4 ms·
"Seems to feed on fear of nuclear. " If you read the article you will see that they only want Holtec to use a less harmful solution, storing the waste for 24 y
by FollowingTheDao 4y ago
"Seems to feed on fear of nuclear. "
If you read the article you will see that they only want Holtec to use a less harmful solution, storing the waste for 24 years.
It is a truth that they are dumping 1 million gallons of radioactive waste in the Hudson. If you are OK with that maybe you should tell them to dump it in your local river.
- madsbuch 4y ago> If you are OK with that maybe you should tell them to dump it in your local river. It is OK with me. I already have a local powerplant, local cars, and local industry exhausting it into the air a breath. If I could switch, I happily would accept this type of release into the water over the release into the air. > ..., storing the waste for 24 years. Should we as power plants to store the exhaust air for 24 years?
- FollowingTheDao 4y ago> Should we as power plants to store the exhaust air for 24 years? Yes. > If I could switch, I happily would accept this type of release into the water over the release into the air. Read the article. The solution is to store it on site with the plutonium. Holtec just does not want to pay for it.
- kapuasuite 4y agoHow dangerous is it to dump it in the river now?
- adhesive_wombat 4y agoStoring for 24 years and then doing would be the same as releasing 1/4 million gallons now. If it's that harmful, that's not OK either.