• stoy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Sigh, it is super easy to deal with nuclear waste, you find stable bedrock, drill a hole into it, put the wast into the hole, backfill with clay.

    Done.

    There is zero need to build momuments to warn future civilizations, as long as it is deep enough, we can expect their technical development level to be on our own level before they can dig it up.

    I am a Swede, we have stable bedrock, a stable political system, we have the skills to build a facility like this, we have a shitload of space for it. We should invest in large storage facilities for nuclear waste, we can make enough to fill the global demand for nuclear waste storage, and we could make a plenty of money doing so.

    Also, it can be quite cold in Sweden, we could build the sites with heat exchange pipes surrounding them giving us decades of boosted geothermal power.

    If I were a billionaire, I would focus on building nuclear waste sites for the benefit of mankind.

    • frongt@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Burying it works great, until the geology shifts or groundwater starts seeping into the hole.

      • stoy@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Yes?

        It is the only long term solution we have, it is elegant and simple.

        • woelkchen@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          It is the only long term solution we have

          Posted article says otherwise. Clearly you didn’t care to read it.

          • nyan@lemmy.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Posted article indicates that even if the experiment performs to expectations, there will still be waste to be disposed of. They hope to convert most of the nasty, longer-lived radionucleides into something useful, but most is not all. Plus, part of their selling point is conversion into medical radionucleide sources, and to be honest, the market there isn’t all that big (like, “a single reactor in Canada supplied a high percentage of these sources for many years” not-that-big). It can probably absorb the output of this reactor, but ramp the idea up into a general solution for all nuclear waste everywhere, and we’ll likely end up with more medical and industrial radionucleide sources than we know what to do with.

            (There’s also the question of what kinds of waste could be reprocessed. Only enriched waste from light-water reactors? What about waste from heavy-water reactors, which tends to be bulkier but considerably less radioactive?)

            • woelkchen@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 hours ago

              most is not all

              The less if left, the better. Certainly better than burying everything and hoping for the best.

            • woelkchen@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              3 hours ago

              Given that there are zero experiences with burying nuclear waste for a million years, your easy solution is very much at best hypothetical.

              • stoy@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                3 hours ago

                Eh, the maths have shown that burying will work fine.

                • woelkchen@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 hours ago

                  Your maths:

                  Where are the actual experiences with it? The physics also show that such a reactor is possible. If numbers on paper are good enough for burying, they are good enough for that reactor to actually get rid of the waste.

    • Uranium 🟩@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Out of curiosity, does Sweden have any nuclear power facilities?

      And do you know if that form of storage requires vitrification of the waste products? (Essentially turning them to glass so they cannot leach out of containment in the event of a breach)

      • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        If you want more info about this type of a storage solution, look up Onkalo in Finland.

      • stoy@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        We have three active nuclear powerplants, Ringhals, Forsmark and Oskarshamn.

        We are currently decomissioning the powerplant Barsebäck, the Danes were less than happy about having two reactors close to their coast.

        Forsmark is the only powerplant that still runs all their reactors, Oskarshamn only has one of three reactors running, and Ringhals has two active reactors out of four.

      • stoy@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Notice how I never once mentioned building more nuclear power in my post, so I am not sure if you are replying to the right conversation.

          • stoy@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 hours ago

            It happens, it’s fine.

            If you want to discuss my thoughts about nuclear power as a modern energy source, I am open to it, but perhaps in a more apropriate post.

            Anyway, have a lovely day! :)

      • LEM 1689@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        I know. Yet everyday there’s more and more. Canada is going to start injecting it down into the Canadian Sheild. Took them 25 years to decide. Its just a scene from an old movie “Holocaust”. The greatest experiment of all. Hope this isnt another “Age of Stupid” moment.