Quote:
Originally Posted by LostCause
I don't think burying nuclear waste in metal drums, encased in concrete, encased in a massive overfilled cavern is the most responsible thing to due when taking future generations into account. Trash is one thing, but when it lasts 14,000 years it is a trans-generational issue.
- LostCause
|
I didn't say we should do that. Metal drums? Never heard of anyone burying nuclear waste in metal drums, is this a technology you are developing?
France reprocesses it, reducing volume by 70% and removing the longer lasting isotopes, these longer lasting isotopes actually make usable fuel again. The leftover waste is not nearly as long lasting, within 10,000 years the amount of Amercium will not be notable. Only neptunium will be left over in waste that was well processed using PUREX, but that's a tiny percent of the waste.
The only reason we here in the US are talking about storing waste for 300,000 years or whatever is that we banned reprocessing, so instead it all has to get buried in Yucca mountain suspended in porcelain flasks which could even be crushed and smashed without releasing radioactivity - only a volcano would have the potential to release the isotopes, but then it would just be suspended in magma. Anyway, if it weren't for the silly "environmentalists" stopping us from reprocessing then we wouldn't have to worry about storing long lasting Uranium or Plutonium isotopes.
