5 ms·
The amount of spent uranium that will need to stored is infinitesimally small compared to the amount of energy that is produced in contrast to the waste that is
by samtho 3y ago
The amount of spent uranium that will need to stored is infinitesimally small compared to the amount of energy that is produced in contrast to the waste that is produced by any other non-renewable source. It will typically get buried deep in the earths crust - deeper than anything save for mining, encased in concrete, and buried over where it would be most unlikely that anything will touch it ever again.
- zer00eyz 3y ago>>> It will typically get buried deep in the earths crust IN the us, above ground, on site, in dry casks (Fukushima had this same issue too) There is no plan for where to put it. Yuca mountain is stalled and no way to finish (and problems with the site) https://www.nei.org/news/2019/what-happens-nuclear-waste-us https://www.nei.org/news/2019/what-happens-nuclear-waste-us Sweden got their shit together, but they dont have much in the way of power and their site has massive cost over runs. https://www.politico.eu/article/sweden-approve-nuclear-waste-storage-site/ https://www.politico.eu/article/sweden-approve-nuclear-waste... But, even underground, on the time scale were talking about, its complicated: https://longnow.org/ideas/the-other-10000-year-project-long-term-thinking-and-nuclear-waste/ https://longnow.org/ideas/the-other-10000-year-project-long-...
- arcticbull 3y ago> IN the us, above ground, on site, in dry casks (Fukushima had this same issue too) There is no plan for where to put it. Yuca mountain is stalled and no way to finish (and problems with the site) It wasn't an issue at Fukushima, it's not currently an issue in the US, and the reason Yucca Mountain isn't being developed is FUD and politics, not technical. Note that the vast majority of nuclear waste isn't high-level waste, but rather low-level - tools, clothes, etc.