I agree. We should deal with nuclear waste in the same way we handle the waste from other fossil fuels: by spreading it over the entire planet in a thin, even coating so that everyone is equally affected!
Comment on nuclear
lettruthout@lemmy.world 5 weeks agoYup meltdowns happen sometimes. AND there’s the century-long legacy of radioactive waste!
Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 5 weeks ago
renzev@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Back in middle school, our science teacher decided to make the class do a debate about different types of energy sources in order to learn about their advantages and disadvantages. I was on the pro-nuclear team, and we were wracking our brains trying to come up with a rebuttal to “but what about the waste?” until some madlad basically came up with this great argument:
We can just dump all of the nuclear waste on Belgium. It will take a really long time before it fills up, and nobody cares about Belgium anyway
The anti-nuclear team had no good response, and we actually got a point for that argument because we looked up the relevant statistics (nuclear waste output, belgium surface area, etc.) and calculated exactly how long it would take to turn belgium into a radioactive wasteland.
Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 5 weeks ago
There’s a really simple answer to the waste problem though. And it’s super, blatantly obvious.
All nuclear material is basically ground up rocks that we dug out of a hole and then filtered the spicy bits out of. So grind it back up, pour it into concrete and stuff it back down the same hole it came from. Of course, you can’t legally do that, but that’s only because we have a ton of rules what constitutes safe disposal, etc. Recreating the original conditions basically meant you’re (re)creating something unsafe, but we do that in a LOT of places.
gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 4 weeks ago
fair argument
I want to add something to it:
First of all, a lot of that uranium seems to have been there and slowly decaying for a long time. I think, what we humans did was to “wake it up” and turn it into some more violently-reacting other elements, for the sake that we get the energy out of it at an acceptable pace. Not, though, it’s severely more toxic than it was before.
Also, I’ve an idea about what to do with the waste: Since the waste tends to activate itself due to neutron activation, put a lot of it (but just barely not enough to make a bomb) together and it will activate itself to react violently at very high speeds, but just barely not fast enough to explode (make a bomb). That way, you can get a lot of heat out of it rather quickly, and are left with burned-out material (which contains less radioactive potential).
Shiggles@sh.itjust.works 5 weeks ago
You’re so right - we should just pump all our crap out into the biosphere instead and keep burning coal.
naught101@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Solar and wind are currently both cheaper than coal, and rapidly getting cheaper.
Nuclear is more expensive, and the cost is growing. There will be almost certainly be no private investment in nuclear in the future unless it’s ideologically driven.
brbposting@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks ago
Come on let’s get some price breaks on the solar towers!
I totally know what solar towers are
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 weeks ago
Nuclear is more expensive, and the cost is growing. There will be almost certainly be no private investment in nuclear in the future unless it’s ideologically driven.
even if this is the case, i still think it’s a good idea to at least invest in research and development in nuclear fission, which might even help fusion down the road. Not to mention it’s always good to have alternatives. Would be a shame if we found out that solar panels are actually the new asbestos or something silly.
anomnom@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks ago
The only problems with solar are incoming president McFuckface’s tariffs, and AI’s propensity to use every goddamn moving electron in the world.
Shiggles@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks ago
almost certainly no private investment in nuclear in the future
I too refuse to read any news, ever, if it doesn’t support my viewpoint. Definitely no current investments in nuclear at the moment.
I like wind and solar! They’re not the whole of the solution for the whole globe though. There’s no reason to keep spreading the fossil fuel industry’s propaganda for them.
naught101@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Sorry, I meant to say new private investment
rumschlumpel@feddit.org 5 weeks ago
century-long legacy
At least millenia, might be epochs (million years) …
ramble81@lemm.ee 5 weeks ago
Though if Chernobyl is any indication in a few decades nature works its way around it.
luce@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 weeks ago
The dangerous radiation disappears much much sooner then that. And if its millions of years, life would adapt, more then it already has. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiotrophic_fungus
gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 4 weeks ago
Interesting link, thanks. Also, radiotrophic fungus is speculation at this point and has never been found in nature.
stoy@lemmy.zip 5 weeks ago
Luckily waste storage is a solved peoblem.
Drill hole in bedrock, put waste in hole, backfill with clay.
swab148@lemm.ee 5 weeks ago
Drill hole in bedrock, nuclear waste falls into the void and despawns, problem solved
rtxn@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Oh joy, I get to bust out these bad boys again! www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aUODXeAM-k www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhHHbgIy9jU
There’s also that one guy who touched the hot part and is now using that tiny blister to conduct a decades-long smear campaign against pots.
luce@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 weeks ago
kyle hill is interesting to me because when he is making videos about nuclear it is either the most terrifying nuclear horror story yet or facts and statistics about how safe nuclear is. I personally believe nuclear to be a super safe and efficient way to create energy, its just something funny I noticed. Makes me think about how common coal accidents are and how little they are covered compared to something supposedly scary like nuclear.
skulblaka@sh.itjust.works 5 weeks ago
Nuclear has the same problem as aviation, by average it’s many many times safer than most alternatives, but any time something goes wrong it has a high chance of going extremely wrong and making an international scene. So it’s generally safer but every accident makes world news.