AFAIK - It’s not that there’s some special modern solution for dealing with the waste. It’s that the modern technology we have produces far less waste than one might think, because our perception of nuclear is outdated. There are also now ways to repurpose/recycle the waste which reduces total waste by 20-30%. I mentioned earlier in a reply to someone else that all of the nuclear waste created in the US since the 1950s can fit on one American size football field (stacked 10 yards high). That’s 70 years of nuclear waste that, properly stored, has a small geographical footprint and little to no impact on the surrounding environment.

I haven’t listened to these podcasts in a while, but if I remember correctly they do talk about modern methods for storing the waste that are much more efficient than in the past.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Thanks for this brief. I agree less waste is better than more waste. But looks like the method of dealing waste has not changed. The narrative of comparing with football field is interesting, I would question how they determined it is small or big. But regardless, very interesting info, I will definitely do some digging.

Props to you for keeping an open mind 💯 that’s rare these days, especially on topics like this.

I never say I am against nuclear. I just states a fact based on my understanding. Turn a blind eye to drawbacks is not the way. Know the in and outs before convincing people is due diligence. 🤙

🎯🎯💯Always study both sides of a rational argument. And DYOR. Good work friend.

Exactly my point no solutions only tradeoffs