In my oppinion, nuclear waste should be put into a particle accelerator in order to split it into lighter elements that disintegrate earlier ~20 years. Those cost should be added to the invoices the consumers are paying.
That's the only way renewable energy sources can compete with nuclear fision.
What do you think about?
Spent nuclear fuel can actually be burned in gen IV nuclear reactors. The fuel is dissolved in a molten salt which allows us to burn nuclear weapons material and thorium as well. This reactor could reduce the lifetime of nuclear waste from tens of thousands of years down to only hundreds of years.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Is it worth that extra cost compared to the bottom of the sea wharehouse?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I don't know anything about a warehouse at the bottom of the sea but it's worth it to get rid of radioactive waste that would otherwise last 10s of thousands of years.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I am not really sure about putting nuclear waste to a particle accelerator. Let's ask @lemouth then :D
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit