Comments by "Wom Bat" (@wom_Bat) on "The world’s first permanent nuclear-waste repository | DW News" video.

  1.  @christianzilla  the wast can be used for some reactors which leave only around 4 to 8% of the wast left for disposal. Then there's thorium reactors which only generate around 1% waste.
    1
  2.  @markusmuller6173  deper is better or else you get problems like Washington. They had a facility just below the surface leak and cancer rates went up till they noticed the problem. The costs to fix the site are astronomical. Deep is definitely better.
    1
  3. Not at all, those were active plants not disposal sites. Cherynoble was caused when Soviet engineers turned off multiple saftey mechanisms to attempt an experiment to get more power out of the reactor. In Japan the plant ignored weather warnings and kept the plant active during a tsunami. America has 2 near the surface right outside Seattle leaking gallons of wast a day. See any alarm bells? The finish design is over 1,000 meters deep. A flood or earthquake wont effect the surface. Also after 1,000 years the wast is as radioactive as uranium ore in the ground. I Do agree we need something more like thorium liquid salt reactors. Same neucular warmth without the possibility of going critical. Also it's like 99% efficient so there's practically 0 radioactive wast.
    1
  4. Yes Mexico the paragon of safe buisnes practices and anti corruption. Just the other day i was thinking how safely they handle pesticides and chemical waste. Obviously if Mexico can't mine uranium in a safe manner nobody can. We should use liquid thorium nuclear reactors thogh. They are more efficient and cheaper. However they don't create depleted uranium and the defence sector loves their cheap abundant depleted uranium for weapons.
    1
  5.  @2000sborton  when you write that much some people are going to skim 📑✍ 🎿 👀 Though if they were anything like the leaking Washington wast dump sites, I'd say incompetent planning was probably a large factor. Still you can look up thorium and America's stockpiles of depleted uranium ammunition. YouTube is full of documentaries on it.
    1
  6. After 1,000 years it becomes as radioactive as uranium ore.
    1
  7. Canada, Sweden, USA these sites are all over the world.
    1
  8. We have. It's thorium liquid salt reactors. However they don't leave depleted uranium as a byproduct so the defence sector pushes back against it. They like their depleted uranium weapons.
    1
  9. Ah yes, Finlands final solution. Been a while since Europe's last final solution.
    1
  10. They just need thorium already. Same neucular glow without the hazardous wast material.
    1
  11. Tell that to Taiwan.
    1
  12. Not when it's that far down.
    1
  13. Just gotta go deep. If you go deep enough it's radioactive anyway. We do this in canada too about 1000 meters down in a limestone cavern.
    1
  14. 👏👏👏 thorium👍🏻🙏🏻🙌✌🏻
    1
  15. That's why we need thorium liquid salt reactors. Same neucular warmth without the plutonium wast or depleted uranium. However the defence sector loves using cheap depleted uranium for weapons. So they lobby hard against thorium. It is the way of the future though. The best part is it can't go critical like Chernobyl.
    1