Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 ... 26
Send Topic Print
Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream (Read 10288 times)
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17710
Gender: male
Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #150 - Mar 15th, 2024 at 3:34pm
 
freediver wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 3:26pm:
24,000 year is the short period.



Nope Hydrogen-3 is one of the shortest. Hydrogen -5 is shorter.
Plutonium-239m1 193nS
Back to top
« Last Edit: Mar 15th, 2024 at 3:40pm by lee »  
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49091
At my desk.
Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #151 - Mar 15th, 2024 at 3:48pm
 
lee wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 3:34pm:
freediver wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 3:26pm:
24,000 year is the short period.



Nope Hydrogen-3 is one of the shortest. Hydrogen -5 is shorter.
Plutonium-239m1 193nS


24,000 years is the half life. What makes you think it would be a good idea to only store it for that long?

Do you know what half life means?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 41954
Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #152 - Mar 15th, 2024 at 3:52pm
 
lee wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 3:26pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 3:20pm:
Not without a large investment in manufacturing abilities, Lee.  And of course, Electricity.


So not via renewables then. Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 3:20pm:
You can offset CO^2 production with planting trees, Lee.


But you have already razed the land to build solar and wind. They are not conducive to trees. Wink


Where the electricity comes from is immaterial.  The US used hydropower for it's first enriched Uranium.

Quote:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 3:20pm:
You can manufacture things without using fossil fuels.


Let's see. Solar panels? No you need a steady reliable supply for the semi-conductor junctions. Wind turbine blades? No you need a steady reliable supply to cure the fibreglass resin.


Wind, pumped hydro, hydrogen, photo-voltaic, all as being proposed and built for steel production at Whyalla,  If it works for steel and copper smelting it will work for fibreglass.  You are being left behind as we speak, Lee.

Quote:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 3:20pm:
Such childishness such a lack of vision.


So tell us where in this "vision" of yours from whence they come. Wink


Already mentioned.  Hydro power, hydrogen power, wind, photo-voltaic are all sources of electricity, Lee.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Belgarion
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 5429
Gender: male
Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #153 - Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:10pm
 
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 1:11pm:
lee wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 12:38pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 14th, 2024 at 9:44pm:
None of those is operational as yet, Lee.


What part of operational 2025 didn't you understand?  And you still can't provide a source for reliable energy. Grin Grin Grin Grin

Don't you think 70 years after nuclear tests, we have that data? How long do you think? 1,000 years? Roll Eyes


A figure of 24,000 years has been mentioned as the half life of Uranium waste. I reckon that would be a fair number to work on, Lee.  You seem to think 70 years is a long time.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


Watch and learn....

https://www.tiktok.com/@theradguyglows/video/7302016199993445674
Back to top
 

"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Voltaire.....(possibly)
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 41954
Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #154 - Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:28pm
 
Belgarion wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:10pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 1:11pm:
lee wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 12:38pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 14th, 2024 at 9:44pm:
None of those is operational as yet, Lee.


What part of operational 2025 didn't you understand?  And you still can't provide a source for reliable energy. Grin Grin Grin Grin

Don't you think 70 years after nuclear tests, we have that data? How long do you think? 1,000 years? Roll Eyes


A figure of 24,000 years has been mentioned as the half life of Uranium waste. I reckon that would be a fair number to work on, Lee.  You seem to think 70 years is a long time.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


Watch and learn....

https://www.tiktok.com/@theradguyglows/video/7302016199993445674


What he doesn't mention is that the nuclear waste is still radioactive, even if encased in glass.  You still have to store it for it's life, which is over 24,000 years.  Are you going to guarantee it during that period as safe, Belgarion?  Really?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 46568
Gender: male
Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #155 - Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:39pm
 
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:28pm:
Belgarion wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:10pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 1:11pm:
lee wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 12:38pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 14th, 2024 at 9:44pm:
None of those is operational as yet, Lee.


What part of operational 2025 didn't you understand?  And you still can't provide a source for reliable energy. Grin Grin Grin Grin

Don't you think 70 years after nuclear tests, we have that data? How long do you think? 1,000 years? Roll Eyes


A figure of 24,000 years has been mentioned as the half life of Uranium waste. I reckon that would be a fair number to work on, Lee.  You seem to think 70 years is a long time.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


Watch and learn....

https://www.tiktok.com/@theradguyglows/video/7302016199993445674


What he doesn't mention is that the nuclear waste is still radioactive, even if encased in glass.  You still have to store it for it's life, which is over 24,000 years.  Are you going to guarantee it during that period as safe, Belgarion?  Really?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes



Little waste is generated

Nuclear fuel is very energy dense, so very little of it is required to produce immense amounts of electricity – especially when compared to other energy sources. As a result, a correspondingly small amount of waste is produced. On average, the waste from a reactor supplying a person’s electricity needs for a year would be about the size of a brick. Only 5 grams of this is high-level waste – about the same weight as a sheet of paper.

The generation of electricity from a typical 1,000-megawatt nuclear power station, which would supply the needs of more than a million people, produces only three cubic metres of vitrified high-level waste per year, if the used fuel is recycled. In comparison, a 1,000-megawatt coal-fired power station produces approximately 300,000 tonnes of ash and more than 6 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, every year.

https://world-nuclear.org/nuclear-essentials/what-is-nuclear-waste-and-what-do-w...
Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17710
Gender: male
Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #156 - Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:48pm
 
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 3:52pm:
If it works for steel and copper smelting it will work for fibreglass.


If it works. The SA Green hydrogen plant already runs at a 50MW loss. 250MW in 200MW out.  Wink

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 3:52pm:
You are being left behind as we speak, Lee


Nope you believe. That sums it up.

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 3:52pm:
Hydro power, hydrogen power, wind, photo-voltaic are all sources of electricity, Lee.


So which ones will be reliable? And of course the problem with hydrogen storage.

You do understand reliable?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 41954
Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #157 - Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:56pm
 
Frank wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:39pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:28pm:
Belgarion wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:10pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 1:11pm:
lee wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 12:38pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 14th, 2024 at 9:44pm:
None of those is operational as yet, Lee.


What part of operational 2025 didn't you understand?  And you still can't provide a source for reliable energy. Grin Grin Grin Grin

Don't you think 70 years after nuclear tests, we have that data? How long do you think? 1,000 years? Roll Eyes


A figure of 24,000 years has been mentioned as the half life of Uranium waste. I reckon that would be a fair number to work on, Lee.  You seem to think 70 years is a long time.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


Watch and learn....

https://www.tiktok.com/@theradguyglows/video/7302016199993445674


What he doesn't mention is that the nuclear waste is still radioactive, even if encased in glass.  You still have to store it for it's life, which is over 24,000 years.  Are you going to guarantee it during that period as safe, Belgarion?  Really?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes



Little waste is generated

Nuclear fuel is very energy dense, so very little of it is required to produce immense amounts of electricity – especially when compared to other energy sources. As a result, a correspondingly small amount of waste is produced. On average, the waste from a reactor supplying a person’s electricity needs for a year would be about the size of a brick. Only 5 grams of this is high-level waste – about the same weight as a sheet of paper.

The generation of electricity from a typical 1,000-megawatt nuclear power station, which would supply the needs of more than a million people, produces only three cubic metres of vitrified high-level waste per year, if the used fuel is recycled. In comparison, a 1,000-megawatt coal-fired power station produces approximately 300,000 tonnes of ash and more than 6 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, every year.

https://world-nuclear.org/nuclear-essentials/what-is-nuclear-waste-and-what-do-w...


So, Soren, are you volunteering to store this nuclear waste in your home?  Really?   Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 41954
Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #158 - Mar 15th, 2024 at 5:00pm
 
lee wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:48pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 3:52pm:
If it works for steel and copper smelting it will work for fibreglass.


If it works. The SA Green hydrogen plant already runs at a 50MW loss. 250MW in 200MW out.  Wink


That is 200MW which is created by green means, Lee.  Why do you concentrate continually on the negatives?  Afraid of the positives?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

Quote:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 3:52pm:
You are being left behind as we speak, Lee


Nope you believe. That sums it up.


No, I am basing my comments on facts, facts you don't like.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

Quote:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 3:52pm:
Hydro power, hydrogen power, wind, photo-voltaic are all sources of electricity, Lee.


So which ones will be reliable? And of course the problem with hydrogen storage.

You do understand reliable?


All will complement each other, Lee.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 46568
Gender: male
Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #159 - Mar 15th, 2024 at 5:09pm
 
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:56pm:
Frank wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:39pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:28pm:
Belgarion wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:10pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 1:11pm:
lee wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 12:38pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 14th, 2024 at 9:44pm:
None of those is operational as yet, Lee.


What part of operational 2025 didn't you understand?  And you still can't provide a source for reliable energy. Grin Grin Grin Grin

Don't you think 70 years after nuclear tests, we have that data? How long do you think? 1,000 years? Roll Eyes


A figure of 24,000 years has been mentioned as the half life of Uranium waste. I reckon that would be a fair number to work on, Lee.  You seem to think 70 years is a long time.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


Watch and learn....

https://www.tiktok.com/@theradguyglows/video/7302016199993445674


What he doesn't mention is that the nuclear waste is still radioactive, even if encased in glass.  You still have to store it for it's life, which is over 24,000 years.  Are you going to guarantee it during that period as safe, Belgarion?  Really?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes



Little waste is generated

Nuclear fuel is very energy dense, so very little of it is required to produce immense amounts of electricity – especially when compared to other energy sources. As a result, a correspondingly small amount of waste is produced. On average, the waste from a reactor supplying a person’s electricity needs for a year would be about the size of a brick. Only 5 grams of this is high-level waste – about the same weight as a sheet of paper.

The generation of electricity from a typical 1,000-megawatt nuclear power station, which would supply the needs of more than a million people, produces only three cubic metres of vitrified high-level waste per year, if the used fuel is recycled. In comparison, a 1,000-megawatt coal-fired power station produces approximately 300,000 tonnes of ash and more than 6 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, every year.

https://world-nuclear.org/nuclear-essentials/what-is-nuclear-waste-and-what-do-w...


So, Soren, are you volunteering to store this nuclear waste in your home?  Really?   Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes



A very moronic question from a very moronic, spineless, vain idiot.

Do you store the waste products of your life in your home, cockwomble?  No.

In your head, sure. But not in your home.

Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 41954
Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #160 - Mar 15th, 2024 at 5:32pm
 
Frank wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 5:09pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:56pm:
Frank wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:39pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:28pm:
Belgarion wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:10pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 1:11pm:
lee wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 12:38pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 14th, 2024 at 9:44pm:
None of those is operational as yet, Lee.


What part of operational 2025 didn't you understand?  And you still can't provide a source for reliable energy. Grin Grin Grin Grin

Don't you think 70 years after nuclear tests, we have that data? How long do you think? 1,000 years? Roll Eyes


A figure of 24,000 years has been mentioned as the half life of Uranium waste. I reckon that would be a fair number to work on, Lee.  You seem to think 70 years is a long time.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


Watch and learn....

https://www.tiktok.com/@theradguyglows/video/7302016199993445674


What he doesn't mention is that the nuclear waste is still radioactive, even if encased in glass.  You still have to store it for it's life, which is over 24,000 years.  Are you going to guarantee it during that period as safe, Belgarion?  Really?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes



Little waste is generated

Nuclear fuel is very energy dense, so very little of it is required to produce immense amounts of electricity – especially when compared to other energy sources. As a result, a correspondingly small amount of waste is produced. On average, the waste from a reactor supplying a person’s electricity needs for a year would be about the size of a brick. Only 5 grams of this is high-level waste – about the same weight as a sheet of paper.

The generation of electricity from a typical 1,000-megawatt nuclear power station, which would supply the needs of more than a million people, produces only three cubic metres of vitrified high-level waste per year, if the used fuel is recycled. In comparison, a 1,000-megawatt coal-fired power station produces approximately 300,000 tonnes of ash and more than 6 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, every year.

https://world-nuclear.org/nuclear-essentials/what-is-nuclear-waste-and-what-do-w...


So, Soren, are you volunteering to store this nuclear waste in your home?  Really?   Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


A very moronic question from a very moronic, spineless, vain idiot.

Do you store the waste products of your life in your home, cockwomble?  No.

In your head, sure. But not in your home.


I expected nothing less from a coward like you, Soren.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17710
Gender: male
Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #161 - Mar 15th, 2024 at 5:35pm
 
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 5:00pm:
That is 200MW which is created by green means, Lee.


Providing the weather works.

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 5:00pm:
Why do you concentrate continually on the negatives?


Because we need RELIABLE electricity. Weather dependant renewables are NOT. Roll Eyes

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 5:00pm:
No, I am basing my comments on facts, facts you don't like.


Which facts? That renewables are not weather dependant? Roll Eyes

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 5:00pm:
All will complement each other, Lee. 


So if you have a wind drought for 7 days and overcast conditions not being moved because there is no wind, so little solar energy, what is your back plan? The green hydrogen won't work under those conditions at all. Roll Eyes

"Climate influence on compound solar and wind droughts in Australia"

"We find that compound solar and wind droughts occur most frequently in winter, affecting at least five significant energy-producing regions simultaneously on 10% of days. The associated weather systems vary by season and by drought type, although widespread cloud cover and anticyclonic circulation patterns are common features. Indices of major climate modes are not strong predictors of grid-wide droughts, and are typically within one standard deviation of the mean during seasons with the most widespread events. However, the spatial imprints of the teleconnections display strong regional variations, with drought frequencies varying by more than ten days per season between positive and negative phases of climate modes in some regions."

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41612-023-00507-y

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 46568
Gender: male
Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #162 - Mar 15th, 2024 at 5:36pm
 
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 5:32pm:
Frank wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 5:09pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:56pm:
Frank wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:39pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:28pm:
Belgarion wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 4:10pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 1:11pm:
lee wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 12:38pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Mar 14th, 2024 at 9:44pm:
None of those is operational as yet, Lee.


What part of operational 2025 didn't you understand?  And you still can't provide a source for reliable energy. Grin Grin Grin Grin

Don't you think 70 years after nuclear tests, we have that data? How long do you think? 1,000 years? Roll Eyes


A figure of 24,000 years has been mentioned as the half life of Uranium waste. I reckon that would be a fair number to work on, Lee.  You seem to think 70 years is a long time.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


Watch and learn....

https://www.tiktok.com/@theradguyglows/video/7302016199993445674


What he doesn't mention is that the nuclear waste is still radioactive, even if encased in glass.  You still have to store it for it's life, which is over 24,000 years.  Are you going to guarantee it during that period as safe, Belgarion?  Really?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes



Little waste is generated

Nuclear fuel is very energy dense, so very little of it is required to produce immense amounts of electricity – especially when compared to other energy sources. As a result, a correspondingly small amount of waste is produced. On average, the waste from a reactor supplying a person’s electricity needs for a year would be about the size of a brick. Only 5 grams of this is high-level waste – about the same weight as a sheet of paper.

The generation of electricity from a typical 1,000-megawatt nuclear power station, which would supply the needs of more than a million people, produces only three cubic metres of vitrified high-level waste per year, if the used fuel is recycled. In comparison, a 1,000-megawatt coal-fired power station produces approximately 300,000 tonnes of ash and more than 6 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, every year.

https://world-nuclear.org/nuclear-essentials/what-is-nuclear-waste-and-what-do-w...


So, Soren, are you volunteering to store this nuclear waste in your home?  Really?   Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


A very moronic question from a very moronic, spineless, vain idiot.

Do you store the waste products of your life in your home, cockwomble?  No.

In your head, sure. But not in your home.


I expected nothing less from a coward like you, Soren.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


And, of course, I expect nothing more from you, moronic, spineless, vain deficit-riddled old fool.

Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49091
At my desk.
Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #163 - Mar 15th, 2024 at 5:59pm
 
Lee how long do you think you would have to store the waste for?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 105380
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #164 - Mar 15th, 2024 at 7:16pm
 
freediver wrote on Mar 15th, 2024 at 5:59pm:
Lee how long do you think you would have to store the waste for?



Even millions of years is not enough:



Nuclear waste takes too long to decay.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioactive_waste

Some common nuclear waste half lives:

Plutonium 239 half life      24,110 years.
Americium 241 half life          432 years
Radium 226     Half life      1,600  years
Uranium 236  Half life   15 million years.
Plutonium 244 Half life   80 million years
Uranium 235  Half life  704 million years
Uranium 238 half life      4.5 billion years
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 ... 26
Send Topic Print