3 ms·
Not a problem? Ah. From 1946 to 1982, 14 countries buried nuclear waste in 80 places in the ocean, without any more surveillance since 1995 (the detected radioa
by vindarel 5y ago
Not a problem? Ah. From 1946 to 1982, 14 countries buried nuclear waste in 80 places in the ocean, without any more surveillance since 1995 (the detected radioactivity was low). Some liquid waste was just released there, some barrels are not protected, some are. In total, they are as radioactive as 3 Fukushima. No operation is planned to pick the old barrels up, because "most of them would not support a manipulation".
We bury them under forests, so they become a lost territory, the forest is filled with cameras and drones. Not a problem for the inhabitants? Their life is also changed by the invasion of militaries and cops in the closest village (Bure). When we bury them underground, then the drinking water is at risk, some territory is closed… this impacts people.
Then we are thinking in sending the waste to space? Wow O_o And what do I not know?
- roenxi 5y ago80 locations! Dear me. And do you feel that this more-than-single-digit list is sufficient to abandon the entire discipline of nuclear physics, or just the part that generates energy? That is comparable to the number of Biosecurity level 4 labs in the world. The ones that research biological weapons. That is the sort of activity that can be threatening when there are 80 of them globally. Not 80 small piles of toxic garbage. How many unspeakable waste dumps are there in the world? More than 80. More than anyone can count.
- vindarel 5y agoNot what I said, and narrow focus. Still, not a problem as of today?
- roenxi 5y agoYes still not a problem as of today. These problems are nothing compared to the slag of old lead mines. There isn't anything to rebut, these problems are localised and trivial on the scale of 10% of the globe's electricity supply. The waste issues of solar panels are going to be substantially bigger - because there is actual volumes of waste produced there. Waste issues from coal are already substantially bigger. Oil is substantially bigger. Hydro might produce less waste, but sterilises large areas and does a lot more ecological damage. Waste issue from any industrial process that is useful globally is going to create bigger waste problems than nuclear. The globe is big. You can lose a plant's nuclear waste in a parking lot if you don't demarcate it (the part of the waste that is scary, anyway). There isn't a lot of waste. It is hard to describe how small that is compared to all the land and sea we have available and sitting unused.