Re:Nuclear turn green as EU parliament approves new taxonomy
by Turing_Machine on Thursday July 07, 2022 @07:20PM
(#32020963)
Nuclear waste doesn't need to be sequestered for anything like 200,000 years.
After a few hundred years it's no more radioactive than the rocks from which it came.
You seem to have the common misconception that "long half-life" = "more radioactive", when in fact "long half-life" = "less radioactive", by definition.
Re:Nuclear turn green as EU parliament approves new taxonomy
by c1ccccc1 on Thursday July 07, 2022 @08:33PM
(#32021538)
200,000 years is not much on geological timescales. Here's one example of a place with very stable geology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Shield
The other main thing to remember when burying nuclear waste is that it's important to keep it away from aquifers and generally any flow of water under the ground. Obviously you'd probably want to seal it in waterproof containers anyway, but it's better to not have to rely on the container staying intact over long spans of time.
Re:Nuclear turn green as EU parliament approves new taxonomy
by colechristensen on Thursday July 07, 2022 @05:20PM
(#32019597)
Deep holes in mountains in deserts in tectonically boring locations in the middle of plates.
Re:Nuclear turn green as EU parliament approves new taxonomy
by orangepurple on Thursday July 07, 2022 @05:29PM
(#32019709)
Ancient geologically stable rock formations exist
Where?
Where on Earth will you find a place that will still be like that in 200,000 years.