We aren't the only dysfunctional government. Finland is the first country to settle on a permanent nuclear storage facility.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20230...orage-site

So this will not be a place you will want to go for the next 100,000 years.

What could possibly go wrong?

Seems to me the best option would be putting the waste on rockets and shooting it into outer space and hopefully none explodes until its hundreds of thousands of miles away from earth.

(08-26-2023 08:09 AM)BlueDragon Wrote:  Seems to me the best option would be putting the waste on rockets and shooting it into outer space and hopefully none explodes until its hundreds of thousands of miles away from earth.

yeah good idea... then the butterfly effect kicks in... asteroid that was going to miss us by 300mil miles, all of a sudden gets a nudge that pushes that trajectory right into us and destroys all life on the planet... then earth wobbles out of orbit slams into venus, venus flies into the sun and the next thing you know galaxy after galaxy explodes leaving nothing but emptiness....

Well, there we have it.

We’re all “going green”, while raping the planet.

We could frack and drill on a couple acres across Pennsyltucky and the Dakotas. OR, better, we can forego that and make parts of the planet leech-pits for radioactive waste and uninhabitable for 100,000 years.

But, I’m sure Greta is smiling wide. Cause that’s who we take our orders from now…

Clown world

(08-26-2023 10:07 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  Well, there we have it.

We’re all “going green”, while raping the planet.

We could frack and drill on a couple acres across Pennsyltucky and the Dakotas. OR, better, we can forego that and make parts of the planet leech-pits for radioactive waste and uninhabitable for 100,000 years.

But, I’m sure Greta is smiling wide. Cause that’s who we take our orders from now…

Clown world

Our biggest mistake was in not jumping onto the nuclear power train decades ago back in the 1960s. We could be much further along with the technology for nuclear power and most likely not having nearly as much angst trying to figure out how to store the waste today. By far it has the highest power density out of everything available to us except for nuclear fusion. Then all of the fossil fuels wouldn't be considered as primarily fuels but as inputs into other industries. You may have ultimately had a much more organic move towards EVs if all of your power needs were coming from nukes.

(08-26-2023 06:06 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  What could possibly go wrong?

The solution to nuclear waste is what the French do. They recycle and reprocess it at a facility out on the end of a peninsula. The outputs are MOX fuel-grade nuclear material and greatly reduced reactivity nuclear waste. Eventually the waste is reduced in reactivity to the point that it can simply be put back into the mine from which it came. Jimmy Carter signed an EO prohibiting the process in the USA, and no subsequent president has revoked it.

Is that Space 1999? Loved that show when I was a kid.

Anyway, you don’t have to blow it up if you get it to space, it would just be a little more crap floating around. Problem is it would only take one launch mishap to kill millions of people, be like setting off a dirty bomb in the jet stream.

(08-26-2023 08:09 AM)BlueDragon Wrote:  Seems to me the best option would be putting the waste on rockets and shooting it into outer space and hopefully none explodes until its hundreds of thousands of miles away from earth.

Pretty sure a rocket failure in the upper atmosphere spreading nuclear waste is the reason they don't do that.

(08-26-2023 11:04 AM)banker Wrote:  Is that Space 1999? Loved that show when I was a kid.

Anyway, you don’t have to blow it up if you get it to space, it would just be a little more crap floating around. Problem is it would only take one launch mishap to kill millions of people, be like setting off a dirty bomb in the jet stream.

Yep. Space: 1999

Moonbase Alpha
Nuclear waste disposal site exploded and blew the moon out of Earth orbit.

Thanks guys. I knew my idea was a crazy one but as Einstein has said I don’t know what WWIII will be fought with but WW4 will be sticks and stones or whatever is left you can get your hands on.

Nuclear waste is a major problem that needs to be solved and NOT just burying it underground.

(08-26-2023 10:30 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(08-26-2023 10:07 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  Well, there we have it.

We’re all “going green”, while raping the planet.

We could frack and drill on a couple acres across Pennsyltucky and the Dakotas. OR, better, we can forego that and make parts of the planet leech-pits for radioactive waste and uninhabitable for 100,000 years.

But, I’m sure Greta is smiling wide. Cause that’s who we take our orders from now…

Clown world

Our biggest mistake was in not jumping onto the nuclear power train decades ago back in the 1960s. We could be much further along with the technology for nuclear power and most likely not having nearly as much angst trying to figure out how to store the waste today. By far it has the highest power density out of everything available to us except for nuclear fusion. Then all of the fossil fuels wouldn't be considered as primarily fuels but as inputs into other industries. You may have ultimately had a much more organic move towards EVs if all of your power needs were coming from nukes.

Agree entirely. Who stopped nuke in its tracks in the 70’s?

My next door neighbor was a nuke sub driver 35 years ago and they stayed underwater for six months at a time. We don’t think we could do that locally today?

I’d have no problem with thousands of small nuke power plants all over the place, Lot cleaner and more productive than the big azz fans and Chinese mirrors covering our productive farm lands.

We are being ruled by the least among us.

We live in dumbfvckland.

(08-26-2023 02:11 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(08-26-2023 10:30 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(08-26-2023 10:07 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  Well, there we have it.

We’re all “going green”, while raping the planet.

We could frack and drill on a couple acres across Pennsyltucky and the Dakotas. OR, better, we can forego that and make parts of the planet leech-pits for radioactive waste and uninhabitable for 100,000 years.

But, I’m sure Greta is smiling wide. Cause that’s who we take our orders from now…

Clown world

Our biggest mistake was in not jumping onto the nuclear power train decades ago back in the 1960s. We could be much further along with the technology for nuclear power and most likely not having nearly as much angst trying to figure out how to store the waste today. By far it has the highest power density out of everything available to us except for nuclear fusion. Then all of the fossil fuels wouldn't be considered as primarily fuels but as inputs into other industries. You may have ultimately had a much more organic move towards EVs if all of your power needs were coming from nukes.

Agree entirely. Who stopped nuke in its tracks in the 70’s?

My next door neighbor was a nuke sub driver 35 years ago and they stayed underwater for six months at a time. We don’t think we could do that locally today?

I’d have no problem with thousands of small nuke power plants all over the place, Lot cleaner and more productive than the big azz fans and Chinese mirrors covering our productive farm lands.

We are being ruled by the least among us.

We live in dumbfvckland.

I think the problem is who is going to safe guard those thousands of potential dirty bombs. A SSN is not likely to have its nuclear material stolen by terrorists

K.
That’d be a real concern.

Yet of course, if “we”, again can’t protect our most obvious infrastructure and prevent these potential terrorist acts, what are we even talking about? We’re done if that’s the case.

Mauis more worried about water “equity” than kids being burned to death, if that’s now the standard all the rest of this is pissing in a fan.

We are ruled by the least of us, we’ll see if enough folks will deny the decline going forward.