this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2024
2 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

59587 readers
4578 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

It's not that difficult to store it's just a rock. You just pop it in a sealed casket, put it underground, mark the location as do not enter and then forget about it. Hardly the greatest of economic challenges.

Anyway you're assuming that we won't have a way of recycling it in the future and there's increasing evidence that we will be able to pretty soon.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

That is a horribly naive underselling of what's involved in storing nuclear waste. How do you transport it? What do you do in the event of an accident during transport? Where is it stored now? Is it somewhere we can get good transport in? How do you mark something "do not enter" for tens of thousands of years? Think of what languages existed during the Roman Empire, and then realize that we'll have to store it for orders of magnitude longer than that.

Logistics, logistics, logistics. They are not easy for even the simplest projects.

We do have the recycling technology. It's not a far off thing; been developed for decades. If there's a good reason for a nuclear renaissance, it's in using the waste we already have, and recycling it down to something that's only dangerous for centuries, not millennia.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

All of the infrastructure for transporting nuclear waste already exists for transporting the existing nuclear waste.

Realistically it's the only viable long-term option it's infinitely better than fossil fuels and Fusion power would be nice but doesn't exist yet at least not outside of a lab and I don't think even in the lab particularly efficient.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 0 points 5 months ago

Realistically it’s the only viable long-term option

No, it isn't. Solar+wind+storage will do fine.

Fusion power would be nice but doesn’t exist yet at least not outside of a lab and I don’t think even in the lab particularly efficient.

And the fact that you word things this way makes it pretty clear to me you have no idea what you're talking about and haven't actually researched anything about it.