How do you make safe, cheap nuclear reactors? Bury them a mile deep

Re:How do you make safe, cheap nuclear reactors? Bury them a... by chickenbig on Wednesday August 28, 2024 @05:47AM (#41377759)

> Chernobyl has polluted a huge area which is closed off to this day and won't be able to be used for decades more.

Unless you give credence to Moller & Mousseau's contested research, Chernobyl's exclusion zone is a wildlife haven.

> Fukushima pollution is all over the Pacific.

Detectable/attributable is not the same as significant. That especially goes for the tritium releases which are a non-event.

> And dismantling is a huge cost that is often left to the state because the operators don't bother factoring it in.

The UK has the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Liabilities_Fund, and in the USA the NRC keeps track of decommissioning funding https://www.nrc.gov/waste/decommissioning/finan-assur.html .

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How do you make safe, cheap nuclear reactors? Bury them a... by Terr_ on Wednesday August 28, 2024 @06:48AM (#41378114)

> Chernobyl's exclusion zone is a wildlife haven.

Even then, that may say more of the negative impact of human industry and urbanization on those species and their habitats, as opposed to the safety of any isotopes.

[ Parent | on HN ]