3 ms·

This doesn't even begin to get into the cost of handling the waste. Which 70 years latter, the US still has seemingly never once found a long term answer to, as

This doesn't even begin to get into the cost of handling the waste. Which 70 years latter, the US still has seemingly never once found a long term answer to, as far as I am aware. Personally I would really like to see ambitious high tech safe nuclear options be a thing, and to have thoughtful long term handling plans. The Integral Fast Reactor getting canceled (1994) seems a real shame to me. A safe cheap transuranic-burning-capable low-proliferation-concern breeder sodium fast reactor could help us greatly deal with waste, could be gamechanger. But perhaps it was too soon, that it would have only been another mark against ambitious nuclear. GE Hitachi has kept the plans updated & moving along, which is interesting. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integral_fast_reactor https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integral_fast_reactor And TerraPower has recently reached out expressing interest in working together towards an IFR inspired design. https://neutronbytes.com/2022/02/03/terrapower-teams-up-with-japanese-fast-reactor-experts/ https://neutronbytes.com/2022/02/03/terrapower-teams-up-with... But given costs as is, focus on being extremely cheap not advanced makes some sense, albeit it sort of also feels like it limits the potential, & keeps us from addressing actual real total costs.

postingawayonhn 4y ago
> Which 70 years latter, the US still has seemingly never once found a long term answer to, as far as I am aware. That's primarily a political issue rather than a technical one.
- rektide 4y ago
  What countries have done the best job at tackling nuclear waste? What power-generating corporations have done the best job at owning their waste? And how many have been able to responsibly do so without it turning into a vast political issue? The US may be fucked & awful here, but I cannot imagine the rest of the world is particularly less fucked or less awful. I'm sure some folks have not gotten quite so tied up in this question, but I also don't have high confidence they have been paranoid & political enough about how properly they ought to be dealing with waste that will live for hundreds of thousand of years. If they have to come deal with really awful problems in 20k years, at enormous expense, well, that factors against the advantage of nuclear power too.
  - postingawayonhn 4y ago
    Finland is probably the most advanced with regards to permanent geological storage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYpiK3W-g_0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYpiK3W-g_0
r00fus 4y ago
Nuclear waste? Why not reprocess like France? Heritage Foundation (!) agrees: https://www.heritage.org/environment/commentary/recycling-nuclear-fuel-the-french-do-it-why-cant-oui https://www.heritage.org/environment/commentary/recycling-nu...
- rektide 4y ago
  The bulk of the words in my post described not just high-enrichment reprocessing like France (with proliferation risk), but a far far far more capable & interesting ability to just burn a wide variety of transuranic nuclear wastes & to have a broader MOX reprocessing. That doesn't highly resemble the process of making nuclear bombs. Please, read my IFR wikipedia link, I'll wait! So far breeder reactors have been some of the least economic energy-generation systems on the planet. We also attempted them only in the most limited window of time, long ago, when nuclear was so young, and have never tried again. It seems unlikely cost will really come down (unless we actually factor in the network-externalities of dealing with the waste, which so far no one has ever had to face). I think a lot on the sharp-as-a-tack Charles Stross's Nothing like this will be built again, which isn't a breeder reactor but speaks to a more ambitious & open ended time. And I semi-weap for a humanity that cannot experiment, cannot try great things, that is market driven, risk-averse, & rational to a fault, at the cost of ignoring so much potential. https://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/rants/nothing-like-this-will-be-buil.html https://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/rants/nothing-l...
  - Schroedingersat 4y ago
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breeder_reactor#Development_and_notable_breeder_reactors https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breeder_reactor#Development_... "Never been tried again" There has barely been a break and all of them failed just as abysmally.

postingawayonhn 4y ago

> Which 70 years latter, the US still has seemingly never once found a long term answer to, as far as I am aware. That's primarily a political issue rather than a technical one.

rektide 4y ago
What countries have done the best job at tackling nuclear waste? What power-generating corporations have done the best job at owning their waste? And how many have been able to responsibly do so without it turning into a vast political issue? The US may be fucked & awful here, but I cannot imagine the rest of the world is particularly less fucked or less awful. I'm sure some folks have not gotten quite so tied up in this question, but I also don't have high confidence they have been paranoid & political enough about how properly they ought to be dealing with waste that will live for hundreds of thousand of years. If they have to come deal with really awful problems in 20k years, at enormous expense, well, that factors against the advantage of nuclear power too.
- postingawayonhn 4y ago
  Finland is probably the most advanced with regards to permanent geological storage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYpiK3W-g_0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYpiK3W-g_0

r00fus 4y ago

Nuclear waste? Why not reprocess like France? Heritage Foundation (!) agrees: https://www.heritage.org/environment/commentary/recycling-nuclear-fuel-the-french-do-it-why-cant-oui https://www.heritage.org/environment/commentary/recycling-nu...

rektide 4y ago
The bulk of the words in my post described not just high-enrichment reprocessing like France (with proliferation risk), but a far far far more capable & interesting ability to just burn a wide variety of transuranic nuclear wastes & to have a broader MOX reprocessing. That doesn't highly resemble the process of making nuclear bombs. Please, read my IFR wikipedia link, I'll wait! So far breeder reactors have been some of the least economic energy-generation systems on the planet. We also attempted them only in the most limited window of time, long ago, when nuclear was so young, and have never tried again. It seems unlikely cost will really come down (unless we actually factor in the network-externalities of dealing with the waste, which so far no one has ever had to face). I think a lot on the sharp-as-a-tack Charles Stross's Nothing like this will be built again, which isn't a breeder reactor but speaks to a more ambitious & open ended time. And I semi-weap for a humanity that cannot experiment, cannot try great things, that is market driven, risk-averse, & rational to a fault, at the cost of ignoring so much potential. https://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/rants/nothing-like-this-will-be-buil.html https://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/rants/nothing-l...
- Schroedingersat 4y ago
  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breeder_reactor#Development_and_notable_breeder_reactors https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breeder_reactor#Development_... "Never been tried again" There has barely been a break and all of them failed just as abysmally.