this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
38 points (93.2% liked)

World News

39004 readers
2591 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

And what do YOU know about radioactive waste disposal?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

We can bury it in the ground and it will literally turn into lead. How are you doing with carbon emissions? Got a fix?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I think it's photosynthesis. 'Bury in the ground' is an extreme simplification btw. Also, I am finished with this topic scince long anough. It feels politically biased. If you'd like to reply, I'd hear it gladly. But I m not going to be involved into a discussion.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I know it's a damn lot easier than carbon recapture, if we're talking waste products. It's not ideal, but there is no such thing as perfect, and we shouldn't let that be the enemy of good. Nuclear fission power is part of a large group of methods to help us switch off fossil fuels.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"Easier"? Are you aware of the fact that radioactive waste tombs are meant to stand for millions of years? It requres a lot of territory, construction and servance charges, and lots of prays for nothing destructive happens with it in its "infinite" lifetime.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Have you tried capturing gas? As difficult as radioactive waste tombs are, they're easier than containing a specific type of air lol.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Read about breathing if you want to know how to capture gas. Also, about photosynthesis.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you want to buy the land to plant a second Amazon, be my guest. And breathing does the exact opposite of what we want.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

I'd rather fill land with trees than with radioactive wastes.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Launch it into the sun or Florida

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Launching radioactive waste into space is a terrible idea, because rockets on occasion crash. Once that happens it becomes a nuclear disaster.

Instead we can safely store it in depleted mines.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Mines fill up with water if they're not constantly pumped out. Even the salt mines which seemed like a solution were found to have this issue

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Dig a hole, anywhere, there's a chance it'll fill with water. Especially with climate change. We're seeing moisture getting dropped in areas at greater frequencies that didn't happen decades ago. There's no guarantee you can dig a hole anywhere on earth that wouldn't become apart of our aquifers as the water travels back to the ocean.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sealing a deep narrow borehole isn't a difficult problem. The Earth has contained oil and gas underground for millions of years.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

Its contained it using geological features but once exposed how is it possible to recreate that. Its also not like this material is goo

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There is no guarantee of anything.

But if you're storing it hundreds of miles from the ocean, the risk is minimal.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It isn't really minimal since the water cycle on earth is all connected.

Water in the ocean evaporates. It's carries inland by Hadley cells that deposit the moisture inland. It gets dumped on the highest points which all run back the ocean and creating all our aquifers along the way. Those aquifers feed our great lakes and wells.

But you're suggesting we bury toxic material that remains toxic for hundreds or thousands of years somewhere remote that would just be high up in that water cycle. In places where private companies would be out of the eyes of watchdog groups