320
Robot begins removing Fukushima nuclear plant’s melted fuel.
(www.voanews.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2024
320 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
60466 readers
4411 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
See, totally harmless accident. Just give it another hundred years and the place will be good as new.
When reading about dungeness reactor i learned that even reactors that haven't melted down also take about a hundred years to decommission safely.
Another interesting stat I heard on a podcast is that the coal industry has proven much more deadly than the nuclear industry in terms of human lives lost.
It doesn't take a hundred years, but a couple of decades and it's hugely expensive. And nobody knows what to do with the waste.
Everyone that does their research knows what to do with it. https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/fuel-recycling/processing-of-used-nuclear-fuel
That's some really cool technology you got there, that can reprocess radioactive waste from decommissioning nuclear plants. You know, reactor vessels, bio shields, all the plumbing etc. Please point me to a source on how that technology works.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_reprocessing?wprov=sfti1
Did you even read what I wrote before?
Like I said below, it’s basically recycling, which also doesn’t make the waste disappear. I’m with you on this one, but you also did ask how reprocessing works, so there’s that.
My question was specifically how reprocessing the stuff other than fuel would work. And it was a rhetorical question because it obviously doesn't.
You either just treat them like normal buildings, treat them like tourist buildings, or just sell them to Holtec.
Do you really think that out of the millions of demolished buildings, none had toilets‽
You really have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
I live within two hours of a decommissioned nuclear power plant and 10 seconds of a sink.
https://www.pnnl.gov/news-media/recycling-gives-new-purpose-spent-nuclear-fuel
But isn’t the amount you can recycle limited?
This place says 96% https://www.orano.group/en/unpacking-nuclear/all-about-used-fuel-processing-and-recycling
Ooooh. Is there a catch? Are the Fukushima spent fuel caskets all fully recycled?
Looks like the soil is going to https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2024/09/4895fe8d3ef8-japans-plan-to-reuse-decontaminated-soil-in-fukushima-safe-iaea.html?phrase=defense%20budget%20poll&words=
But what about their 307cu³ and counting of spent fuel?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeness_nuclear_power_stations
It's an amazing place. I visited last month. You can overlook the power station from a nearby lighthouse.
Fantastic. Just kick the can down the road and make it some future generations' problem. Great technology!
Sadly that's what the human race does. It's nothing unique to nuclear power.
It still baffles me, for example, that with all this technology, we still generate all this rubbish which we then bury in the ground. And we all know it. We all buy things in disposable packaging. We are all complicit.
Do you really have trouble understanding the difference between nuclear waste and regular waste?
More or less everyone is allowed to return to their homes as of this year. Even the radiation in the direct vicinity of the plant is nearly nearly down to pre-accident levels
It's much better than the alternative, yes cancer rates shot up and a huge area of once beautiful and productive land is contaminated but if we had rooftop solar then rich corporations wouldn't be able to manipulate us with price spikes and lock us into being helpless without them.
The rich need to have power over us and centralized power generation controlled by the ultra wealthy is the only option that let's them have that dominamce so every propaganda bot must ignore all the safety risks, spiraling economic costs, and political bullshit so they can push for it and divert money from.far more viable and effective alternatives.
Manufacturing of solar panels produces a different kind of contamination, though—it's just not located at the point of power generation. Wind is probably a bit better, with fewer exotic chemicals required, but "rooftop wind" isn't exactly a common catchphrase.
Wind Turbine's problems is we have to replace the blades every 3-7 years depending on the model and there is no good way to recycle or break down the fiberglasse components. So every every 3-7 years you have 3 XL tractor truck trailer size turbine blades going into landfills.
Wind and Solar are still good, don't get me wrong, but lets not pretend they have no downsides or drawbacks.