Quote:
Originally Posted by ken0042
How do you transport said nuclear waste? If you have just one accident, wouldn't that be so much worse than the damage being done today?
Eventually oil sands discussions turn to nuclear. Your option sounds the cleanest so far, but like you said- the 100,000 year storage of nuclear waste seems like a much worse option. At least with CO2, the planet already has a large scale method of dealing with it. Even in the far shorter term than 100,000 years; if you found a bunker under your house with toxic waste in barrels constructed in the 1700's, would you trust it?
|
Good questions ken, the answer is that the risk is is very low - the nature of an "accident" is much different from what most people imagine when they think of nuclear disasters today... Ie Fukushima (thank LWR technology for that). PM me with your email address and I can send you a good paper on a simple
Process that would allow us to utilize candu waste for this purpose.
And I totally agree... It's a very tough sell to think we can engineer something that will last 100,000 years in a secure state.