3 ms·
A safe design for a device producing nuclear waste can't exclude once-in-millenia earthquakes and tsunamis parameters.
by madflo 15y ago
A safe design for a device producing nuclear waste can't exclude once-in-millenia earthquakes and tsunamis parameters.
- mfringel 15y agoOkay, so once in 1,000 years isn't enough. I'll buy that, especially where an accident's effect can last for up to a century. So, how about once in 10,000 years? Once in 100,000 years? That's on the level of meteor strikes, and I can't think of any power plant that could withstand those. I think that "never" is as impractical as "two years from now."
- pavel_lishin 15y agoI'd call it safe if it only failed when it no longer mattered - if your power plant does not contain the nuclear waste in case of collision with the moon, it's a non issue, because there is nobody left alive to matter.
- rimantas 15y agoYep, nuclear power plants should go coal plants way: just scatter radioactive waste around and noone will complain. Reference: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=coal-ash-is...