637
Nuclear fusion reaction releases almost twice the energy put in (www.newscientist.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/news@lemmy.world
344 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

Yes those designs are already in use today. Modern reactors are incredibly safe. The only modern disaster was Fukushima and that didn't even cause any deaths and was brought on by a tsunami.

And here is your source. And this is for ALL nuclear waste in the world.

The volume of high-level radioactive waste (HLW) produced by the civil nuclear industry is small. The IAEA estimates that 392,000 tonnes of heavy metal (tHM) in the form of used fuel have been discharged since the first nuclear power plants commenced operation. Of this, the agency estimates that 127,000 tHM have been reprocessed. The IAEA estimates that the disposal volumeb of the current solid HLW inventory is approximately 29,000 m3.1 For context, this is a volume roughly equivalent to a three metre tall building covering an area the size of a soccer pitch.

This is a good video to learn more about nuclear power and how many people misunderstand it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    Fair enough, thanks for sharing.

    So like I said, the catastrophic failure effects are my primary concern, though I am concerned about dealing with the waste product.

    Having said that, that's still a lot of waste that your documentation is talking about, and it'll be around for centuries. I don't think it makes your point as well as you think it does.

    Better to have other forms of energy that doesn't generate that sort of waste, or make sure we have one hell of a foolproof (not verified by biased corporations) of preventing that waste from getting into the environment either accidentally or on purpose/terrorism.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The waste is still very much a non issue in the short term (i.e. 100 years) while we desperately need clean energy options now. And that waste is nothing compared to the billions of tons of c02 we release yearly. And we DO have ways of stopping it from getting into the environment. It's not some new thing that they are just now figuring out. That issue was solved years ago! The storage containers they use can literally be hit by speeding freight trains and not leak. There have been almost no incidents of spent nuclear fuel causing environmental damage. I honestly think that oil companies have been gaslighting people (no pun intended) about how "dangerous" nuclear is just so they can keep building more refineries.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    Got to ask and why Japan is dumping all that water into the ocean from Fukushima if it's easy to handle and store.

    Yes, I know, they deemed it safe to do so, but still, why aren't they just storing it instead (like they have been so far; just make new storage, there's plenty of land, especially around where people can't live anymore), if it's so easy to do so, as you advocate?

    What today's science deems as safe may be deemed as hazardous by tomorrow's science.

    Also, transportation to the storage locations, and the maintenance of the storage locations, still an issue. Other forms of energy doesn't have the storage of waste byproducts problem.

    I honestly think that oil companies have been gaslighting people (no pun intended) about how “dangerous” nuclear is just so they can keep building more refineries.

    Trust me I'm very anti-oil, I can't wait for fusion to come along finally, and for solar/battery to be better and more widely used than it is today.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent