I'd agree if you're talking older-style reactors that can turn into an oversized "dirty bomb." Gen IV reactors are are designed to be "walk away" safe since they can't technically "melt down."
-
-
What up, America? Retweeted What up, America?
What up, America? added,
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
We won't be using old-style pressurized vessel uranium 235 reactors. New Gen IV reactors such as the molten salt reactor generate a tiny fraction of the waste--waste with a radioactive half-life of around 300-400 years.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
So whose house do you want to bury the nuclear waste next to?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Whose house are you going to bury all millions of dead people of coal power next to? https://www.who.int/airpollution/en/ … I'd rather have storage containers beneath my feet.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I’m not arguing for coal, I just want to know why, if nuclear waste disposal was so safe and easy, do we have cleanup operations all over the US, which admins continue to cut the budgets? My family was downwinders of Hanford which is leaking into the Columbia river
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
The clean-ups are probably driven by phobias about everything nuclear. I'm agree with the experts that most of them are symbolism. BTW, if you are "against" nuclear, the only viable&reliable form of energy for developing countries is coal. So in sense, you are "pro-coal".
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Way to straw man. So you propose to put 3rd world leaders in unstable countries in charge of nuclear plants, while the US engages in regime change ops. Great idea!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I'd rather see those countries having access to proliferation-resistant
#GenIV#nuclear, than having them burn the projected amount of coal, killing people and fueling#climatechange in the process. So if not coal or nuclear, what is yourreliable&affordable&existing alternative?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Look if you notice I’m not arguing against your supposedly “clean” new reactors. I’m saying we already have huge problems with storing the waste that is already here. I don’t hear any solutions coming out of you. Solar, wind, possibly hydro may be more expensive but better
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Some Gen IV designs eat spent nuclear fuel as their own fuel.
-
-
ANY waste as fuel? I have a hard time believing that when there is such a wide variety of types of waste.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @supamerica @ScottAdamsSays and
See how you had to imagine that Scott Said ANY Waste. He specifically said spent nuclear FUEL. yes. That nuclear fuel still contains 95-96% fuel materials.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.