this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
1570 points (94.0% liked)

World News

38586 readers
2295 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Shurimal@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Bullshit. Nuclear waste (more precisely, spent fuel that can be reprocessed for new fuel or other useful radionuclids) is the only waste we have actual good solutions for. It's not an engineering problem, we know very well how to safely dispose of the small amount of ultimate nuclear waste.

All the other waste, including waste from producing new and retiring old solar panels and wind turbines, basically just gets thrown into the landscape with no containment whatsoever. And some of that stuff is toxic, some will never degrade (plastics used in composite materials the wind turbine blades and towers are made of).

Plus, if you only used nuclear energy throughout you life, the amount of ultimate waste can literally fit into a coke can. That's how efficient and energy dense it is.

[–] blazera@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago

We already have more nuclear waste than we have capacity to store. And we arent reusing that nuclear waste. If you wanna become a nuclear engineer and get them to start using it please do, but right now the nuclear waste plan is to bury it for many millenia

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Out of sight out of mind, right? Great solution. Coke can? Ummmmmmmmmmm nope.

[–] Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Where do you think the discarded blade of wind turbine go? 🤔

[–] blazera@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not into underground storage for tens of thousands of years

[–] Shurimal@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's precisely where they go—landfills. They're made of non-recyclable glass fiber-plastic composites that won't degrade for millions of years.

[–] blazera@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Landfills arent underground, and theyll break down within a millenia. Well the plastic anyway. Then youre left with recyclable glass if it isnt crushed into sand first

[–] Shurimal@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

Landfills not being underground is even worse (but normally they are buried under soil when they go unused).

While the plastics degrade mechanically, being reduced into small particles, chemically they are not. They just turn into microplastics which I'm sure you're aware is a huge problem.

With the small amount of ultimate nuclear waste that cannot be reprocessed further, the solution is simple: drill a km deep shaft into the bedrock, place them at the bottom, fill the shaft with rubble and cement. Done. No-one's going to accidentally dig them up and they pose absolutely no threat to anyone. The finns are doing something like this as we speak.