8 ms·
> if you sidestep the issue of waste If you do that, just sidestep the elephant, then nuclear is very attractive indeed!
by thoroughburro 1y ago
> if you sidestep the issue of waste
If you do that, just sidestep the elephant, then nuclear is very attractive indeed!
- fsmv 1y agoThe waste isn't even that bad. There's not that much of it and we have extremely safe storage solutions. We way over engineered the safety by orders of magnitude. Nuclear waste storage facilities can take a direct missile hit and still be safe.
- deng 1y agoReality likes to have a word with you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asse_II_mine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asse_II_mine
- viraptor 1y ago> we have extremely safe storage solutions This doesn't mean "we don't have unsafe storage solutions".
- deng 1y agoHumans are simply terrible at long-term safety. How often do we have to experience that until we say: while it might be theoretically possible to store this stuff securely for thousands of years, apparently, we are just unable to do it, be it because of incompetence, greed, or both.
- whamlastxmas 1y agoI’d rather us try and almost always successful store harmful waste than spew all of it directly into the air, killing millions of people. Over a million people die every year from carbon emissions from things like gas and coal power plants and vehicles
- nandomrumber 1y agoYou'd think if that were the case, you'd at least know someone who knows someone who knows someone who knows someone who's cause of death was coal fired power plant emissions. You're characterising it wrong. Epidemiologists estimate the days of lost life across a population due to environmental exposures. If you add all those up they aren't equivalent to number of lives lost.
- MostlyStable 1y agoYou do probably know someone, and almost definitely know someone who knows someone, whose death was due to chronic coal fired power plant emissions. The fact that that's not what's on the death certificate doesn't mean it's not what happened.
- saagarjha 1y agoPeople who are exposed to radiation typically do not die of acute radiation poisoning. They die of cancers years later. People who are exposed to coal plant pollution also die of cancers and all sorts of pulmonary diseases.
- 93po 1y agorespiratory disease kills over 8 million people a year, and that disease is very often largely attributable to air pollution
- slavik81 1y agoWe better get good at it. There are many dangerous chemicals used in all kinds of industry that we need to store forever because they will always be harmful to human health. Lead, mercury, cadmium, and other toxic elements will never break down.
- yellowapple 1y ago> There are many dangerous chemicals used in all kinds of industry that we need to store forever Or better yet, reuse.
- potato3732842 1y ago>Humans are simply terrible at long-term safety He says while we carbon swaths of our planet out of habitability at current technological/economic levels because the available solutions are good and not perfect. Surely you see the irony.
- dreghgh 1y agoDo you see the irony in trying to fix a problem caused by persistent, universal short term and selfish thinking with a solution which relies on no one thinking like this in the future anymore?
- zizee 1y agoSometimes it is good to tradeoff solving a known short term problem, by taking on a solution with a uncertain long term issue. If the world had continued to adopt nuclear power unabated, it is likely that climate change would not be a problem, and millions of cases of cancer not occurred. This is not to say it is now time to adopt nuclear carte blanche, but to demonstrate that your way of thinking is not without issue either.
- hectormalot 1y agoI think people also heavily underestimate what 1000s of years means. This type of storage has to survive 3x as long as the Egyptian pyramids. The problem is not just technological. At those timespans you can’t assume the country you live in - or the language you speak - to still exist.
- GeoAtreides 1y agodo you have a link with where all the gigatons of CO2 emitted annually are stored safely?
- jenadine 1y agoAn interesting example of bad waste management in the 70's. But hardly an argument for how safe nuclear energy can be. You wouldn't judge the safety of aviation based on the Wright brothers plane. Also note that one of the problems on that mine is not only the radioactive waste, but also mercury, lead, arsenic, and other product not coming from nuclear facilities. That kind of waste is dangerous for basically ever compared to the radioactive atoms. Yet nobody talk about it. Nuclear energy is not the only industry producing nuclear waste. You've got also significant radioactive waste produced by the medical, research, defence, mining, and other industries. And so we need safe waste storage regardless of the existence of nuclear power plants.
- hobs 1y agoHowever kitty litter will take them out https://practical.engineering/blog/2025/4/15/when-kitty-litter-caused-a-nuclear-catastrophe https://practical.engineering/blog/2025/4/15/when-kitty-litt...
- ebcode 1y agoHanford.
- LightBug1 1y agoNot sure why you're down voted, but who cares. This is THE issue. I hope you're forgiven, in time, for stepping out of line in the cathedral of modern nuclear power.
- nandomrumber 1y agoThe nuclear waste issue is such a non-issue that the overwhelming majority of nuclear waste, the actual spent fuel, is stored on site at the nuclear power plants. Long lived nuclear waste just isn't that radioactive, and highly reactive nuclear waste products just aren't that long lived. If the waste is vitrified (glassified) it becomes basically chemically non-reactive too.
- MostlyStable 1y agoThis is an important point that a lot of people don't seem to understand. The longest live materials that are the hardest store are the least dangerous.
- LightBug1 1y agoLeast dangerous. I recommend storing them in a shed next to your home. Thanks for stepping up. We appreciate you.
- fc417fc802 1y agoHappily. As long as I also receive a billion dollar check and the necessary permits for digging a ridiculously deep shaft straight down. The issues surrounding long term storage are almost entirely political.
- LightBug1 1y agoAll I read above is "If's" "As long as" "Unless'" , etc. I'll do further research but my initial impression is that you're all operating like economists ... "ceteris paribus". The funny thing is. Life isn't like that. Mismanagement, cost compromises, engineering fuck ups, climate disaster, terrorism, etc are almost de rigueur ... You've not convinced me.
- kergonath 1y agoNuclear waste is not released in the atmosphere. You cannot compare solid waste in canisters and what gets out of the smokestacks.