5 ms·

What are your thoughts on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onkalo_spent_nuclear_fuel_repository https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onkalo_spent_nuclear_fuel_repo... and

What are your thoughts on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onkalo_spent_nuclear_fuel_repository https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onkalo_spent_nuclear_fuel_repo... and similar nuclear waste disposal strategies?

cycomanic 5y ago
The issue with these facilities is that they need to be safe for thousand(s) of years and nobody really knows if they are. Moreover the experience in Germany is that the operators, politicians, construction companies... take shortcuts for various (primarily economic reasons), which makes safety even more questionable. This is one of the primary things that fueled nuclear scepticism in Germany, people become more aware of the news around nuclear power operators and the dogeiness that is happening. For example it happened multiple times that there were incidents that should have been reported by law and operators didn't report because it possibly would have meant to a shutdown period. Usually, nothing came out of these violations, even though there are provisions that require operators to be "trustworthy". Looking at other countries, e.g. France, information was very biased to keep bad news about nuclear away. For example my partner told me that when Tschernobyl happened when she was young they were essentially told that all radiation had stopped at the border and now restrictions regarding vegetables, mushrooms etc were necessary.
- morelisp 5y ago
  Thank god we're burning lignite and building pipelines to buy gas from Putin rather than dealing with potentially dodgy nuclear plant operators!
  - cycomanic 5y ago
    Well the consequences of a dodgy nuclear plant operator are potentially pretty disastrous (see Japan). That said, I completely agree that burning lignite is shameful, I would argue that it has nothing to do with nuclear or renewables, it's politics. Regarding gas, both nuclear and most renewables are not really in the same category as gas in terms of the supply they provide. Gas would be just as necessary if all current goal plants are nuclear (or wind for that matter). It might very well be that gas would allow to reduce CO2 emissions and transition to renewables more quickly than without. I agree with the geopolitical implications, but Germany is producing lots of things in China and are delivering weapons to Saudi Arabia and now we suddenly take a stance when it comes to gas from Russia? In terms of environmental impact it's still better than developing reserves from fracking.
    - morelisp 5y ago
      > now we suddenly take a stance when it comes to gas from Russia? So we can hype up renewables even though we know we can't really build enough fast enough, completely throw out nuclear because of the hypothetical risk of some future corrupt politician coming into control of our waste pile, then when it comes to gas we suddenly take a Realpolitik stance but only as it pertains to the despot next door?
  - max002 5y ago
    Thanks (multiple) gods that wr dont bae science on god.

cycomanic 5y ago

The issue with these facilities is that they need to be safe for thousand(s) of years and nobody really knows if they are. Moreover the experience in Germany is that the operators, politicians, construction companies... take shortcuts for various (primarily economic reasons), which makes safety even more questionable. This is one of the primary things that fueled nuclear scepticism in Germany, people become more aware of the news around nuclear power operators and the dogeiness that is happening. For example it happened multiple times that there were incidents that should have been reported by law and operators didn't report because it possibly would have meant to a shutdown period. Usually, nothing came out of these violations, even though there are provisions that require operators to be "trustworthy". Looking at other countries, e.g. France, information was very biased to keep bad news about nuclear away. For example my partner told me that when Tschernobyl happened when she was young they were essentially told that all radiation had stopped at the border and now restrictions regarding vegetables, mushrooms etc were necessary.

morelisp 5y ago
Thank god we're burning lignite and building pipelines to buy gas from Putin rather than dealing with potentially dodgy nuclear plant operators!
- cycomanic 5y ago
  Well the consequences of a dodgy nuclear plant operator are potentially pretty disastrous (see Japan). That said, I completely agree that burning lignite is shameful, I would argue that it has nothing to do with nuclear or renewables, it's politics. Regarding gas, both nuclear and most renewables are not really in the same category as gas in terms of the supply they provide. Gas would be just as necessary if all current goal plants are nuclear (or wind for that matter). It might very well be that gas would allow to reduce CO2 emissions and transition to renewables more quickly than without. I agree with the geopolitical implications, but Germany is producing lots of things in China and are delivering weapons to Saudi Arabia and now we suddenly take a stance when it comes to gas from Russia? In terms of environmental impact it's still better than developing reserves from fracking.
  - morelisp 5y ago
    > now we suddenly take a stance when it comes to gas from Russia? So we can hype up renewables even though we know we can't really build enough fast enough, completely throw out nuclear because of the hypothetical risk of some future corrupt politician coming into control of our waste pile, then when it comes to gas we suddenly take a Realpolitik stance but only as it pertains to the despot next door?
- max002 5y ago
  Thanks (multiple) gods that wr dont bae science on god.