3 ms·
It’s also a cultural thing in the west too, a lot of early green movement was built the same way, when half lives were incredibly long. The politics just hasn’t
by nailer 4y ago
It’s also a cultural thing in the west too, a lot of early green movement was built the same way, when half lives were incredibly long. The politics just hasn’t caught up with the science.
- noncoml 4y agoWhat’s the half-life now?
- nailer 4y agoA few human generations. Which is still a problem but not as much as storing waste in a way that a civilisation thousands of years need to understand.
- noncoml 4y agoWas not disputing. Just have no idea about it and was wondering. Thanks! Yeah, a few human generations is definitely a huge improvement!
- simplotek 4y ago> (...) when half lives were incredibly long. I'm sorry, did the laws of physics changed in the last couple of decades?
- nailer 4y agoThe laws of physics remain the same, however the ability to reduce waste half lives by reusing spent fuel rods has changed, so we don’t need to store waste for ten thousand years. Maybe do a bare minimum of research before posting a snide comment?
- simplotek 4y ago> The laws of physics remain the same, Yes, this means the half lives are still the same, and the original claim was patently nonsense. > however the ability to reduce waste half lives by reusing spent fuel rods has changed, This is also patently false. The advances in nuclear reprocessing only mean that spent fuel rods can be refined and reused, so that the resulting nuclear waste has fewer material with eternal half lives. Still the shortest half lives of the remaining materials still span thousands of years, which in humanity's time scale means they are eternal. > so we don’t need to store waste for ten thousand years. The thing is, you still do. The shortest half lives are tens of thousands of years. Those are the shortest ones. material with longer half lives still exist in spent nuclear fuel, but with lower concentrations. What leads you to believe they don't exist?
- nailer 4y ago> has fewer material with eternal half lives Grammar error aside - ‘eternal’ half lives don’t exist. The time taken for radioactivity to decay by half cannot be and is not 'forever'. That's very basic maths. Again you’re aggressively incorrect.