3 ms·

So, what changed in regards to dealing with its waste in the two decades? Or do you simply not care enough anymore?

• barbazoo 4y ago
  I put too much weight on the waste storage problem. Looking at it now, in my opinion it might be preferable to have nuclear waste underground somewhere than keep polluting the atmosphere. It seems silly to still get hung up on that. Sure it's not great and I'd rather we don't, but we're at the eleventh hour and we've got to take more drastic, albeit suboptimal, steps.
• pfdietz 4y ago
  Waste was never the big problem with fission, nor is it the blocking issue now. The world has gravitated toward dry cask storage of spent fuel, which is both simple, sensible, and cheap. It only contributes $0.001/kWh toward the cost of power from fission reactors, and precludes no future options to dealing with the spent fuel. What has blocked fission is one thing: cost. For a while, fission advocates could stand pat, knowing that eventually fossil fuels would have to be moved away from, to fission, regardless of how expensive fission was. But now renewables have undercut fission, so that (somewhat lazy) expectation, that fission was almost entitled to be the post-fossil energy source, is no longer valid.