Look at when you use the leftover material over and over again, the output of waste is nothing... not to mention even if you use a worse design that you do have to store the waste its fine being stored. There is less harmful waste then what it takes to make a solar panel for the same energy out put. Seriously read up on it it's not as bad as you'd think... I changed my mind on it not to long ago.
But they're not recycling the waste, they're stacking it.
All civilizations fail at some point. When ours fails, the inability to maintain the nuclear waste will mean the end of the human race. It's simple math at this point.
I think that using depleted uranium munitions makes a lot of $$$ for some corporations but it is a horror to the entire sane world.
In September 2009, Fallujah General Hospital, Iraq, had 170 new born babies, 24% of whom were dead within the first seven days, a staggering 75% of the dead babies were classified as deformed.
This can be compared with data from the month of August in 2002 where there were 530 new born babies of whom six were dead within the first seven days and only one birth defect was reported.
Doctors in Fallujah have specifically pointed out that not only are they witnessing unprecedented numbers of birth defects but what is more alarming is: "a significant number of babies that do survive begin to develop severe disabilities at a later stage."
I think that's the point the other poster is making. If the waste is radioactive it means there's still energy left that can be harvested. The newer plant designs don't generate depleted uranium. That's a by-product of plants designed in the 50's and 60's and built in the 70's.
To be honest I'm not sure if there is much a choice. Wind/hydro can't supply close to the energy needs we need by themselves. Solar is a natural choice but producing a solar panel is not clean at all. It requires a lot of energy, rare earth minerals, and produces a lot of waste, as the poster mentioned. Adoption of newer/clean nuclear plant would be a big step forward.
view the rest of the comments →
giggle_puppy ago
So no hard facts or studies, anecdotal evidence. Nuclear is still the way to go for clean energy, you just shouldn't build a plant in a dumb location.
flock-o-turtles ago
Clean energy?
Radioactive wastes
giggle_puppy ago
Look at when you use the leftover material over and over again, the output of waste is nothing... not to mention even if you use a worse design that you do have to store the waste its fine being stored. There is less harmful waste then what it takes to make a solar panel for the same energy out put. Seriously read up on it it's not as bad as you'd think... I changed my mind on it not to long ago.
nokilli ago
But they're not recycling the waste, they're stacking it.
All civilizations fail at some point. When ours fails, the inability to maintain the nuclear waste will mean the end of the human race. It's simple math at this point.
flock-o-turtles ago
I think that using depleted uranium munitions makes a lot of $$$ for some corporations but it is a horror to the entire sane world.
In September 2009, Fallujah General Hospital, Iraq, had 170 new born babies, 24% of whom were dead within the first seven days, a staggering 75% of the dead babies were classified as deformed. This can be compared with data from the month of August in 2002 where there were 530 new born babies of whom six were dead within the first seven days and only one birth defect was reported. Doctors in Fallujah have specifically pointed out that not only are they witnessing unprecedented numbers of birth defects but what is more alarming is: "a significant number of babies that do survive begin to develop severe disabilities at a later stage."
seeker ago
I think that's the point the other poster is making. If the waste is radioactive it means there's still energy left that can be harvested. The newer plant designs don't generate depleted uranium. That's a by-product of plants designed in the 50's and 60's and built in the 70's.
To be honest I'm not sure if there is much a choice. Wind/hydro can't supply close to the energy needs we need by themselves. Solar is a natural choice but producing a solar panel is not clean at all. It requires a lot of energy, rare earth minerals, and produces a lot of waste, as the poster mentioned. Adoption of newer/clean nuclear plant would be a big step forward.
From this link: