Re:Nuclear is back on the table for a green future
by worik on Wednesday June 15, 2022 @08:52PM
(#31761343)
No.
The storage problem has not been solved because we do not have the technology. There is no evidence that the technology os possible.
The long term waste (not much in quantity, but it does mount up. A few million litres at the moment I believe ??) has to be stored for periods of time on the order of hundreds of thousands of years.
There is no way we can write a warning sign that we know can be read for that long.
We cannot build a structure that will last that long.
There are no places on this planet that we can be sure are stable for that long.
It is making future generations pay for our current consumption.
Re:Nuclear is back on the table for a green future
by Consultant32452 on Wednesday June 15, 2022 @09:22PM
(#31761548)
>It is making future generations pay for our current consumption.
Okay, then in places where wind/solar/storage aren't up to snuff we'll just keep burning coal.
The insurance issue is similar identical to other energy sources. Why isn't hydro power insured in the case of accidental flooding? If they were it wouldn't be possible to run them at current energy prices. We don't see fossil fuel plants being insured against increased air pollution, nor do they have to pay if people around them get sick. If a hydrodam causes a flood, then there will be a flood. Hopefully those people downstream has their own insurance.