by UIUCstudent01 » Tue 07 Mar 2006, 19:52:20
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Zardoz', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gnm', 'A')ll those hundreds of blasts both above and underground in Nevada and enviros are worried about storing waste deep in yucca mountain?...
I've never understood the "nuclear waste disposal problem". How many water-free solid-rock formations must there be deep underground all over the world? Bury it a mile-and-a-half deep, with no chance of water ever getting to it, and that's the end of the story...
I think the warranty guarantee on the nuclear waste disposal problem is shorter than the half-life of the waste.
Here's another problem. Our total energy consumption has steadily increased... and by massing nuclear, we can continue our lifestyle until we hit the absolute end of nuclear power. (There's an end ot it - even with the nuclear 'recycling'.) And that end won't be a peak. It'll probably be a complete drop.
We'll be using an immense amount of nuclear power and producing alot of waste at the very height of our consumption. You can't guarantee that the waste will not enter the water after our civilization collapses. The long-long-term projections of nuclear are grim for ecology of the planet and the human race. In the short-term, they look like a savior.
(Unless of course, you think fusion will save us all in about 50 years. And then we can increase the standard of living and just grow without limits...)
That's my understanding, at least...