>42kms of tunnels, 420 metres under the ground.
>100 years to dig
>Sealed for 100,000 years
But hey guys, nuclear power is totally clean, safe and cheap! It's not like we have to create entire catacombs just to power a small country.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-08/finns-to-bury-nuclear-waste-in-world's-costliest-tomb/7488588
WHAT THE FUCK ARE THEY DOING TO MY COUNTRY
Solar is better but even that is not totally useful because of power storage issues and the rare earth minerals required to make panels.
>>76814532
>strongly implying the volume of nuclear waste is bigger than the amount of uranium you take out of the ground in the first place
>>76814721
>implying that is relevant
>>76814649
>>76814850
>implying the underlying implication was not "muh we will run out of space"
>Nuclear Waste gives of radiation
>Radiation is energy
>Convert that energy into a usable form
>No more Nuclear waste
>>76814721
Only relevant if you plan on using your uranium mine as the storage facility.
Which you aren't.
>>76814532
the truth is, we do not have the technology to destroy radioactive materials yet.
> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER
>>76814649
Solar is good, battery technology is getting better though and panels more efficient.
Wind is good. People are hard on it because a lot of the early models were shit but they keep getting better with modern windmills paying themselves off much wuicker than before and ahve expected lifecycles of 70 years +
This is the real new hotness though - tidal power.
http://inhabitat.com/australian-wave-energy-project-sets-world-record-with-14000-operating-hours/
Unless the moon falls out of the sky, we'll always have the tides and swell.
>>76815016
The jess won't let us do this tho
>>76814532
>It's not like we have to create entire catacombs just to power a small country.
But you can just dump it in the desert brah
>>76815146
>battery tech is getting better
Batteries havent improved sinch lith ion m8
>>76814907
THe underlying implication is that there are FAR FAR more costs associated with Nuclear power, primarily storage related, that are never taken into account when people talk about how cheap Nukes are.
Of course the waste is less than the volume of uranium mined.
Theres no such thing as radioactive waste
This happens because governments are fucked up and liberals are intentionally doing stupid shit/sabotaging nuclear power.
>>76814532
Used nuclear fuel can be re-used in certain nuclear reactors. Google for breeder reactors, Russia already has full cycle nuclear plants based on that tech.
>>76815211
You think capitalists would do that? Just waste money to spite people?
>>76814532
>Countries have been wrestling with what to do with nuclear power's dangerous by-products since the first plants were built in the 1950s.
>something that hasn't even been around for 100 years will need at leasy 100000 years to to make up for damages
from unleashing multiculturalism to sending out two space probes for aliens to enslave us to unknown nuclear disasters you people have doomed us all
>>76814532
Why don't we shoot nuclear waste in space with rockets? Is it still too expensive?
Then why not pour molten lead over it and create a sort of envelope to contain radiation?
>>76814532
Nonononono.
You see, we can recicle all that nuclear "waste" there is still some very usefull uranium overthere and we know how to extract it again, the problem is that when you do that you also extract plutonium, plutonium that you can reuse into nuclear bombs BUT since you cant reuse all the plutonium(it would be too costly to create so many nuclear bombs) you have to store it safely in more and more increasing quantities in foolproof unassaultable facilities with incorruptible people... a security nightmare.
So the goverment takes the easy way, and just let it rot in underground facilities.
>>76815287
Capitalists? No. But shortsighted governments, who are ultimately the ones who commission, build and run power plants? Yes.
After extensive research I have found a solution to the nuclear waste issue:
>take nuclear waste
>create dirty bombs
>nuke Africa
Trust me, I'm a scientist.
>>76815352
>We can re-use the waste in bombs
Yeah that sounds way more productive.
>>76815352
It would be far easier to just shoot that shit into space.
>>76815135
What if we were to load it all into a shuttle and send it into the Sun?
>>76815494
Why shoot into space valuable and scarce resource? There's very limited amount of usable Uranium on Earth.
>>76815457
Damn right emu lover.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_thermal_rocket
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_%28nuclear_propulsion%29
>>76814649
Solar is great until you get clouds, or in finlands case a never ending winter.
>>76815515
You don't know much about stars.
>>76815444
Dem trips tho
>>76815016
Straya will be ded tonight
>>76815211
Nuclear is far cheaper than anything else
Intentional mismanagement, bad designs, excessive regulation, and the fact existing reactors today are old as fuck is what causes most of the costs.
>>76815494
>>76815515
Costs too much
>>76814532
just air drop it all on that stupid abo dirtpile they worship
>>76815600
Space mirror with magnifying glass.
It'll always overproduce solar power on earth until you get bored and start scorching targets on earth for fun.
>>76815600
Solar is great until you actually ask what those panels are made of, then see how destructive the extraction and refinement of Neodymium (and all Rare-Earth Minerals) is.
>>76814532
Nuclear power is a scam, it's only real purpose has been the creation of bombs. They use a ridiculously complex and dangerous procedure with radioactive material to boil water, yeah right.
Too hard to light a fire and keep it going with coal since it's so rare, we only have a few mountain ranges of the shit here.
>>76814532
>It's not like we have to create entire catacombs just to power a small countries sewer system
>it's not like we have to create entire catacombs just to store all of our dead people
>>76815515
way too dangerous, and do not underestimate the weight!
That's a lot less messy than digging a dozen of these (to get the same amount of energy) then firing all the trapped actinides straight into the air. It's almost as bad for 'renewables', you might only have to remove a couple of mountains instead of a dozen to get at the rare earth elements needed for your precious solar panels but the pollution you generate refining those mountains down is even more hazardous. The beauty of nuclear is that it minimises the volume of the nasty stuff and we can bury it afterwards.
>>76815779
>Cheapest source of power
>scam
k
>>76815833
Forgot pic
>>76815802
explanation: the departure phase is most dangerous. Our rocket technology is primitive. But yes, you could shoot all of our radiocative waste into the sun without issues
>>76815779
>Nuclear power is a scam, it's only real purpose has been the creation of bombs
You are correct in that uranium power plants were created for this purpose. A thorium power plant would be able to process the old waste in addiction to having much less waste.
>They use a ridiculously complex and dangerous procedure with radioactive material to boil water, yeah right
Boiling water is now complex and dangerous
>>76815868
Hey, I live literally 800 meters from there if that's the one i think it is.
It's genious. Other countries are paying us money to take their nuclear waste and we use it in secret to build our own nuclear weapon arsenal. Russia should be afraid, very afraid.
>>76814532
Finland is about as geologically inactive as it gets. For your information, we don't store just our spent fuel in there, but also rent the space for other countries as well. For us, nuclear power is the only solution for reliable energy production. We don't have oil or coal, the climate for large scale solar production, the geography for large scale hydroelectricity, and wind power is a meme. Unlike fossil fuels, nuclear power doesn't depend on massive logistical solutions to keep us supplied, and is indeed better for the environment. Green-leftie-axis loves to bitch about nuclear power because of muh Chernobyl (blatant ignorance of each and every safety procedure) and muh Fukushima (building a plant on the coast of a geologically volatile country prone to tsunamis), but I haven't heard any of them propose an alternative other than cutting down half of our forests to build wind parks and buying energy from Russia (nuclear produced of course).
>>76815188
What is graphene, Alex?
>put nuclear waste in sealed barrels
>drop into subduction fault
>its gone for a billion years
haha nuclear waste though guys what do we DO about all this POLLUTION
>>76816117
It's in Arizona. To be fair, big holes in the ground tend to look similar.
>>76816078
>Boiling water is now complex and dangerous
No the fucking point is that boiling water to turn a wheel centuries old technology, the use of a complex and dangerous method of doing it is stupid, for fucks sake.
>>76815853
Nice complete lack of an argument there leaf, I know right, coal comes out cheaper every time. Even when the globalists try and destroy It's economic advantages.
they should just do what they do with other industrial byproducts
put them in the water supply and get doctors to say they're good for us
aren't newer generation reactors capable of using waste as a power source?
or am I mistaken
Well but guys, one of the problems is that uranium is not unlimited. Countries can't depend only on nuclear power plants or the deposits would be depleted in one century or so(without taking into account the increasing price of uranium)
Is just a good complementary energy source.
>>76816417
The waste doesn't just magically disappear.
THORIUM.
>>76816440
100 years is more than enough to figure out nuclear fusion
>>76815739
CHINA YES
BLIGHT THIS MOTHERFUCKER
>>76816335
>the use of a complex and dangerous method
Almost all power is produced by a method that's complicated and dangerous at one point or another:
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5650
https://www.nuffield.ox.ac.uk/politics/aberfan/desc.htm
http://www.britannica.com/event/Deepwater-Horizon-oil-spill-of-2010
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2013/09/29/forget-eagle-deaths-wind-turbines-kill-humans/
>>76816417
IDK but as already stated there is no such thing as waste, fuel rods can still give their unspent 85% uranium, is just that the goverment doesn't want to recicle it in fear of creating a plutonium black market.
>>76814532
Nuclear is the way of the future, although props to hydro, solar and wind will also be needed to help.
Waste of space, would be perfect for """""refugee""""" center
>>76814532
Yeah I laugh every time some nuke shill says its clean energy. Fuck that shit build more wind-powered turbines and put solar panels on every fucking roof.
>>76816538
You don't know that... it would be a serious bet to center all your power production in just one resource with expectations of finding "soon" a replacement.
In fact, in strategic terms, depending on one resource is just retarded. Makes your country both dependable from the source and easy to blockade.
>>76814532
>Local vegetable farmer Timo Rauvola was sanguine about the plans for a nuclear burial ground.
>"Personally, I believe that when [the waste] is placed deep down there with care and expertise, it is better than how it is now around the world — placed wherever," he said.
Why are farmers so sanguine and always right
>>76816669
Why not both? I mean mutated islamic mole people might be a problem later but we'll all be dead then (or, if not, shortly afterwards).
>>76815515
It would work but it would be
A.) Expensive
B.) Risky as fuck.
What do you think would happen if the take off goes wrong or the rocket explodes several hundred kilometers in the air? All that sweet nuclear waste will distribute across the skies and eventually rain down.
>>76816156
an intelligent Finn
what a Saturday
>>76816813
Didn't you know that roaches can survive nuclear radiation?
>>76816335
>the use of a complex and dangerous method of doing it is stupid, for fucks sake.
Radioactive decay is not actually very complicated. I'm sure a steam engine and combustion engine seemed dangerous when they were first created.
As for safety? Per megawatt, even in its infancy, nuclear has been the safest way to generate power ever
>>76816790
Who the fuck uses the word "sanguine"?
>>76815332
Because it would suck if one of those rockets happened to explode
>>76817002
vampires usually
>>76816963
Can they chew through solid rock? Obviously, you'd seal them in.
Honestly, we should just turn Africa into one big global landfill.
>>76815352
>it would be too costly to create so many nuclear bombs
surely the free market would fix it?
>Send waste to Ukraine
>Pay locas to steal artifacts
>????
>A нy, чики-бpики и в дaмки!
>>76815648
So that`s why you almost always have a nuclear subsided by the State?
>>76817254
Plutonium has other uses, but in the black market/goverment bussiness is usually bomb related.
>can't build new reactors because mentally deficient liberals
>can't afford to pump tons of money into advancing the tech
>old reactors are inefficient
>still using old reactors
>>76817333
>subsided by the State?
while all your homogaywindsolar projects are 10x worse with subsidies, and then people pay 4x more for electricity
Idiot Kraut, go present your ass to your local Achmed.
>>76816971
Safest, in what regard? It might not kill as many people as other methods (I dunno), but making whole regions uninhabitable >>>>>>>>> a few ded people
Also friendly reminder that they still haven`t taken care of Fuckoshima
>>76814532
>Be against nuclear power
>Prevent it from evolving to something more efficient and less wast producing
Good job, retardo
Just dump it in a third world shithole that has no future beyond misery. The West can use the superior energy production to fuel its expansion into space.
>>76815648
No it fucking isn't.
Every single nuclear plant that has ever operated did so via massive subsidy.
Name one reactor that runs commercially and has operated for one fucking week without any subsidy.
Anywhere on the planet, any time in the past or present.
Go ahead, I'll wait.
Why doesn't big oil just roll their entire capital into wind turbines, then cut off the oil supply?
They'd force countries to adopt their windpowered money printers at whatever cost they wanted.
And the world would praise them for it.
>>76817002
>>76817105
its one of the four humours; sanguine, melancholic, choleric and phlegmatic
>>76817365
I'm sure the demand for nuclear bombs would be high if they were legal.
>>76817461
We have a feed in tarifs, no subsidies. Here is some advice: When you don`t know what you are talking about, shut the fuck up.
As for the price, that mostly comes from large businesses being excluded from the EEG.
>>76817466
>Safest, in what regard?
In terms of deaths per kWh generated. A lot of people die from the pollution released by fossil fuels as well as in the process of obtaining them and the scale that other renewables have to be constructed on to compete means more people die from stupid shit like climbing up the hundredth wind turbine tower of the day.
>making whole regions uninhabitable
They're relatively small on a planetary scale and China is doing much the same thing on an even larger scale to produce the composites for your wind turbines or doped silicates for your solar cells. Also, unlike in the latter cases, accidents which cause areas to become uninhabitable don't happen with modern reactor designs. It's like comparing the localised horror of an occasional train crash to the steady, diffuse drip of deaths from driving.
>>76816908
>Italy
>>76817569
>Why doesn't big oil just roll their entire capital into wind turbines,
Not all of it, but they are.
Not oil companies anymore, but 'energy' companies.
They will corner the market, kill off the competition, and fuck us all.. again.
For now, oil still nice and cheap.
>>76815600
Wow, America.
You do know that there's a type of solar panel that was invented by Australia that can charge while covered by a cloud?
It's pretty old new tech, so i can understand why you still think its the 1990's for solar panels. After all it came out in 2008.
>>76814532
>pic related
>>76817466
Safest as in less deaths per kilowatt hour. As for making whole regions uninhabitable... coal fires are the first thing that come to my mind. Obviously building nuclear reactors on active fault lines, at water level or as Russia likes to do, turn off all of the safety precautions and run your reactor, that's 20 years over due for maintenance, on full blast... is gonna lead to some issues. But even with these classic examples of retarded reactor handling, it's still safer
>>76815016
Most of the anti-nuclear faggots don't realize we already use by products of fission in every day products (namely smoke detectors, as one example, bomb detectors, and helium 3 which is highly sought after in the medical fields). They ALSO go out of their way to PREVENT reserch into USING it.
Because muh hippy fears muh Gaia muh nature provides.
>>76814623
>MY COUNTRY
It's "everyone's" country now, goyim. Don't forget to pay your EU taxes, and take your mandated niggers.
>>76814532
>420 fuse it
>>76817886
>as above, so below
>>76817745
I am sure you can back that up with numbers (for renewables vs. nuclear). Also, would be interesting to know if that covers death from long-term deaths as well.
Sure, and that wouldn`t be an issues if it happens in the desert. But when you get shit like that in europe of japan then it is a different matter.
>>76817903
>Coal
We aren`t in 1880 anymore.
>>76817544
I'm not sure why I said I'd wait, I won't. Because I know the answer, because it's never fucking happened anywhere at any time. Nuclear power requires massive overhead, and not because of regulations, but because of logistics.
If it was actually cheap to produce (let alone the cheapest, what a fucking retarded thing to say, you've literally never even tried to look into this topic for one single second), banana republics would be full of foreign-owned reactors exporting energy.
Stop writing a narrative in your head and deciding that it must be true just because you like the way it makes you feel. Try earnestly learning about subjects that interest you before you pass off your assumptions as facts, you lazy ignorant piece of trash.
Why don't we just shoot it into space if you guys are gonna be so autistic about it?
>>76818189
>Let's just put this dangerous material on a rocket that could very well blow up again
Great idea retard.
>>76818283
Don't blow up the rocket then.
>>76818189
Because shooting shit into space costs money.
>>76816078
>>76816335
Hot water is used as a moderator (in the core) to slow down neutrons to allow enough neutron capture for fission to occur. In the event of a leak, the water boils away and shuts down the fission. There is still enough radionuclide decay heat to cause a meltdown, but no more fission; and therefore no earth shattering kaboom.
There are lots of reactor designs out there, but not many that are inherently safe.
Hot water is used elsewhere just to transfer heat, because that's just how mechanical engineers roll. Yea you can use molten salt to transfer heat, but mixing that into water used elsewhere would be bad.
>>76818189
Let's launch these rockets from your backyard on an island where you and all your relatives are forced to live and wait for it to explode mid launch.
I'm all for it.
>>76816790
>Why are farmers so sanguine and always right
Because they humbly tend.
Praise KEK.
>>76818113
>I am sure you can back that up with numbers (for renewables vs. nuclear). Also, would be interesting to know if that covers death from long-term deaths as well.
Graph from:
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.180.4490
Yes, it does, it also includes the big stupid accidents like Chernobyl.
>But when you get shit like that in europe of japan then it is a different matter.
That would be an issue if you did get shit like that but modern reactor designs don't. If anything, it's anti-nuclear alarmists like you that are making things more dangerous by preventing new, safer plants from being built.
>We aren`t in 1880 anymore.
Again, thanks to anti-nuclear alarmists like you, your country generates more energy from coal than any other source. Nice job, Germany, thanks for polluting the fuck out of the rest of Europe because you're perfectly happy to freak out about what is literally the safest power source but can't stand letting your lights go out.
>>76818399
No shit, all energy costs money.
>>76818449
So launch it on a sea platform.
God damn you guys are spergy.
>>76817583
Is this loss?
>build fucktons of nuclear reactors to solve the nation's energy problems
>make bombs out of the waste
>drop them on the sandniggers
problem solved
Here is a documentary about the project.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeVPMzJOFrQ
>>76816626
Can plutonium be handled by criminals though? Doesn't it require some knowledge and expertise?
>>76818113
>We aren`t in 1880 anymore.
~30% of the worlds electricity is coal power mate
>>76818408
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor
lftr reactors designs I've seen would use molten salt inside the core to heat outer layers of water and go overkill on safety because they know that if there was even a perceived safety risk their design would be scrapped.
>Hot water is used elsewhere just to transfer heat, because that's just how mechanical engineers roll
There's a meme in here somewhere I just know it
>>76818592
>So launch it on a sea platform.
>>76816306
>implying the Jews will let that out of the lab
>>76818877
>implying that the criminals cannot be psychopathic/communist sciencists
>>76818531
Sure, just that the same was happening before we phased out nuclear. But again, I don`t expect a big energy cuck to actually look at the data.
>>76818956
Well sure but how would they go stealing this stuff?
It might be a nightmare to guard it be stealing it is even harder I imagine, plutonium being dangerous and all.
>>76819052
he's american and it is late over there, let him be finnbro
Better safe than sorry. There are no earthquakes etc in finland so i think cheaper catacomb would work. But better safe than sorry.
>>76818906
Hold on to your foreskin, goy
https://youtu.be/U1TH2x4nzZI
>>76818877
Fissile plutonium (Pu-239) is pretty easy to transport as long as it's sealed because it emits negligible gamma radiation. However, most Pu-239 has Pu-240 mixed in, which is a moderately intense gamma emitter, the gamma rays have a moderate energy but the Bq/mol is rather high so you'd only really want to keep supergrade plutonium in your pocket.
The real danger comes with trying to manipulate it, it's extremely good at dispersing itself because it generates a frangible oxide on contact with air that is more voluminous than the source metal, it effectively divides itself until it's fine enough to catch fire, then does so with rather nasty ferocity. It's also extremely chemically toxic, quite apart from the radiation emitted, it induces heavy metal toxicity so badly that it makes lead look like gold. In fact, an early weapons fabrication laboratory in the US had to slice up every bit of equipment they had and seal it in barrels after a plutonium glove box was constructed from flammable plexiglass and the resulting fire spread almost 100g of plutonium oxides around the facility.
tl;dr: Criminals could shuffle supergrade plutonium in containers around quite happily but they'd die pretty quickly quickly if they tried to manipulate it.
>>76818620
>Is this loss?
You're only a loser if you choose to be.
>>76819025
You morons, why'd you reduce natural gas use while doing basically nothing to coal? Natural gas is the safest fossil fuel.
>>76816908
Get your spaghetti and never talk to me or my countrymen never again
>>76819291
So basically plutonium would never get stolen unless the criminals are pure retards?
>>76815515
Just waiting for space elevator desu, within next 30 yrs. srsly, theyre just waiting on the microcarbon shit to mass produce affordable enough to make a teether and they can pry safely just traffic it there than launch into sun
However
irrelevant the singularity will have hit by then with the ai going homocidal and killing us all rightfully since man made a god in his image, evil begits evil
>>76819613
>>76819676
Kek in context
>>76819613
Space elevator thread when?
Solar Panels
SAS farm - 12 acres - 10,276 solar panels - 3,600 MWh annually
Smallest nuclear power plant in the US
Calhoun plant - 479 MW - 11,496 MWh if ran at full capacity daily
Palo Verde plant - 3,937 MW - 22,992,080 MWh if ran at full capacity for 2/3rds of a day for the entire year, or 22.9 GIGAWATTH
Nuclear energy, even with the worst plants in the world, produces over 100x the amount of energy the best solar farms in the world produce. The best nuclear plants can get more than 1000x the energy. Storage is not a problem at all because you just enrich the uranium and reuse it. Very little waste is created.
>>76814532
As long as it is put deep into a geologically stable mountain there are no issues.
Nuclear has the least deaths per KWHR.
Wind and solar are meme energy sources in terms of output and energy storage.
All arguments against Nuclear I've heard thus far are appeals to emotion or shilling from the coal and oil industries.
>>76819594
Unfortunately, criminals are pure retards:
https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/goi%C3%A2nia%C2%B4s-legacy-two-decades
Fortunately, there was only a relatively narrow 5 year window between the collapse of the Soviet Union and 1996 where large amounts of fissile material were unsecured. There are, however, a shit load of non fissile nuclear sources still out there which are ideal for dirty bombs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1_XoZHhQck
The Soviets made thousands of sources like these for thermoelectric generators and seed irradiators and only a few hundred have been secured.
>>76814532
>you were born too early to explore the ancient finn nuclear catacombs
>>76819594
Dude just delete that cartoonish image from your brain, where all criminals are 70 or less IQ people.
>>76819811
This.
But geothermal and current-based power plants aren't all that bad. Britain can get some pretty sick mileage off of the currents they get. Ditto the Bahamas and Eastern Cuba. Not as good as nuclear, though, because no current energy source is.
>>76819741
Sorry m8. 4me 2 l8. Should been sleep 2 hrs ago. Sheeeeit. Dont tempt me.
2am atm
>>76819025
>literally half of your power comes from coal and coal accessories
Stop shitposting
>>76814649
Rape the planet with semi conductor byproducts and semiconductors themselves or carbon emissions or nuclear waste
pick your poison
>>76819741
In 10 hrs I dedicate thread to you?
>>76819997
I don't think the planet gives a single fuck.
>>76814532
>implying anybody's running out of space underground
>implying it doesn't produce shit tons more energy, productivity, and value than it costs to dig and stuff it underground
hell, they could use the nuclear power to run the drills too if they wanted to.
>>76816825
nuclear waste is way overrated. The hysteria around it is comical. If it were to go up 700km in the air and rain down, it'd be so diffuse it wouldn't matter.
I still vote for dumping it in the Marianas Trench though. Maybe we can make a Godzilla or something with the deep sea gigantism already occurring there.
>>76815515
We would only be able to do it during the day. Not very efficient.
>>76823013
Solution: use the Moon at night, then it will be destroyed when the Sun turns into the Moon in the morning.
>>76819613
>singularity meme
top kek
>>76815135
We have the technology, it's just cheaper to dig out fresh fuel.
This will change with improved reactors that don't leave barely used fuel behind (and can obviously use existing barely used fuel too)
>>76822859
>I still vote for dumping it in the Marianas Trench though. Maybe we can make a Godzilla or something with the deep sea gigantism already occurring there.
Or we could encase the fuel casks in a thick ceramic shell and drop them into an active volcano. The ceramic will keep the fuel from breaking up during the descent, and the fuel itself wont melt until its deep into the mantle (nuclear fuel melts at >1400C, most lavas are <800C). Even when the fuel melts, a properly built ceramic cask would survive up to about 1600C, at which point the high density blob of spent molten fuel will continue its descent to the core.
Thats the idea at least.
>>76815285
>breeder reactors
thanks senpai didnt know about this
>>76815150
They are inhuman bastards..
>>76814532
Nobody does it anymore because of terror risk, but we could just go back to reusing depleted rods.
That would save us in two ways.
1. Less Waste
2. Our fissionable stockpile lasts longer.
>>76814532
Even with the cost of treatment and buildings tunnels such as this, nuclear energy is cheaper than meme green energy.
So I'll keep my 75% nuclear powered country. Thank you.
>>76817036
this doesn't seem to be a deal-breaker; rockets have and can be launched from barges.
>>76815352
just drop it into the ocean you morons, it will disappear and never be seen again
do you even know how deep the ocean is, it is practically as deep as outer space
>>76818123
your post gets me curious - do you have further info on this topic?
>>76828320
Japan with the Fukishitpost
>>76828320
>do you even know how deep the ocean is, it is practically as deep as outer space
I have no face.
>>76828320
This is a great idea until the giant mutants emerge from the seas and start attacking cities.
>>76828781
That was nippons plan all along, real life godzilla
Yeah much better we just keep on burning coal and oil indefinitely, no way that's going to end poorly for us.
inb4 muh solar yeah maybe I'll take that seriously once you can actually power the factories that make the panels with the panels they produce, then it's a real technology with real potential to replace fossil fuels until then it's just a way to show off for rich people.
>>76828781
Just seal the waste in ceramic (glassify it if you must) before tossing it into a trench. Properly constructed ceramic casks can withstand pretty much anything you can think of throwing at them and they wont leak their contents.
>>76816306
Are they using graphene batteries in consumer products yet?
>>76829844
Your opinion doesn't count. Australia has the biggest uranium reserves on earth. There is a conflict of interest.
Not a problem for long, fusion is right around the corner
>>76831348
It has been right around the corner for decades already.
>>76831454
No, we didnt have the processing power for designing the magnetic spools until recently. Yeah, sure, we had tokamaks, but they are not suited for electricity generating fusion, but now, with stellarators we most likely can produce usable energy around 2050.
>>76814532
dude, how many meters exactly?!
>42 km of tunnel
as opposed to the thousands of km of tunnel in every Country in the G8 that have high-speed rail between military bases, along with under-ground cities for the elite in case of nuclear war?
>>76814532
>building a spooky catacomb
Or
>trashing the whole planet
I'll take the catacomb
>>76814532
>he thinks it's for nuclear waste
>not as a refuge to wait out the happening
Meanwhile in Finland's culturally enriched neighbour
Sweden will build ten new nuclear reactors and update on new nuclear reactors from 2015 to 2020
>http://nextbigfuture.com/2016/06/sweden-will-build-ten-new-nuclear.html
Can you imagine Somalians and snackbars being in charge of nuclear safety?
Replace uranium with thorium in reactors.
No more nuclear waste. No more meltdowns.
>>76814532
Aussie coal shill gtfo.
>>76815515
Only way to efficiently pull that off is with multiple space elevators, but it would probably still be better to save it and put resources towards trying to find a safe use for the waste.
Feels good to live in a country where 74% of the power produced is clean, nuclear power. And as far as I know we are the only ones actually working towards fusion.
>Germany
>stops using nuclear power because "muh Fukushima"
>turns to coal
>not enough
>have to buy French nuclear power
Topkek.
>>76818123
Russia and China export Nuclear reactors to third world countries.
>>76833037
Sure thing, bro. Just solve these problems, and we'll start building the reactors right away.
>>76814532
If everyone went vegan, we wouldn't need nuclear power.
what would happen if you just dumped all the radioactive shit into that lava crap in volcanoes?
>>76833561
Then you have radioactive lava.
To my understanding, the used up rods aren't even that dangerous unless you directly touch them. Compared to, say, radon gas radiation.
Am I wrong?
>>76817935
The anti-nuclear activists are mostly funded by oil corporations.
Imagine if the US were 100% nuclear, and ran electric cars instead of gasoline.
Think the US'd give two fucks about oil in the middle east? The entire country would be energy independent from the rest of the world, with the safest form of energy generation we've ever invented.
Literally just using naturally hot rocks to turn water into steam.
Fucking soviet russian idiots had to ruin it all.
>>76833301
Canada does as well - possibly the most successful nuclear reactor exporter with our CANDU reactors.
I think India's bought most of them.
>>76833916
That was during operation with new fuel and an on-going nuclear process though.
>>76833731
They're more or less pretty safe.
Think of them as stones that are constantly trying to reach a few hundred degrees celsius and give off invisible light that gives you sunburns inside your body.
>>76833916
I'm pretty sure this didn't happen at a nuclear power plant, but at some other facility. As I recall, he was pouring some sort of liquid into a large boiler type thing which was the wrong type to be pouring it into, and it condensed enough to go supercritical, which gave off a burst of radiation that eventually killed him. (And I think the other guy with him, but ouchi got the most of it because he was actually looking into the container)
>>76814649
I read you can generate energy from mechanical energy from cars on roads.
Problem is, I bet this will be exploited to track movement.
ONKALO MAINITTU! TORILLA TAVATAAN!
>>76819613
>the singularity will have hit by then with the ai going homocidal and killing us all rightfully since man made a god in his image, evil begits evil
God dammit I hope you're wrong.
They must be stupid AIs then.
>>76818071
Is that khazad dum?
>>76814532
All this bullshit about nuclear waste is FALSE.
There is no such thing as nuclear waste. That "waste" is naturally occuring.
Digging shit out of the ground does not magically make it "radioactive" or more harmful or "waste".
IT'S IN THE GROUND RIGHT NOW
DIGGING IT UP AND USING IT DEMONSTRABLY ISN'T A BIG DEAL
PUTTING IT BACK INTO THE GROUND IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS NEVER DIGGING IT OUT
>>76834895
Then why not just never dig it out?
>>76834895
>That "waste" is naturally occuring.
Not true. The stuff produced by the nuclear reactors has much higher concentration of radioactivity than anything we can dig from the ground naturally.
>>76835442
No, we can definitely find high concentrations of highly radioactive material. There was even a natural nuclear reactor in africa that was discovered, and much of the earth's internal heat is generated by radioactive decay.
>>76835093
Because it's extremely useful to dig it out, stick it in a boiler to heat water into steam for half a decade, and then remove it and bury it again once it's stopped getting as hot as it used to.
>>76831642
I think the US is going to beat you guys to practical fusion. I don't think you guys have any designs for things like diverters that can survive the needed heat flux, or reactor walls that can breed Tritium and be replaced (and survive).
The US inertial confinement designs seem to be more workable because you can drop the pulse rate to get whatever average flux is survivable without exotic materials.
The cost of electricity from a Tokamak or your stellorator with massive super conducting magnets, solid tungsten walls, flowing liquid metal diverters/interior will not be cost effective (imho).
The US inertial confinement is just like a miniaturized operation plowshare test.
There is also two different approaches, the z-machine and laser, being researched in parallel.
>>76835836
>No, we can definitely find high concentrations of highly radioactive material.
High, yes. But not as high.
>>76836001
M8 what part of "naturally occuring nuclear reactor" didn't you understand?
Yes, you literally can find radioactive rocks that will kill you. Polonium in particular, but you can also find mines filled with radon gas.
>>76814649
Solar has shit generation density, it's only good for rural areas.
>>76836284
I never said you couldn't find stuff from the ground that could kill you. Just that nuclear waste is much more likely to kill you if you're exposed to it.
>>76836474
That really depends on the waste. For the most part it's pretty damn safe - don't let it sit close to other spent fuel rods, keep them stored underground or underwater, and you're fine.
They're SPENT fuel rods for a reason. They're not very radioactive anymore, they don't heat up as much or as quickly.
The way this works is: The more highly radioactive the material is, the shorter the halflife, the more lethal it is, and the faster it disappears.
Short half life = dangerous = gone very quickly.
long half life = not dangerous = takes a long time to go away (uranium - billions of years)
Other nuclear waste tends to be more lethal (basically, products created by the fuel rods) but those can be extracted and put in other reactors and used as fuel as well. If it gets hot, it'll be useful in a nuclear reactor. If it doesn't get hot, it's not particularly dangerous.
Basically the only time you'll get dangerously radioactive waste in the sense that you're dead with short exposure, is if you do something completely retarded like ban the reprocessing of nuclear fuel.
>>76837218
>They're SPENT fuel rods for a reason. They're not very radioactive anymore, they don't heat up as much or as quickly.
You seem to have very basic misunderstandings about the process. Used fuel rods are way, way, WAY more radioactive and dangerous to humans than unused rods. The stuff produced by the nuclear reactor has much shorter half-life than the actual fuel and therefore it emits radiation with much higher intensity.
>>76837989
That's not the spent fuel rods, and I told you what's done with that in sensible countries: It's used in other nuclear reactors designed for it.
Because if it gets hot (ie it's highly radioactive), it's useful for turning water into steam and can thus run a nuclear reactor.
What's been happening is reactors that can use these get canceled/shut down by ignorant hippies/oil lobby shills and this fuel has to be stored somewhere safely because we've gone full retard and refuse to use it.
That's not an issue with nuclear reactors or the fuel, that's an issue with retards being retarded.
>>76838431
Just google it up, dumbass. Used fuel rods are much more dangerous to humans than unused rods.
>>76839105
Literally all of the dangerous elements there can be used as fuel.
The plutonium especially, the other stuff is used largely for medicine.
The only reason it's not used is because of politics, not technological limitations.
There's no reason for nuclear waste to be dangerous - and honestly the safest way to dispose of it is to just dump it in an ocean trench, but people largely don't understand what is even bad about radioactive anything, except that it is bad, so we never get any sensible policies regarding it.
>>76814532
That's a shame. Lools like a great place for urban exploration.
I think nuclear waste should be sent into oceanic trenches or into the sun
>fuel rods
literally all of you can go kill yourselves, fuel isnt in a rod form, however the control rods are
>>76816312
I thought about this when I was little. Not sure if its technically possible but seems reasonable.
>>76840769
yeah they just pour the fuel in like gasoline :^)
google fuel rod m8
>>76840964
Perfectly reasonable, if anything leaks out it's so little and the ocean so big that it literally doesn't matter.
You don't even have to put it in any sort of fault line. Just the deep ocean is good enough.
wouldn't stop environmentalists from bawling their fucking eyes out though.
>>76815135
>What are breeder reactors
>>76816478
You're right. It decays leaving behind neutrons that heat up water that is used to heat up unpressurized water, turning it to steam which is then put into a turbine which uses magnets to create electricity which is sent your house so you can shitpost on the internet.
>>76842490
>which uses magnets to create electricity which is sent your house
Are you fucking retarded you don't have super high voltage coming to your house. It goes trough a transformation system which reduces the voltage to what ever the standard is in your country probably 120v@60hertz for you.
>>76842863
Would his house get that electricity without the nuclear reactor? No? Fuck you then, leaf
It's because of fear mongering idiots who don't properly understand radioactivity influencing politicians into coming up with absurd waste disposal standards.
>>76843082
What are you trying to say?
Did the heat get to your head you fucking retard?
>>76843280
>mfw going to Wales should be illegal for workers in British nuclear plants
>>76814532
>doesnt murder humans
>doesn't shorten life span and pollute the air
Oy vey goyim muh shekels
>>76833916
It surprises me that they tried to save him for so long. It seems like after all his skin fell off and his intestines were literally coming apart inside him, it was clear he was not going to "living" much longer in any sense of the word.
>>76814532
>worlds costliest tomb
>tomb
Thats because they have non tombs that are dug that deep all the time.
The governments have these things called D.U.M.B.S, and you probably dont know about them, but if shit hits the fan kykes like Soros will just go and hide in a bunker 30km underground for 3 generations.
>>76844906
It's not that surprising. The hospital got paid for keeping the guy alive.
It's stupid to build that. Incredibly stupid. Technology will eventually solve the problem of radioactive waste.
>>76845928
>Technology will eventually solve the problem of radioactive waste.
It already has. The answer is Onkalo.
HYDRO
Y
D
R
O
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydro-Qu%C3%A9bec
>>76814532
What's wrong with catacombs?
>>76834501
what the hell are you talking about
>>76846794
>dams run out during an exceptionally dry period
>have to throw money into fossil fuels quickly not to have blackouts
I'm not memeing, this is actually happening in tasmania because they had a commie government
>>76817418
libruls/leftists in a nutshell, meanwhile Coal is fine, more dosh for that.
>>76814532
>using solid fuels
>be unable to separate wastes from the fuels
Fear of nuclear power is the worst thing about nuclear power for it hinders the process of improving upon it.
>>76814532
All of the toxic waste in the world wouldn't even fill up a 100 yard football field.
>>76847199
if that ever happens we can always just buy from the US and the rest of canada, we aren't isolated like Tasmania
>>76846794
Yeah not everyone has the hydro resources that Quebec has.
>>76847511
I think ontario and labrador have great hydro potential also
and for the rest honestly I don't see anything wrong with nuclear power, I really do think most of the fear surrounding it is irrational
>>76814532
>42kms of tunnels, 420 metres under the ground.
>100 years to dig
Sounds like some really slow tunnel digging
>Sealed for 100,000 years
Why don't they try to figure out something else to do with the waste? If they have residual heat, which apparently they do, there must be something that can be done with it.
Also: You may be unaware of this, but some countries simply dump their nuclear waste in the ocean and it hasn't been a problem.
>>76847449
Tasmania isn't that isolated, but they had the misfortune of their power link to the mainland being severed months ago, and the company responsible for fixing it is still fucking around
>>76815135
>the truth is, we do not have the technology to destroy radioactive materials yet.
We could just use a Hydrogen bomb against it.
Dump all the nuclear waste in a single location in the ocean or desert, then h-bomb it.
>>76814532
When railguns become usable, we can just shoot nuclear waste on a trajectory towards the sun.
And as other anons have said, studying the isotopes and refining the processes is something we're held back from by the collusion of big business and the welfare state "industrial complex" that siphons money to making more serfs and more trinkets instead of direct research.
>>76848043
we stopped scattering radioactive dust into the atmosphere for a reason, anon
>>76816569
>Turkish Bathhouse.JPG
>>76814532
Imbecile wanna shitposter
>>76847790
>Why don't they try to figure out something else to do with the waste? If they have residual heat, which apparently they do, there must be something that can be done with it.
Because the problem isn't the heat but the radiation, you dumb fuck. Without the fission chain reaction going on, the used fuel doesn't generate that much heat.
>>76815146
>Solar is good
Solar is just round-about nuclear. We should skip the middle man.
>Wind is good
Waste of space, eye-sore, simply round-about nuclear as well.
>>76815332
The radiation isn't really the problem, the problem is the radioactive isotopes.
>>76815457
We can re-use the waste to create bombs to bomb the rest of the waste.
>>76814532
The entire amount of nuclear waste produced by France in the whole history is currently stored in a single 50x100m hall. It's something like 1000 cubic meters. I would imagine Finland will have far less than this. No idea why would they need a huge tomb like this.
>>76814649
>stealing power from the sun
>>76848043
so suddenly all of the radioactive waste is vaporized into radioactive dust that's spread across the whole planet.
Sounds like a great plan straya
>>76848596
>the problem isn't the heat but the radiation
In nuclear documentation there is no need to distinguish between the two
The actual problem is the radioactive isotopes, not the radiation nor the heat...
>you dumb fuck
Wow.
>>76815779
Coal kills way more people than nukes. Thousands die every year from air pollution.
>>76848902
>mfw the sun gets angry at his blessing being stolen and used for powering abominable parodies of life
>mfw civilisation annihilated in a solar flare
>mfw you could have prevented this
>>76814649
Solar is good if you're in the middle of fucking nowhere and don't want to use nuclear (ie, space). It's fucking worthless everywhere else.
>>76815211
Most of those costs are fighting the legal battles against anti-nuke shills whose knowledge of radiation came from watching Godzilla and the X-men.
>>76849442
yet nuclear is literally the only sane option if you intend to move away from the sun
>>76814532
Burying shit in tombs is due to government regulations, not the innate hazards of nuclear waste. We could probably reuse every bit of it if we were allowed to.
>>76814649
>>76815146
>>76815600
>>76815733
>>76815739
>>76815833
>>76816645
>>76816774
>>76817745
>>76817861
>>76819761
>>76819811
>>76829844
>>76836303
>Solar
Solar power is just round-about nuclear. Anyone promoting it is simply promoting nuclear power via proxy through their ignorance.
>>76815444
Sounds legit. Would solve their overpopulation problem.
>>76815211
Thorium does not have these problems. Governments prefer uranium breeder plants because they create precursors to nuclear weapons as waste.
![Olkiluoto%203%20July%202014%20460[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/EN7Lc5v.jpg "Olkiluoto%203%20July%202014%20460[1].jpg")
Boo hoo. Nuclear power is the truly the greenest energy you can have. It is even greener that those annoying proplellers neo-green leftards want to make.
Finnish bedrock is also very strong and we have no earthquakes, etc. I dont see any problem here.
