As the title says, I’m interested in this community’s perceptions on nuclear energy.

  • monobot
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    you can literally store nuclear waste in a hole for thousands of years without it messing up the environment

    No you can not, we still don’t have the technology to store it safety. And we definitely still don’t do it. If you do just a bit of research you will notice that nuclear waste is being stored in big water pools close to nuclear plants. I would not call that “safe, long term solution”.

    I am really angry at the anti-nuclear movement.

    Current nuclear technology was developed for nuclear weapons, it is a no go. We need to impove reserch into molten salt thorium reactors and fision, but uranium is not an option.

    • keepthepace@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Notwithstanding the fact that “big water pools” would not be an extremely high tech solution and could be a long term solution, you should look into geological storage. Enclosure in glass and concrete, storage deep enough to be below aquifers, do look like they can last millions of years (which, personally I think is a waste: a radioactive material is something that radiates energy. I am sure that within a century or two we will dig up these “wastes” to generate energy, I hope we make their enclosure easily openable)

      Current nuclear technology was developed for nuclear weapons

      True, and internet was developed by the DARPA. That’s largely irrelevant. The effort to make weapon-grade uranium (90%) is an order of magnitude above the effort to make power plants-grade uranium (20%)

      • monobot
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I agree that, in future, we will probably have ways to store and use energy from radioactive waste and I geological storage might probably be solution.

        But… we are still not close to it, “we will solve it in the future” is what got us here.

        Additionally, I just think there is no need to take such risks when there are other, safer options.

          • monobot
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            If you take a look at “Status” column, only four of them are in use. After 60 years of nuclear energy and 440 nuclear power plants in 32 countries.

            I call that a big fail, and exact problem I am talking about.

            We don’t even need to go into question wether thise will be safe for thousands of years, which is doubtful.

            • keepthepace@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              If I show you definite proof of extraterrestrial visits on Earth, it will not matter that 99.9999% of UFO sightings were fake.

              I call that a big fail, and exact problem I am talking about.

              No, you never specified the hypothetical blocking problems you are talking about. Existence of even one site in operation proves that no blocking problems exist.

              We don’t even need to go into question whether these will be safe for thousands of years, which is doubtful.

              My good man, these are designed for millions of years. Based on the observation of billions years old natural occurring isotopes. From the WP article:

              Despite a long-standing agreement among many experts that geological disposal can be safe, technologically feasible and environmentally sound, a large part of the general public in many countries remains skeptical as result of anti-nuclear campaigns.

              • monobot
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Well I am sceptical. Maybe I can believe that US and other rich nations can make it work, I have huge doubts in most of the couries being careful enough.

                  • monobot
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Storage facility ahould not be “run”, it is not possible to guarantee someone will keep an eye on it for thousands of years.

                    But you are right, running power plant is harder and I don’t trust most of the governments around the world to do it safety.

                    If rich/stable countries focus only on nuclear as clean energy - risky countries will do the same or go to coal.

                    We are not searching for solution only for US and Europe since it is not enough.