2 ms·

> EDIT- it does sort of seem like treating nuclear waste the same as other industrial waste and sending it off to approved Class III landfills should be accepta

by mlyle 4y ago

> EDIT- it does sort of seem like treating nuclear waste the same as other industrial waste and sending it off to approved Class III landfills should be acceptable. So then, kicking the can down the road leads to the public being forced to accept nuclear waste at a Class III landfill. I think you mean a class I landfill/disposal wells, unless there's another scale I don't know. Something like a Yucca Mountain isn't perfect, but it's better than that. The nice thing about nuclear waste is the hazard disappears over time. The worst of it is spent fuel. Spent fuel does needs cooling for 40+ years. Then after 300-400 years, the vast majority of the hazard is gone. Yes, it does take tens of thousands of years to completely vanish to baseline. Compare to various kinds of nasty toxic-to-life things that more readily dissolve in groundwater and are equivalently nasty for tens of thousands of years.

cinntaile 4y ago
> The nice thing about nuclear waste is the hazard disappears over time. The radiation hazard disappears over time but how do you know this stuff isn't poisonous for example?
- mlyle 4y ago
  > The radiation hazard disappears over time but how do you know this stuff isn't poisonous for example? Oh, it is -- it's mostly heavy metals. But: - We're not going to stop using heavy metals. - We produce a lot less of it than other heavy metals-- so we're talking about a tiny portion of this hazard. - We can reasonably expect it'll be a lot better disposed than what we typically do with heavy metals.
SoftTalker 4y ago
To me, nuclear fission has to be part of any serious plan to reduce carbon emissions. Yes, there is some low hanging fruit that solar/wind generation can address, and we should do that, but we need electricity at night, and when the wind isn't blowing, and when the seasonal position of the sun isn't advantageous. Battery storage technology is not anywhere close to the scale that would be needed. As transportation is shifting away from fossil fuels, and world population expands, demand for electricity will only increase. Fusion energy may be something that becomes practical in another hundred years time, but it's not close. Yes, nuclear waste is dangerous and needs careful, well planned management. OK. Are we serious about addressing carbon emissions, or not? If we are, it's something we have to figure out. It's not beyond our capability, and any risks need to be considered in light of the alternative of continuing to dump carbon into the atmosphere.

by mlyle 4y ago

cinntaile 4y ago

> The nice thing about nuclear waste is the hazard disappears over time. The radiation hazard disappears over time but how do you know this stuff isn't poisonous for example?

mlyle 4y ago
> The radiation hazard disappears over time but how do you know this stuff isn't poisonous for example? Oh, it is -- it's mostly heavy metals. But: - We're not going to stop using heavy metals. - We produce a lot less of it than other heavy metals-- so we're talking about a tiny portion of this hazard. - We can reasonably expect it'll be a lot better disposed than what we typically do with heavy metals.

SoftTalker 4y ago

To me, nuclear fission has to be part of any serious plan to reduce carbon emissions. Yes, there is some low hanging fruit that solar/wind generation can address, and we should do that, but we need electricity at night, and when the wind isn't blowing, and when the seasonal position of the sun isn't advantageous. Battery storage technology is not anywhere close to the scale that would be needed. As transportation is shifting away from fossil fuels, and world population expands, demand for electricity will only increase. Fusion energy may be something that becomes practical in another hundred years time, but it's not close. Yes, nuclear waste is dangerous and needs careful, well planned management. OK. Are we serious about addressing carbon emissions, or not? If we are, it's something we have to figure out. It's not beyond our capability, and any risks need to be considered in light of the alternative of continuing to dump carbon into the atmosphere.