4 ms·

The elephant in the room is really the cooling pools at all the plants. And there is the rub, a lot of that nuclear fuel could be "recharged" but no one wants t

The elephant in the room is really the cooling pools at all the plants. And there is the rub, a lot of that nuclear fuel could be "recharged" but no one wants to build those sorts of reactors either. I think France shut their last one down a while ago. There is no scale of nuclear that really makes sense. Look at Fukushima. Not only is the whole area a mess. No one knows what to do with the mess. There's a lot filled with radioactive metal scraps and a security guard. Tell me does that seem cleaned up and dealt with to you? Nuclear power creates a problem so big, that lasts for so long, that it is on a time scale beyond peoples comprehension. Look at the efforts that were being proposed to mark the site at Yucca Mountain. You remember Yucca Mountain, the hole in the ground where we were gonna burry this problem. Yea we didn't do that. So right now nuclear waste is everywhere. And it is becoming more prevalent, and less controlled. How long before we have another one of these https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goiânia_accident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goiânia_accident ... how many more generations are going to be cleaning up Chernobyl? That fancy building that we slid over the site. It's not even gonna make it 100 years before it needs replaced. We're going to be dealing with the site for generations to come. EDIT: I love the down votes but show me the link to the safe, long term, paid off nuclear storage that address the needs of the plants that we have running today never mind the ones people want to have built.

throw0101d 3y ago
> Look at Fukushima. Not only is the whole area a mess. No one knows what to do with the mess. As someone who lives in Toronto, Canada, which is ~50km (as the crow flies) to a nuclear plant, I have no qualms about nuclear, and wish we'd build more in the province. As for waste, they have an entire episode called "What About the Waste?": * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2t2tYQsK94 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2t2tYQsK94 At the end of the day, we can just bury it: * https://globalnews.ca/news/10191441/site-canada-nuclear-waste-ontario/ https://globalnews.ca/news/10191441/site-canada-nuclear-wast... It's currently not economically viable to reprocess it because uranium is so cheap, but having it available for possible future needs would be nice. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goiânia_accident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goiânia_accident You are comparing apple to orange: the above was a tiny module. Nuclear "waste" from reactors is stored in cement cylinders that weight tonnes. And we need radioactive materials, like the one in the above incident, for many applications, including medical treatments as well as for things like sterilizing things. Canada, which has a nuclear industry, provide a lot of the world's medical isotopes: > The deal to produce the isotope at Darlington will ease concerns about access to the raw material for TheraSphere, which has been provided to more than 100,000 liver cancer patients worldwide, said Peter Pattison, president of Boston Scientific's interventional oncology franchise in Ottawa. * https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-darlington-nuclear-isotope-yttrium-90-therasphere-1.7135480 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-darlington-nu... * https://www.canadianisotopes.ca/isotopes-in-canada/ https://www.canadianisotopes.ca/isotopes-in-canada/ * https://natural-resources.canada.ca/our-natural-resources/energy-sources-distribution/nuclear-energy-uranium/medical-isotopes/23060 https://natural-resources.canada.ca/our-natural-resources/en... Unless you wish to deprive people of possibly life-saving treatment options? * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_therapy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_therapy
- zer00eyz 3y ago
  At the end of the day, we can just bury it: * https://globalnews.ca/news/10191441/site-canada-nuclear-wast https://globalnews.ca/news/10191441/site-canada-nuclear-wast... Can.. CAN??? This is the sort of magical thinking that the pro nuclear crowed cant come to terms with. Yes you can, why didn't you did this hole in the ground in 1980 when the first reactor went on line... Looking for a site to dig at next year does not solve the 40 years of waste (public electric, Canada has waste going back to the 50's) sitting on the ground outside at every nuclear site out side the baltic. (they dug a hole, and guess what its filling up pretty fast cause they built more stuff after they started digging). Who pays to clean all this up? Who is going to foot the bill for the hole? who is going to fund security for it for the rest of time. Show me that math before we build one more plant. Dig the the hole. DO IT don't TELL ME ABOUT IT. SEE: Every project in the world that was going to do it, France, USA, USSR, Japan, Canada... and one working hole in Finland that will fill up in half the expected time. >> It's currently not economically viable to reprocess it because uranium is so cheap, but having it available for possible future needs would be nice. https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/csitinfo.cfm?id=0607033 https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/csitinfo.cfm?id=0... Dig it up, and then leave a mess for someone else to clean is no different than the economics of coal, it's just on a smaller scale. And thank god cause uranium has a half life. >> You are comparing apple to orange: the above was a tiny module. Nuclear "waste" from reactors is stored in cement cylinders that weight tonnes. There is no amount of "safe" nuclear material. Full stop. >>> The nation's spent nuclear fuel is initially stored in steel-lined concrete pools surrounded by water. It's later removed from the pools and placed into dry storage casks that are made of steel and concrete or other materials used for protective shielding. From: https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-fast-facts-about-spent-nuclear-fuel https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-fast-facts-about-spent-... The waste isnt embedded in cement, Its in a cement container with a cement lid. They used to use (and may still be made by a company that makes) septic tanks. Your nuclear waste has the same protective storage as a rural house puts its shit. The only reason it goes in this sort of housing. Because it makes it hard to casually mess something up (see every pre 1970's nuclear accident, and there are LOTS OF THEM, including at the same site as the next point). You mean this reactor that Canada shut down: https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Canadian-isotope-reactor-enters-retirement# https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Canadian-isotope-rea... This was vital, maybe for the public good sure. And leaking heavy water. In the grand scheme of things not THAT bad, but should not be happening... was this a systemic failure or a true accident? The reality was that the the economics to run it safely weren't there.

throw0101d 3y ago

> Look at Fukushima. Not only is the whole area a mess. No one knows what to do with the mess. As someone who lives in Toronto, Canada, which is ~50km (as the crow flies) to a nuclear plant, I have no qualms about nuclear, and wish we'd build more in the province. As for waste, they have an entire episode called "What About the Waste?": * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2t2tYQsK94 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2t2tYQsK94 At the end of the day, we can just bury it: * https://globalnews.ca/news/10191441/site-canada-nuclear-waste-ontario/ https://globalnews.ca/news/10191441/site-canada-nuclear-wast... It's currently not economically viable to reprocess it because uranium is so cheap, but having it available for possible future needs would be nice. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goiânia_accident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goiânia_accident You are comparing apple to orange: the above was a tiny module. Nuclear "waste" from reactors is stored in cement cylinders that weight tonnes. And we need radioactive materials, like the one in the above incident, for many applications, including medical treatments as well as for things like sterilizing things. Canada, which has a nuclear industry, provide a lot of the world's medical isotopes: > The deal to produce the isotope at Darlington will ease concerns about access to the raw material for TheraSphere, which has been provided to more than 100,000 liver cancer patients worldwide, said Peter Pattison, president of Boston Scientific's interventional oncology franchise in Ottawa. * https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-darlington-nuclear-isotope-yttrium-90-therasphere-1.7135480 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-darlington-nu... * https://www.canadianisotopes.ca/isotopes-in-canada/ https://www.canadianisotopes.ca/isotopes-in-canada/ * https://natural-resources.canada.ca/our-natural-resources/energy-sources-distribution/nuclear-energy-uranium/medical-isotopes/23060 https://natural-resources.canada.ca/our-natural-resources/en... Unless you wish to deprive people of possibly life-saving treatment options? * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_therapy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_therapy

zer00eyz 3y ago
At the end of the day, we can just bury it: * https://globalnews.ca/news/10191441/site-canada-nuclear-wast https://globalnews.ca/news/10191441/site-canada-nuclear-wast... Can.. CAN??? This is the sort of magical thinking that the pro nuclear crowed cant come to terms with. Yes you can, why didn't you did this hole in the ground in 1980 when the first reactor went on line... Looking for a site to dig at next year does not solve the 40 years of waste (public electric, Canada has waste going back to the 50's) sitting on the ground outside at every nuclear site out side the baltic. (they dug a hole, and guess what its filling up pretty fast cause they built more stuff after they started digging). Who pays to clean all this up? Who is going to foot the bill for the hole? who is going to fund security for it for the rest of time. Show me that math before we build one more plant. Dig the the hole. DO IT don't TELL ME ABOUT IT. SEE: Every project in the world that was going to do it, France, USA, USSR, Japan, Canada... and one working hole in Finland that will fill up in half the expected time. >> It's currently not economically viable to reprocess it because uranium is so cheap, but having it available for possible future needs would be nice. https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/csitinfo.cfm?id=0607033 https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/csitinfo.cfm?id=0... Dig it up, and then leave a mess for someone else to clean is no different than the economics of coal, it's just on a smaller scale. And thank god cause uranium has a half life. >> You are comparing apple to orange: the above was a tiny module. Nuclear "waste" from reactors is stored in cement cylinders that weight tonnes. There is no amount of "safe" nuclear material. Full stop. >>> The nation's spent nuclear fuel is initially stored in steel-lined concrete pools surrounded by water. It's later removed from the pools and placed into dry storage casks that are made of steel and concrete or other materials used for protective shielding. From: https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-fast-facts-about-spent-nuclear-fuel https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-fast-facts-about-spent-... The waste isnt embedded in cement, Its in a cement container with a cement lid. They used to use (and may still be made by a company that makes) septic tanks. Your nuclear waste has the same protective storage as a rural house puts its shit. The only reason it goes in this sort of housing. Because it makes it hard to casually mess something up (see every pre 1970's nuclear accident, and there are LOTS OF THEM, including at the same site as the next point). You mean this reactor that Canada shut down: https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Canadian-isotope-reactor-enters-retirement# https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Canadian-isotope-rea... This was vital, maybe for the public good sure. And leaking heavy water. In the grand scheme of things not THAT bad, but should not be happening... was this a systemic failure or a true accident? The reality was that the the economics to run it safely weren't there.