3 ms·
Or maybe they’ll just reprocess it, as is currently done in France?
by ericd 5y ago
Or maybe they’ll just reprocess it, as is currently done in France?
- pfdietz 5y agoReprocessing as done in France doesn't really help. The separated Pu can be sent back to be used again, in MOX fuel for thermal reactors, but spent MOX fuel can't be further reprocessed, as it has more of the troublesome higher actinides (which dominate the heat load in a repository that dictates how spread out it has to be.) Making MOX fuel is sufficiently expensive that the separated Pu has negative value. Reprocessing only really helps if you can feed the Pu into fast reactors that can more effectively consume the actinides. And France has given up on its fast reactor program.
- koheripbal 5y agoLong term storage is a solved problem. People vastly over-estimate the amount of waste involved. It is ONE barrel PER YEAR for an operating reactor. That is a non-issue.
- worik 5y agoOne barrel per year per reactor for geological time periods. So greedy, selfish, and irresponsible. There is no place on the planet that we can be confidant nuclear waste can be stored for 200,000 years with no monitoring.