November 19, 2024

  • Sibbo@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    14 hours ago

    And they are surely paying for the thousands of years of waste storage necessary?

    • spicehoarder@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      13 hours ago

      When a radioactive rock is stored in a cave somewhere instead of pumping the atmosphere full of CO2: 🤬🤬🤬

      • MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        When a radioactive roch is stored in a cave somewhere instead of stopping to produce crypto currencies: 🤬🤬🤬

    • oce 🐆@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Wouldn’t it be an obvious part of the price they will pay for the electricity? The electricity producer or whatever intermediate in charge of the waste, will bill its work for waste storage, and it will end up on the bill of the energy consumer. What am I missing?

      • federal reverse
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        You’re missing that no one ever invested in nuclear if they didn’t expect to socialize storage cost. The premise is completely absurd too — you can’t keep anything safe for over 100k years. There’s no way to ensure that people won’t dig up rocks, even on a 500-year horizon.

        The entire history of humanity is only 300k years long, and our languages as well as our societal systems of organization are much younger.

        • oce 🐆@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Long term storage is not supposed to require maintenance over that time, the worry is rather preventing people to dig them up unknowingly in the future. Actually dangerous wastes have way smaller half lives that that.

          • federal reverse
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            5 hours ago

            Long term storage is not supposed to require maintenance over that time

            Ideally. Though you can do a 80s Germany: Find a suboptimal storage site right next to the inner-German border, so as to piss off the other side of the Iron Curtain. Surprisingly, only a few years after you reunite (and it feels so good), except now you have a bunch of contaminated water in your storage site after mere decades.

            But quite honestly — how can you predict the fate of even the “safest” storage site? Will there be a fracking boom near it in the next 200 years? Something other new technology? And in that sense, it really doesn’t matter whether half life is 10k years or 100k years.