3 ms·
> a few _million_ tons of nuclear waste Massive exageration by several orders of magnitude. They say in the link you provided it is less than 126000 barrel co
by DoingIsLearning 5y ago
> a few _million_ tons of nuclear waste
Massive exageration by several orders of magnitude.
They say in the link you provided it is less than 126000 barrel containers of material. Even if you overestimate at 400 litres per container (they will probably be some sort of sarcophagus vessel) that is about 50k tonnes of material, for more than 30 years of operation. That sounds pretty efficient to me.
Edit: misread that you were refering to the material specifically stored in Asse II
- ThePhysicist 5y agoThe US alone produces several thousand tons of nuclear waste per year. If you take into account the waste associated with dismantling power plants it's easily tenfold. Multiply by all the countries that use nuclear energy and a few million tons over 50-100 years is no exaggeration, probably more of a conservative estimate I'd say.
- flavius29663 5y agoUranium is 19 times more dense than water. 2000 tons of nuclear waste means 100 cubic meters. 100 cubic meters means a 40 foot + 20 foots containers. That is the highly radioactive waste produced by the US each year. This powers 20% of the US. Of course, actual storage would be in some caskets, so a higher volume, but that is the radioactive material volume. There are ~450 reactors in the world with the US operating close to 100. You don't get to millions of tons. Plants themselves are producing lower radiation materials, that don't need those iconic caskets or the extreme care. They wuldn't melt down or anything. This is from day to day operation (gloves, suits, containers) and decomissioning.