4 ms·
The waste problem has been solved. We store it somewhere safe until we decide something better to do with it. What hasn't been solved is the effects of of all
by jmccree 13y ago
The waste problem has been solved. We store it somewhere safe until we decide something better to do with it.
What hasn't been solved is the effects of of all our coal, gas, and oil usage that could be replaced by nuclear power. It makes all the sense in the world to be finding ways we can widely and safely deploy nuclear power worldwide to replace coal and gas power plants. Generating clean electricity is a requisite for wide spread electric or hydrogen cars to stop burning gasoline.
If you believe that coal and gas burning is bad for the environment, then we need nuclear power urgently and widely, energy needs are only going to go up and the only alternative to nuclear is burning more fossil fuels. I find it absolutely absurd that people worry more about nuclear waste than atmosphere pollution currently happening. I think we could store a few hundred years of nuclear waste on Antarctica til technology figures out what to do with it, even if that's just shooting it into the sun. I choose safely storing nuclear waste for the future to deal with over continuing to burn billions of tons of coal and gas each year which is actively killing about a million people per year. (WHO 2008)
- gnud 13y ago> The waste problem has been solved. We store it somewhere safe until we decide something better to do with it. Thus, solving the problem once and for all. ONCE AND FOR ALL!
- eco 13y agoI appreciate the Futurama reference but it is true. Nuclear "waste" is extremely valuable for use in upcoming reactor designs like MSRs that burn up significantly more of the long-lived waste. Keeping it stored temporarily until these reactors go live is the most prudent and efficient option.