3 ms·

> it's easy to store (literally kitty litter) I showed your comment to someone who is currently writing their PhD on how to store nuclear waste safely. I barel

> it's easy to store (literally kitty litter) I showed your comment to someone who is currently writing their PhD on how to store nuclear waste safely. I barely understood half of what they said in the following rant, but they referenced the situation of the Sellafield site several times.

qwe----3 1y ago
You realize people in the 1950s were less careful than now?
- blueflow 1y ago
  Yes, i have been listening to it and its consequences for the last 20 minutes.
vslira 1y ago
I swear I'm not trolling: do you mind asking them about simply dumping it (in leaded concrete barrels etc) in the deep ocean? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_disposal_of_radioactive_waste https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_disposal_of_radioactive_... makes it seem not such a big deal
- kulahan 1y ago
  I've heard of this solution before. I think the greater concern is that other people might gain access by diving down and gathering it back up. I've heard a solution to that is to put it in some container that's highly conductive so it superheats and melts through some amount of the seafloor.
- blueflow 1y ago
  So about the containers for radioactive waste: to use Germany as an example, there are mutliple(!) issues with the simple containers used in the interim storage site Asse, where they simply corroded and started leaking radioactive material. So "normal" containers just don't cut it. To effectively seal and shield so-called "High-level radioactive waste" (which is basically the used fuel rods from a nuclear power plant) the CASTOR containers are used. Those reduce the radiation to some extent - but still not enough for a human to be able to stand next to them without issue. And that is not taking into account that the fuel rods are HOT. As in thermally. (This is btw how you generate heat in a nuclear power plant - you just use the heat from the fuel rods to boil water.) To sum up: you have insanely thick steel (or copper) containers which are super hot. And big. And made from metal, which enjoys corroding in salt water. And like in Tschornobyl, used fuel rods can kill you with their radiation in a couple of minutes if you just stand close enough. Diluting something like this would obviously reduce the immediate danger, but then secondary radiation effects kick in which basically means an increase in cancer rate. So if you throw something like this in the sea, you would probably kill any sea life around (not to mention you would also boil the water probably) it and give cancer to the rest. And since the radioactive particles are now in the fish, which humans tend to eat a lot of, now pretty much all humans have it too.

qwe----3 1y ago

You realize people in the 1950s were less careful than now?

blueflow 1y ago
Yes, i have been listening to it and its consequences for the last 20 minutes.

vslira 1y ago

I swear I'm not trolling: do you mind asking them about simply dumping it (in leaded concrete barrels etc) in the deep ocean? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_disposal_of_radioactive_waste https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_disposal_of_radioactive_... makes it seem not such a big deal

kulahan 1y ago
I've heard of this solution before. I think the greater concern is that other people might gain access by diving down and gathering it back up. I've heard a solution to that is to put it in some container that's highly conductive so it superheats and melts through some amount of the seafloor.
blueflow 1y ago
So about the containers for radioactive waste: to use Germany as an example, there are mutliple(!) issues with the simple containers used in the interim storage site Asse, where they simply corroded and started leaking radioactive material. So "normal" containers just don't cut it. To effectively seal and shield so-called "High-level radioactive waste" (which is basically the used fuel rods from a nuclear power plant) the CASTOR containers are used. Those reduce the radiation to some extent - but still not enough for a human to be able to stand next to them without issue. And that is not taking into account that the fuel rods are HOT. As in thermally. (This is btw how you generate heat in a nuclear power plant - you just use the heat from the fuel rods to boil water.) To sum up: you have insanely thick steel (or copper) containers which are super hot. And big. And made from metal, which enjoys corroding in salt water. And like in Tschornobyl, used fuel rods can kill you with their radiation in a couple of minutes if you just stand close enough. Diluting something like this would obviously reduce the immediate danger, but then secondary radiation effects kick in which basically means an increase in cancer rate. So if you throw something like this in the sea, you would probably kill any sea life around (not to mention you would also boil the water probably) it and give cancer to the rest. And since the radioactive particles are now in the fish, which humans tend to eat a lot of, now pretty much all humans have it too.