Energy Production & Sustainability

HOW DO WE DEAL WITH NUCLEAR WASTE?

Seriously, how do we get rid of it? We are accumulating a LOT of nuclear waste all the time, especially with all these old nuclear plants still operating that are massively inefficient compared to current generation shit.

So far we seem to just dump it all in salt mines. It makes me feel really unsettled though, one day that shit will probably enter into underwater streams, and enter into the oceans.

I think we should shutdown all old nuclear plants, the coal plants, and scale back industry and depopulate. Just keep the current generation nuclear plants running and continue expansion of alternative energy technologies.

No matter what technology you use, you still fuck up the Earth. The only real solution to environmental woes is to reduce population, reduce consumption.

The trend however is to keep increasing population as well as increasing the power of shitskin populaces to consume.

The current generation is plagued with massive amounts of health problems btw. Lots of allergies, myopia, depression, etc. It's only going to get worse carrying on as usual.

We can feed huge numbers of people, but only if we have the infrastructure in place, totally destroy the environment, disregard long-term sustainability, and disregard quality of life. We can achieve some of these very high population numbers if everyone is reduced to cattle in cages called cities.

We would get by absolutely fine with a fraction of the population we have today.

I propose that we start a global race war to kill off all or the majority of shitskins and disrupt the infrastructure that keeps invalids alive so all the downies and other rejects die in the conflict. Somehow during this process we must carefully shutdown many industrial plants, energy plants, etc. and clean up the planet. We need to cause societal disruption in foreign countries like China and make them cave in from the inside, like they've been attempting for decades now to do to America, destroying America from the inside since they can't oppose America any other way.

At what point however can we expect China or another great nation to cave in on itself? Who will go first? Maybe it'll be America that destroys itself first?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yucca_Mountain_nuclear_waste_repository
heritage.
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Pack it all to the middle east

I want them to go to sweden.

We had a perfectly good place for it but niggers don't want to use it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yucca_Mountain_nuclear_waste_repository

feed it to africa

Fuck you king nigger. Fucking kike nigger hybrid freak. I hope Trump brings it back. Fuckthe Indians too.

This.

Send it to the south pole.

At best, it freezes and traps its damaging effects. At worst, sasquatch penguins.

It was always a mistake to take the Catholic point of view, that is, against overpopulation and just "multiply bread" as whoever that Pope was said in opposition to Eugenics.

Now, the world is hypercompetitive, there are too many people competing, inequality has severely grown, and while you can feed the masses ramen noodles and other shit sustenance, they aren't living a life worth living, and are just being a burden.

The world has plenty of useless eaters, and science taking on proto-communist morality – Jew-Christian morality – says every life is worthwhile.

So, you need more energy to power a billion non-whites smartphones. If the world were white-dominated still and the non-whites were mostly slave races who didn't need electricity – or much less – then there wouldn't hardly be any of these issues.

Less than 10% of the world is worth keeping. The elites know this. Unfortunately, it'll be a pyrrhic victory, considering many of the elites are worthless shitweasels who subsist on corporate welfare and other bullshit rackets.

The future will either see basic income or mass population culling, that's a certainty. Our current course is not sustainable.

Once we exterminate the chinks, we can use China as a dumping ground for our waste. China is already badly fucked by the chinks. Indian needs to be depopulated too. They pollute so fucking much. It is always funny to see 'green' idiots get triggered when you tell them that subhumans don't care for the environment and only whites do.

That could encumber future resource extraction efforts there.

What if doing that in some way completely fucks up the entire planet? Like a shelf of ice breaking off of Antarctica one particularly hot summer and the nuclear waste plunges into the ocean and all oceans die?

Reprocess it and use it to fuel current-generation reactors that can use it. Continue R&D on next-generation reactors that can use even more of it.

Definitely. Anything second-generation should be on the decommissioning slate. Those batshit insane RBMK's the Russians _STILL_ use should be first on the list. There's no excuse (besides greed) for us to still be running on hardware constructed in the 70's when there's been forty years of research since then yielding much safer and more efficient and flexible systems.

At this point it feels like nobody needs to do anything specific for this to happen. It seems like it's ramping up on its own.

/thread

quads

I'm not even checking this

What a low fucking effort get

Kys

it's a raid and their strategy is concern troll

1. We need to start recycling waste. The French have been doing this for decades.
heritage. org/environment/commentary/recycling-nuclear-fuel-the-french-do-it-why-cant-oui
2. Start replacing old facilities with newer generation plants.
3. Open Yucca Mountain

God damn, son. Checked.

Is this actually a thing? If so, that would be briliant. We go dig up the tons of barrels of nuclear waste and re-use it again.

How long does the various forms of nuclear waste remain intensely radioactive btw? A hundred years maybe or thousands?

What do we even need all this electricity for? Isn't it largely just for super computers? Lets have a breakdown of energy-use and what it's actually going to, like how much of it is powering the suburbs, how much of it is powering cities, how much of it goes to industry, how much of it is used by the military, etc.

It worked for Singapore.

Population reduction happens by itself if you have highly advanced nations, see : all of the western world.
Introduce that stuff to 3rd worlders and you will see the same effect. For mass consumtion: Just build stuff that lasts longer like simens washing machines, they can go on for decades.
Otherwise enslave the cucks, since they love cities and being crowed up emusculated nothings. One way or another.

No you won't because they are shitskin subhumans. They are fundamentally different from Whites or Japanese.

Absolutely. See . It's always been feasible. It's just perceived as less profitable than burning the fuel once and dumping it (because reprocessing is pricey). Though one would think "well, I can reuse the shit out of this fuel that I no longer have to constantly buy/import" would be a net gain.

Depends on the fuel type (enrichment, etc.) but it's a long damned time. Hundreds of years at least. There's a reason the Yucca Mountain project spent so much time and effort trying to figure out a way to signal "stay the fuck out of here if you want to live" to people in the far future who don't read/speak any current known language.

Manufacturing and air conditioning. And those stupid fucking bitcoin miners. Most of it goes to industry and office buildings, though.

IQ doesnt matter here, all humans are subject to this effect.

Reprocessing is cheap and easy to do, however, it's been illegal to do in the us since Jimmy carter signed it into law, preferring to bury it. This was most likely made to limit out plutonium production, leaving Israel, and SA (at the time), virtually the only producers.

The future is in 'fast' reactors, as they accept a wide amount of fuel and there is virtually no waste. Due to us regulations, we virtually make them unprofitable.

They're the perfect power supply for the grid.

The current way we deal with spent fuel rods is sticking them in a big ass hole in a mountain out in Nevada or somewhere. Pretty sure I remember that from my AP Environmental science class.

We've already got that covered. 90% of nuclear waste is in the "low level waste" category, meaning it can just be thrown in a typical landfill with little to no damage to the environment.
Intermediate level waste comprises 7% of nuclear waste and is radioactive enough to require a bit of shielding but it's not vigorous enough for the heat generated to need to be taken into account. We bury that shit (and recycle some of it for use in shit like smoke detectors)
3% (or 10,000 cubic meters [12,000 tonnes] annually across all nuclear reactors in existence) is your "high level waste." This is the nasty stuff everyone's afraid of. Not only is it radioactive as fuck, but it also gets hot as fuck. That heat generation makes it hard to store, as it will melt damn near anything you try to store it in. It's also a benefit, though. The whole point of nuclear reactors is to get really fucking hot. by recycling high level waste, you can reduce its volume by about 70% before throwing it out (many reactors already do this).
Storage of high level waste is mostly in ponds associated with individual reactors, or in a common pool at multi-reactor sites, or occasionally at a central site.

Nuclear waste is not a problem.

Shoot high level nuclear waste into the sun.

mine fissionable materials from asteroids.


Also

Hi greenpeace

Dump it in Israel.

It hasn't stopped niggers or mudslimes from shitting out dozens of kids for generations now.

Put that shit in a LFTR or other breeder reactor, you mongoloids.

This. There is a documentary on netflix or amazon prime called "pandora's promise". A lefty former anti nuclear activist does the actual research and finds out oooops nuclear was the best option all along and the amount of waste is negligible. He shows that there is more radiation on the beaches of Hawaii than standing right next to containers of nuclear waste.

Nature and nurture are always in some kind of dance and expression with each other.

This. Nuclear waste is really just unspent fuel. It'd perfect for use in a LFTR.

(checked)

Either reprocess it or put it into a breeder reactor.

Reprocessing via PUREX plants is currently ruled out in the US due to the security risks of shipping nuclear waste to and from the PUREX plant, but smaller on-site pyroprocessing machines capable of local reprocessing is literally around the corner and will be arriving any year now. The science is done, the engineering is done, they've got working models, they just need to put together a final commercial unit.

Putting the waste in a breeder reactor is a more efficient way of doing it, as breeder reactors can literally wring ~1000x more energy from that "waste" than the original reactor got out of in the first place, but this would involve much more significant infrastructure changes. Namely, the construction of new gen3 and gen4 plants utilizing breeder technology would need to be approved, and good fucking luck getting that these days.

Long story short, half the reason Yucca Mt. failed is because this "waste" is actually still super useful. ~95% of nuclear "waste" is actually still uranium which can be reused in various ways; it's just that the mixture of uranium to non-uranium elements has dropped too low to be useful for regular reactors. Interring all that "waste" into long term storage would have been an actual waste of valuable resources – we just need to finally get off our asses on using it.

Give it to Japan, they should be developing a resistance to radiation by now anyway.

Just to clarify: there is no storage of fuel rods in the US anywhere except inside on-site spent fuel pools. There was a plan to store them inside Yucca Mt. in Nevada, but that plan got scrapped. There is a second facility called the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP, pic related) in New Mexico which stores nuclear waste generated from various experiments, namely military ones, but not fuel rods. And finally there are plans to expand WIPP to begin storing spent nuclear fuel, but AFAIK it hasn't happened yet.

Outside of the US, many nuclear countries use PUREX technology to reprocess their waste and reuse the U-235 and P-239/241, such as France and Japan. Finland has begun construction of a long term geological repository by the name of Onkalo which is similar to Yucca Mt. Finally, labs are starting to look into what is being called 'deep borehole disposal' methods which involve using oil well drills to dig extremely deep, deeper than oil wells even, all the way into crystalline granitic bedrock, and then just putting the fuel down there, sealing it up, and forgetting about it. (2nd pic).

PUT IT IN THE BLACK CUBE

This is stupid, because if a fault line develops and goes through the underground complex, now you have radioactive material in your groundwater.

I don't disagree with that assessment. As far as I'm concerned reprocessing or reusing the waste is far and away the best solution we have, as disposing of it is not only unnecessarily risky but also wasteful of useful resources.

If we had to dispose of it I would lean towards deep borehole disposal, but that's still very new to the scene and knowing how fucking slow the nuclear community moves it'll be another 20 years before they are even up for consideration for approval.

I prefer the idea of putting it in a monolithic structure. That way future generations never fuck up and accidentally stumble upon it. It will be in huge engraved letters on the side of the structure that no one should ever enter or unleash the material within.

Put fast breeder reactors in heavily guarded facilities in remote locations. You can get rid of most of that waste.

Who gives a shit. There are bigger problems right now, let it pile up in the desert for a few more years.

What would be the effects of flying it into the sun.

And the unfissionable waste can be used for medical purposes like brachytherapy or a nuclear battery industry could develop and used for space probes among other things.

Launch it into the sun

You reprocess it and use it for fuel again. You can do this repeatedly until there is no radioactivity left. In France they make necklaces out of the shit and sell it to the public because it's lost all radioactivity. We have so much nuclear waste today in America because reprocessing it means creating weapons-grade plutonium, which was banned under Jimmy Carter.

The problem is that whoever plays fair will literally be surpassed by the least scrupulous Eg. Chinks. The Chinks certainly won't hesitate to destroy the planet to make a little bit more money.

Bury it in cement or send it off on a rocket into space.

You can't do it repeatedly until there is no radioactivity left.
There will always be the decay products which are uniffissionable, even after going through a breeder. The breeder simply takes the 98% of the fuel that is unfissioned and makes it fissile so it can be fissioned.
However, that still leaves highly radioactive decay products, it's just that those highly radioactive decay products only last years to decades to centuries at most, rather than tens of thousands of years that many of the slower decaying, non-fissile actinides do.
These highly radioactive decay products with the shorter half-lives (due to their high activity) are quite useful for other things though, as I mentioned here .
It would be great if nuclear batteries became common, since they last so long, although they are lower power by mass and volume than chemical ones.

Having your remote batteries last longer than the tv sounds like some subtle type of hell

That's a point many anti-nuke people fail to grasp. Choose at most one of the following:
1) highly radioactive
2) long half-life
This applies to fallout as well as nuclear waste.


I too prefer the monolithic structure, but not for the reasons you cite. Rather, my rationale is this: gasoline was originally considered a hazardous waste byproduct of oil distillation. It seems that the 19th century didn't anticipate the technology of the 20th. Would have been nice had they buried that "useless" gasoline in a nice repository labeled as you described so it was easy to find.

Just pour it in the ocean.

Look at China, India and Africa. These people don't stop overbreeding no matter what.

The ocean is already scary enough. We don't need to create shit like pic related.

Russia.

They have a substantial nuclear waste disposal and storage infrastructure.
All situated in vast and unpopulated areas.

You must not appreciate the volume of the ocean.

you don't, enjoy it nigger

pack it all into a rocket and aim it all at the fucking sun. give it more fuel considering its gonna start burning out in 6 billion years

...

How to nuclear waste.
1. Build warehouse with a crane to move things around.
2. There is no 2. One warehouse is all you fucking need.

THIS

i tried explaining this basic concept today to someone and they just kept going on about feminism and trump. i seriously thought they were deaf. overpopulation is the root of all the problems we see today. and most economies in the world are severely in debt or in a bubble and one day theyre going to burst. and the rich lefties may preach about helping everyone but they all bought bunkers capable of withstanding nuclear war. they know whats coming.

we all feel it.

That would be a tiny drop in the bucket that wouldn't power it even for another year. Why throw away all this hard-earned material when we can recycle it so easily?

One of the rockets fails and explodes in the upper atmosphere making it into a gigantic dirty bomb.

no there isn't. The bigger problem is coal plants shitting out CO2 in massive amounts. Hell, the number of deaths (including accidents) from nuclear power plants over the entire time we have had nuclear power plants doesn't even come close to 10 years of the deaths from the CO2 emissions and accidents in coal plants from one 3rd world country alone. They are inefficient and horrible for your health.
Smog causes cancer too, retard.

Honestly all we need to do is cleanse the world of every nonwhite and we solve literally every problem. No more over population, no more jobs being lost to third world countries, no more of our tax dollars being siphoned away into starving countries for "aid", massive drops in crime and disease, much lower need for polluting farms, no poor countries using inefficient low-tech like there's no tomorrow… Honestly I can't think of a single problem that wouldn't be solved by exterminating every non-white.

Fun fact: coal plants put out orders of magnitude more radiation than nuclear plants do, due to freeing radioactive materials in the coal when they burn it.

Molten Thorium salt reactors can be used as nuclear waste eaters.

Because it's a liquid fuel, everything (conventional nuclear waste) can be thrown in and will be neutron bombarded until they decay into non-radioactive materials.

All the while creating power.

As for the rest of your post, I think you'd struggle to find someone here who wouldn't want to kill all the shitskins, thus solving the overpopulation problem.

thats pretty shocking actually. i guess its a good thing coal is being replaced by natural gas, slowly but surely. coal should be saved for when we have no other option.

Yeah, but what about in the meanwhile? These things take time. We can't snap our fingers and say "well, that takes care of THAT problem!"

It shouldn't be that shocking, honestly. A properly run nuclear power plant will emit almost no radiation. About the only thing that will actually escape are trace amounts of Ar41. Barring an actual containment leak or other serious issue that's about it as far as radioactivity goes.

the obvious answer is sending it to space
yes, and cell phones were tens of thousands of dollars thirty years ago
we used to have space elevator threads, this would be the impetus to get that in motion
right now there's no reason to build a space elevator, but if we used it for jettisoning nuclear waste, we could have a very good reason to do so
don't trust cartoons

What the fuck are you babbling about?

He wants Nuclear waste sent into space

well yeah, i just didnt realize that coal was that dirty. and it baffles me how nuclear energy isnt seen as an option. i mean the navy can clearly make it work. just look at our subs and aircraft carriers. so why cant they figure out how to run nuclear energy facilities correctly on land. the coming energy crisis can be solved by that. easily.

on the flipside human error with that kind of technology is a very real and scary possibility. so i think most are really afraid to try to make it viable

...

Securely bury it in a volatile state dotted randomly to the length of the US Mexico border.
Zero maintenance, lasts for hundreds-thousands of years.
Illegals start dropping dead from radiation poisoning.
Don't have to do the entire length of the border, psychological terror alone will keep people away.
No getting under or over it.

We could easily reprocess it into a small fraction of what we have now, but of course the (((government))) made it illegal. Why? I assume because now they can justify funneling trillions of dollars to oil/green energy companies who couldn't compete with high volume fission energy. And, trillions more dollars to waste on "storing" radioactive "waste." Congratulations, tax payers, enjoy your new "infrastructure."

molten salt reactors

Nuclear power plants need a shitload of water to cool them and run the turbines. Water isn't really something you need to worry about running out of with a boat but in-land you have to rely on rivers. Granted most power plants (coal and nuclear included) just boils water and uses the steam to turn turbines so most of them do but nuclear has extra requirements for this. Find a way of performing cold fusion/fission and we could reduce this need substantially while basically removing the risk of meltdowns.

They can't support overpopulation being a problem because whites are the minority in that argument and would cause a paradox in their narrative.

The world is overpopulated, with Chinese, Indians and Africans. They don't want to admit this.

Industrial civilization is fucked, mate. Nuclear is hella dangerous and the actual EROI isn't all that great. We have a couple hundred years of coal, but it burns dirty no matter how you want to slice the pie, and have you see the amount of environmental destruction required to dig it out of the earth? Solar is garbage and requires a lot of rare earth metals, maybe it can be improved upon with nanoscale engineering, I did see a promising paint that generates electricity through temperature differential. Carbon nanotubes or some shit. Wind is meh. So either materials science is going to save our ass, or we've got a couple hundred years of dirty industrial revolution-era smog and then a return to a lot of 19th century technologies.

It's absolutely possible to generate electrical power from a thermocouple, but the efficiency is shit compared to steam turbines and generators. I suppose that nano engineering could improve it, but I don't really see it going very far.

Just shove it five miles underground, by the time it comes back to the surface in a couple million years it won't be a threat anymore.

how

Came here to post something like this.

only if you have 80 IQ shitskins design your plant

thermocouples aren't the only way of producing power from temperature differential. there's actually tons of them.

damn user. from a little reading about cold fusion/fission it looks like it was already discovered and was memory holed because it would destroy the whole energy industry. if that was possible think of the millions of jobs that would be lost.

i wonder if there is anything that literally absorbs heat and converts it to something else. thats probably the only way cold fusion/fission could work. becuase dispersing the heat would require a ton of water.

not all of them do, only the shit tier designs need water as a coolant.

There. Nuclear energy is now safer than wind.

Obama is a fuckwit, we've got nuclear waste scattered across the US because of that nigger, just sitting around at power plants waiting for something to go wrong.

MOTHER

FUCKING


SPACE

ELEVATOR


___████████_ _██████
_____█░░░░░░░░██_██░░░░░░█
____█░░░░░░░░░░░█░░░░░░░░░█
___█░░░░░░░███░░░█░░░░░░░░░█
___█░░░░███░░░███░█░░░████░█
__█░░░██░░░░░░░░███░██░░░░██
_█░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░█░░░░░░░░███
____█░░░░░░░░░░░░░██████░░░░░████░░█
____█░░░░░░░░░█████░░░████░░██░░██░░█
___██░░░░░░░███░░░░░░░░░░█░░░░░░░░███
__█░░░░░░░░░░░░░░█████████░░█████████
█░░░░░░░░░░█████_████████_█████_█
█░░░░░░░░░░█_█_████_███_█_█
█░░░░░░░░░░░░█_████_████__██_██████
░░░░░░░░░░░░░█████████░░░████████░░░█
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░█░░░░░█░░░░░░░░░░░░█
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██░░░░█░░░░░░██
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██░░░░░░░███████
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██░░░░░░░░░░█░░░░░█
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░█
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░█
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░█
░░░░░░░░░░░█████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██
░░░░░░░░░░█▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒███████████████▒▒█
░░░░░░░░░█▒▒███████▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒█
░░░░░░░░░█▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒█████████████████
░░░░░░░░░░████████▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒█
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██████████████████
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░█
██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██
▓██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██
▓▓▓███░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░█
▓▓▓▓▓▓███░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██
▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓███████████████▓▓█
▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓██
▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓█
▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓█

They're trying to start getting it dumped in the Australian desert.

Also, we already have a method of using temperature difference to generate electricity. Actually, it is surprizingly easy to build with basic materials and its technology is used widely in the industry.
It's called the bloody steam turbine, and its how literally every nuclear and coal power plant runs.
We don't need expensive solar panels or Jovian tech to generate electricity from the sun. I saw this TV program ages ago and it was showing how they are researching thermal solar electricity in the Kike Reich: Their system consists of long black pipes filled with some sort of oil running along V-shaped mirrors in the dessert. A simmilar, but much more basic system is already used by many civilians to heat their water: You may often see houses with a black pipe coiled on the roof.
This heated oil can then be used to boil bore or sea water for turbines. Also, this system may have the advantage if night storage unlike panels and space paint, because the hot oil can symply be pumped into an asbestos tank and stored until night.


Correct me if I'm wrong here, but thermocouples don't run of temperature difference, but the temperature itself. If it were otherwise, a thermocouple would stop giving signal after a while and would give a different voltage at different ambient temperatures.

WE DON'T
Let's shovel that shit right into the next generation's driveway instead and forget about it.
PARTY TIME

Yes, it is. Something like 90% of the fuel is left unburnt in spent fuel rods, hence the whole jacking off over liquid salt Thorium reactors which can dynamically reprocess the fuel while running.

"the temperature itself" is a fairly meaningless term when it comes to power generation. You don't get any power output from "the temperature itself." Thermocouple readings are always done from a known reference point (usually at the junction between the thermocouple's wires and the copper wires leading to the meter.

I know user, I haz that feels too…
the level of scientific literacy is not very good in many Holla Forumsacks. The quest for better understanding of the world around us should be nurtured wherever found.


and the major reason molten salt reactors are not sued is because they can easily be used as breeder reactors to make fissile material for bombs.

used not sued

...

scintillating and insightful response user
never been to redit, no intentions of going, believe it or don't
since your earlier contribution was a reasonable statement about the waste and futility of using a rocket to send the nuclear waste into the sun I'll overlook the attempted slight and ask a question that is germane to OPs question.
What's your position on the future of fission?
What should we do with the various waste products and by-products of our nuclear power industry?

1. Update the reactors, 3-3.5 gen. reactors can recycle the vast majority of your waste.

2. For the left over non-recycle waste, or if step one is too expensive, dump it into the deepest part of the ocean and wait for plate tectonics to drap it into the mantel

YOU STICK IT DEEP INTO THE GROUND.

NUCLEAR WASTE IS HEAVY.

IT SINKS BACK INTO THE MANTLE.

FUCK YOU GREENTARDS FOR SCARING PEOPLE WITH MUH 6,000,000,000,000 YEARS.

Doesn't stop breeder reactors from still being around. Proliferation is a rather stupid argument to use, since any nation with the will and access to nuclear tech can use it to make a weapon. Look at South Africa's ghetto arsenal. LFTR is not being used because it takes investment and R&D in the chemical separation stage. While at the same time being big and scary nuclear tech. Rule of thumb: if it is big, expensive and heavily involved with the authorities, it better buy the district politician another term. Nuclear anything is bad for that.

the mantle is itself nuclear waste

What do you think god made Africa FOR?

Either recycle it or shoot it into the sun.

Integral Fast Reactors, retard. Does France have a nuclear waste problem? 80% of their energy is nuclear.

Could you launch it into space?

The usual argument against that is that rockets fail occasionally and you really don't want to have radioactive waste all over the launch site or country, depending on where the thing blows up.

If we ever get around to proper shuttling rather than largely one way rockets, we could probably establish a secure dump site on a moon or other such rock with no other strategic value. Far as I can tell that should be doable within the century assuming interest in mars doesn't wane.

There is no nuclear waste, it only has byproducts. After a fuel rod is (((depleted))) it has only burned less than a few percent of its energy. Other countries reprocess there fuel and make new fuel from the remaining isotopes but we signed a treaty with Russia saying we would not do that but they are allowed to. Because we are cucks.

AIR DROP IT INTO CHINA AND THE MIDDLE EAST

Cold Fusion, we are 10 years away, and it uses spent fuel rods from the old reactors.

Dump it under Israel.

tfw in Canada a ton of nuclear waste is going to be buried near the great lakes only a few hundred feet away
tfw when it gets into the great lakes, that's the end of Canada, because basically all our population is supported by the great lakes

Do they? Also are they using the old generation reactors or the new ones?

You are fucking retarded. Dumping it into the deepest part of the ocean will kill the entire oceans.

Jettison it into space

That is, send it on course for Sol and add scientific equipment to feed back so that we can understand ourselves better.

Why don't we generate more of our electricity from geothermal like is done in Iceland?

Costs too much.

You do realize how impossible that is, yes?

First of all, it costs ~$10,000 per pound to launch anything into space. Second of all, video.

well encase it in glass and metal 1st, then drill holes in the plate that's going under the crust. Put the glass and metal ingots with the waste in the holes. They get draged down into the earths core and melted where heavy elements sink to the center.

MAKE BOOLITS OUT OF IT


I think you meant 'on' Israel

You skipped geothermal, water dams, etc…

I highly doubt CO2 pollution is that big of a deal, I'd be more worried about the radiation from coal plants.

Do you know how expensive that kind of drilling is? At that point you might as well be launching it into space. I like the user's plans to actually re-use the fuel and to shutdown the older plants far better. There are so many ways for your plan to fuck up and kill our oceans. Just because it's sinking underground doesn't mean a current of water won't pass over it and bring tons of radiation up into the oceans. Glass and metal coating be damned. I'd rather the radioactive waste at least be stored somewhere we can retrieve it from in a hundred years time when we have thought up of a better, more clever way to deal with the stuff.

>heritage. org/environment/commentary/recycling-nuclear-fuel-the-french-do-it-why-cant-oui

Why do I keep seeing broken links being posted all over Holla Forums like this?

Can we make Trump do this? What is Trump going to do about nuclear energy?

Hi OP, nuclear engineer here.


There are a few ways to get rid of it. Waste is actually not a huge problem, nuclear fuel is so energy dense that you can mostly store it on-site in large casks. Waste is something that will only *eventually* become a problem, but the current issue is overblown.

The real danger overall with nuclear is weapons proliferation, and the real problem with it right now is cost. Nuclear just is nowhere near as cheap as natural gas, and that's because plants take 10 years and $10 billion to build, during that time you could invest that money in something that will give you way better returns than a nuclear plant.

I think the only way to make nuclear cost-effective is small modular reactors, but in my opinion they should be sustainable, i.e. fast SMRs that burn plutonium reprocessed from spent fuel. However, reprocessing is both expensive, and dangerous from a proliferation perspective (reprocessed Pu is good bomb making material).

The benefit of the current once-through nuclear cycle is that the fuel is only enriched to about 5%, so on the front-end it's not useable for a bomb, and on the back-end, the spent fuel is so radioactive that anyone who wanted to separate enough plutonium from it would pretty much need a giant, expensive and visible reprocessing plant, along with expertise.

However, with enough research $$$ it's probably possible to make a fast SMR reprocessing fuel cycle secure, so if you guys could go ahead and meme nuclear into the god-emperor's good graces, I'd appreciate it.

Aren''t there already nuclear weapons on the black market, in the hands of pretty much every country on the planet, etc.? Nothing catastrophic has happened so far.

Do you know what Trump is going to do about nuclear waste?

How feasible is it to force a shutdown of the massively inefficient and dangerous old plants and to force the building of bleeding edge ones that use the best technology?


Argh so I guess he's unaware of all this?

We should probably make pro-nuclear memes that can easily be reposted and spread around.

checked


I hope not, but there could be. I agree with you in the sense that I doubt the US adopting reprocessing would really increase the overall danger, because any terrorist with half a brain would simply buy the material from some shit-tier nuclear country like north korea.


Well only a handful of countries are known to be nuclear-armed. US, UK, Russia, India, Pakistan, China, France and Israel (though they deny it). The worry in my mind isn't countries like Iran deploying a bomb - they're smart enough to know that if they hit anyone with a nuke they will get glassed in 30 mins. The problem is countries like Iran or DPRK covertly passing material or bombs to terrorists who will then use the bombs, then the US won't know how to respond.


There is a huge nuclear security apparatus working around the clock to monitor as much as they can, but a lot of nuclear security experts think that a terrorist nuke is just a matter of time. They try to reduce the risk by threatening countries like DPRK etc with huge consequences if they're caught exchanging weapons or material. I guess I would say, "it's worked so far".


No idea, as I said, waste isn't really a problem yet. If we transition to nuclear on a large scale, it will become a problem, hopefully by then we'll have figured out how to deal with it.


I'd say politically impossible barring another fukushima-like event. In truth, even the old plants in the US are actually pretty good - the first generation of nuclear scientists were extremely smart and capable guys. The issue with the new designs is that they are still really expensive to build, actually the old plants were cheaper to build because the nuclear regulatory commission was still figuring out licensing requirements. The new reactors like the APR etc still work on fundamentally the same ideas - pressurized water (several dozen atmospheres), Rankine cycle (steam generators max ~30% efficiency), low-enriched fuel.


Dunno, but if it were up to me I'd pump $$$ into figuring out how to design fast SMRs (whatever the design) and cheap & safe reprocessing.

forgot to say, DPRK too obviously.

Aren''t there already nuclear weapons on the black market

Probably. When the USSR collapsed there were instances of nukes in satellite nations mysteriously disappearing. But, in itself, a country having a nuke is concerning but not overly so. There's not a lot that a country can do with one nuke. They can bluster with it, but having one nuke versus two thousand is ridiculous from a MAD deterrence stand point. You also need an effective delivery system and most countries who don't have nukes that would want them likely don't have a sophisticated rocketry program necessary to build MRBMs, LRBMs or ICBMs. So even if they have a nuke, what the fuck can they do with it?

The more disturbing threat is a terrorist organisation getting their hands on a nuke. If they do that, they could do absolutely catastrophic damage. But if that ever happens, it's game over for Islam. Remember how the world reacted during 9/11 and then multiply it by a million.

How much more electricy do you reckon we'll have to generate when we switch over all or at least the vast majority of all vehicles to full-electric?

How long can we continue with "business as usual" before we hit serious problems with resource shortages, environmental degradation, etc.?

What kind of timeframe do we have to develop new technology or be eternally fucked?

this is the correct answer. I totally leled

I do not agree. Proliferation is a serious problem. It's the main sticking point with Iran right now. They want nuclear power but the world doesn't want them to build bombs
.>>9190054
this needs to be re-negotiated


not many places have the needed geology


are you stricktly a fission man or do you think Lockheed has a chance at making fusion work?


needs to be improved.
I concur, then I'd seriously upgrade security on fissile materials.

I think Canada and America have it.

*Israel doesn't want them to build bombs.

either recycle the fissile material or throw it into the sun

Lace it into quality clothing products, market it as being very progressive as in cell degradation.

in all honesty nuclear power and fusion/fission is a disaster waiting to happen we need to use IMPLOSION rather than explosion as an energy form.

Look at population, land size, and geology of Iceland. Now do the same for north america. This shit ain't rocket science.

What are you telling me exactly?

If I would have checked your ID I never would have replied. Shilling another low effort concern thread and asking a thousand stupid questions. And so new it hurts

reported

Holy shit you're fucking stupid.

I'm not sure, I think the transportation sector's energy use is something like 30-40% of overall, so we'll need about 30% more plants.


I can't speak for other energy generation technologies, but the funny thing about nuclear is that if you do a calculation of future costs of on-site waste storage vs long term repository storage, it's actually cheaper in the long run to store on-site. However, there is a law that says the US govt is required to provide a long term solution eventually, the nuclear industry has been paying 0.1 of a cent per kWh generated to the government for decades in order to fund the repository, so uncle sam kind of owes it to them.


Can't really say, I'm not worried about that kind of thing, because it seems to be a recurring pattern where you have a bunch of people worried about the sky falling, and a few years later it becomes a non-issue due to some technological advanced. What we should be worried about (and most of Holla Forums is), is demographics in America, right now the trajectory is pointing to a Brazil-like future. A thermonuclear armed USA with Brazil demographics sounds like a disaster to me.

I strictly work on fission, there's always a chance fusion will work but it's easier to get funding for fission research, and really we've barely scratched the surface of what's possible with fission.

i read an article a while ago about nuclear reactors that could use thorium and nuclear waste to generate new energy