3 ms·
Vitrification of the waste (mixing it into and storage deep underground provides a safe way to store waste for 1000s of years. > There is no place in the world
by zizee 2y ago
Vitrification of the waste (mixing it into and storage deep underground provides a safe way to store waste for 1000s of years.
> There is no place in the world geologically stable for the required period (we have no way to know)
This can be said of anything, which is IMO a defeatist attitude. Nothing we do is guaranteed to not cause harm. Likewise, our inaction could also cause harm.
For the specific question of stable geology, past performance can help predict future performance. We can make educated guesses. If it has been stable for the last million years, it's a good be it will be stable for the next 10,000.
> We have no way to communicate with people about the dangers for over 100_000 years.
The need to communicate the dangers over vast timeframes presupposes that society has fallen into ruin, and our record keeping has been destroyed. I will argue that if that has happened, it means countless billions will have perished, and people+or lizardmen) living primitive lifestyles will have far bigger worries than and increased cancer risk.
> The political impetus is to get future generations to pay for our current consumption
We are paying for our current consumption of fossil fuels right now. How many deaths from climate change over the next 200 years are appropriate to ensure the safety of an unknown number of people thousands of years from now?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitrification https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitrification
- worik 2y ago> Vitrification of the waste (mixing it into and storage deep underground provides a safe way to store waste for 1000s of years. No. It is a way of loosing it and leaving it around for someone to dig it up and become very sick Remember, it is hundreds of thousands of years
- zizee 2y ago> Remember, it is hundreds of thousands of years Remember that I have already said I disagree with this as something we should be worried about.
- worik 2y ago> I have already said I disagree with this as something we should be worried about. And I said "making future generations pay for our current consumption" Surely that is shameful?
- zizee 2y agoWe've happily fucked future generations by being scared of nuclear (with the fear campaign funded by fossil fuel companies), and bring about climate change. That is shameful, and the anti-nuclear crowd can take responsibility for that. I'd be more concerned about the next 100 years, than pretending we can predict what things we do today will be a positive or negative for 200 years from now, let alone 1000s. And anyway. If you bury this stuff deep enough, encase it in glass, it's going to take a fairly advanced civilization to get at it. They'll quickly work out the risks involved after playing too much with their newly found treasure. Then they can decide whether to leave it be, or whether it's a boon.