You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #17: As I was saying they still don't know what to do with the waste, safely [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-29-08 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. As I was saying they still don't know what to do with the waste, safely
Where and what do you yourself propose to do with the highly radioactive waste. My fingers are sore from typing on this keyboard looking for an answer to that and after all this time I still find no answers. I would really like to hear what your take is on this other than the usual tripe. Let me remind you I do not buy nor listen to bullshit though.
I will be the first to admit that I would love to read that there is a viable way to deal with it and that it is being done. The direct Burning of coal to make electricity is killing us, I understand that, no problem.



http://library.thinkquest.org/17940/texts/nuclear_waste_storage/nuclear_waste_storage.html

The major problem of nuclear waste is what to do with it. In fact, one of the biggest (and perhaps the single biggest) expenses of the nuclear power industry could eventually be the storage of nuclear waste. Currently there are several ways in which nuclear waste is stored. Most of these methods are temporary. In most cases a viable long-term solution for waste storage has yet to be found. This is because the time period for storage is so incredibly long, on the order of thousands of years.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/apr/14/nuclear.greenpolitics

Firing nuclear waste into the sun, placing it in Antarctic ice sheets so it sinks by its own heat to the bedrock, or putting it under Earth's crust so it is sucked to the molten core. These are three of the 14 options the government's advisers are considering to get rid of the UK's troublesome nuclear waste legacy.
All options are technically possible and many are potentially hazardous - either to current generations or those yet unborn. Most also have political drawbacks and are expensive, around £50bn and counting, yet it is a problem the government has decided it must solve.

Last year it appointed a committee on radioactive waste management to re-examine all possibilities to find a publicly acceptable solution to the nuclear waste problem - something that successive governments have failed to do for 50 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC