In US nuclear plants, fuel rods (both new and spent) are stored in “swimming pools” that put about 14 feet of water between the rods and people who work in the plants. That’s considered perfectly safe. A mile of water is a lot more than 14 feet, so I don’t think there is anything to worry about. In fact, I’ve long believed that the safest (and cheapest) way to dispose of nuclear waste is to dump it on some deep area of the sea floor. Instead, we spend many billions of dollars and decades of time trying to get approval to bury it in a salt mine in Nevada. Why?
dump it on some deep area of the sea floor. Instead, we spend many billions of dollars and decades of time trying to get approval to bury it in a salt mine in Nevada. Why?
/jk
I used to work with a professional engineer, who had formerly been employed by the EPA. IIRC, one of his favorite sayings was:
"The solution for polution is dilution!"
;^)
Is it still waste,
if it can be re-conditioned/constituted and
used again to fuel a reactor?
7
Make more sense to store it on the moon anyway. The economics of Gerry Anderson.
Get the waste in the big black and fling towards the sun and keep your moon in orbit.
Will thermoclines keep it down there?
Don't give the Ruskies any ideas of what to do with their aging nuke subs.
The whole point of land storage of nuclear waste is containment. If Caesium-137 is in ocean water it can go anywhere, including your next meal. It’s a gamma emitter. People don’t have 14 feet of water in their bodies to block it. Think about that. Yeah, with sufficient dilution maybe they’ll only get a little bit of cancer. /s