3 ms·
We have a responsibility to future generations. Which is a really long time, considering the half-life involved. "Secure and easily monitored" doesn't account
by bayesian_horse 5y ago
We have a responsibility to future generations. Which is a really long time, considering the half-life involved.
"Secure and easily monitored" doesn't account for: Natural disasters, human error or human depravity (sabotage, shooting, terrorism etc). And what if the government breaks down for some reason? If for any reason the "securely and safely monitoring" gets neglected...
- spupe 5y agoThe way it is going, future generations will be left with much worse problems that a few tons of nuclear waste.
- bayesian_horse 5y agoTo stop climate change with nuclear power, you wouldn't risk "a few tons of nuclear waste" (which we already can't store safely), but it would have to be scaled up by a factor of ten at least. The plants and waste storage sites would have to be everywhere. Including where there is no trustworthy government. Including where people can shoot at the sites, steal material for dirty bombs, start their own nuclear weapons program and whatever. So no, "a few tons of nuclear waste" really doesn't capture the problem...