0
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 01 Jan 0001
0 points (NaN% liked)
0 readers
0 users here now
founded a long while ago
Before we can advance the use of solar panel use, the question of waste must be answered. Humans and corporations aren’t known for their responsibility.
See the double standard? No? I guess not.
Of any industry, the civilian nuclear industry has been exemplary in dealing with their waste streams, in contrast to all other energy industries. A waste stream that's actually highly recyclable and becomes no longer dangerous (unless you eat it) after just 300 years.
Nuclear waste is not an actually existing problem, and anyone raising it is employing a delaying tactic for our society moving away from fossil fuels actually killing our planet.
Okay, so then since you seem so knowledgeable about how fantastic it is, please describe the current standards on nuclear waste disposal and how efficient it is.
Everything I've seen up to this point is contrary and the inability to find a good central location (like the whole Yucca Mountain debacle exemplifies the still existing problem: no one wants it in their back yard.
Are you suggesting the ponds and and other temporary measures that currently exist are a fine way to do business?
Yucca mountain is a political problem, not a technical one. But sure, if you want examples of good practice, I refer to COVRA in the Netherlands, where I had a tour a few months ago. Very interesting facility. If you want a deep geological repository, there is Onkalo in Finland. I'm not a fan of dedicated DGRs, but since it's around, we might as well use it I guess.
In my view, should you care, we're not going to put away the spent fuel at all in these DGRs, but recycle them in until we used all of the fuel. At this point there actual waste, should we no longer be able to recycle this, is around 1% of the current 'waste' in volume and consists solely of short lived isotopes remaining radioactive for around 300 years. If you want to bury that, sure, I guess.
But please, now you tell us more about how fantastic the waste management is of the arsenic mining tailings in China, which are a result of digging for rare Earths to make solar panels. I look forward to it!
Perhaps I should have been more clear: show me a good example in the US. I don't have concerns on European regulation or methods. I also don't doubt China is worse, but that's for them to deal with.
Edit: also, what gave you the impression I thought it was a technical problem? Of course it's a political problem. Humans being irresponsible cannot be fixed by technical means.
@Emil @Tylerdurdon "Nuclear waste is not an actually existing problem," what ? is that sarcasm ?
@tomtrottel @Emil @Tylerdurdon No, it is a classification.
It's like saying »human feces is a huge problem« — well, yes, but that's why we have toilets and sewage plants and so on — it's solved.
As is nuclear waste.
That's a nice analogy! Don't mind me if I use it in the future 👍
@Ardubal @Emil @Tylerdurdon I admire the way you can trick yourself into believing that. Do you have money invested in atomic energy ?
@tomtrottel @Emil @Tylerdurdon
Well, there we are at the divide between facts and opinion, and that between a civil discussion and ad hominem attacks.
Fact: nobody was ever harmed by spent nuclear fuel. Really. Look it up wherever you like.
Fact: that is not by chance, but by engineering.
Fact: the total amount of all the world's spent nuclear fuel ever, in the shape of a cube, would have a side length of about 35 m (before recycling).
Fact: I have no money invested in nuclear energy.
It is as it cost millions every year.