awesome_dude

My understanding is that this material remains toxic to life for thousands, to tens of thousands of years.

Safe means that it's stored such that there's no harm to the environment for that lifetime.

In all "bury it" scenarios, the place where the waste is buried will be subject to change resulting in water, air, able to interact with that waste when normal tectonic and erosion processes do their thing.

I said from the start that the argument you presented was fallacious, and all you did was present it, now, because you have no other argument, you're working on aggressive attacks.

You're on your own now. Bye.

It's not.

The time frame we are talking about invalidates the "safety" because the earth's crust moves and warps, which allows water to access that sort of storage

You're repeating the problem - You're saying that there is less waste to deal with which magically means it's safe.

You do understand that don't you?

I've never understood how people think "less" solves the issue, it's not negligible and asking to increase the number of plants surely increases the waste.

Reprocessing, isn't infinite. There's going to be waste to deal with.

You've not presented any technical solutions, instead you made it political by claiming that's the only problem.

Do you have an actual understanding of the problems or are you just pushing nuclear because it's aligning with you politically

Edit: it's clear from the down votes i am getting that this is political, not technical.

If you're down voting with no technical understanding you're political.

> Nuclear waste would be the other large remaining issue, but again - society chose to create that problem and not solve it. It's not technical in nature.

Care to explain, I've never seen a genuine solution that goes beyond hand waving, bad faith arguing, and aggressiveness.

I'm going to cause an expensive outage that will ruin the company, and our careers unless you say no to sugar in the coffee!!!!

Can they? Yes, anyone can.

Will they... that's a different question

Is it *vital*

No.

It's really helpful, but it's not vital.

WRT Ukraine - the drones are now (AIUI) flown with a tethered fibre connection (inside the Ukraine) - because jammers have made radio traffic with drones near impossible for operators

Yes - what does civilisations forgetting how to make the best known concrete on the planet have to do with forgetting how to make a GEIGER counter

You cannot even spell the damned name properly.

You complain that nothing makes sense to yu, when given an actual example of the problem of a nuclear plant in a warzone you ask what the point is - we're done here, take your trolling elsewhere.

By your logic there are no wars.

"Advanced civilization"

Every civilisation for the last million years has categorised itself thus, and, yet, here we are without their technology.

We still don't know how the Romans made a concrete that is as durable as it is (and nothing we have is nearly as good)

It doesn't need to - all that needs to happen is for water to suddenly have a course to where the materials are being stored.

I do see you instantly reaching for threats of accusations, which i do view as abuse

Bye.

Would have made a nice steamed ham

So, just to be clear, you're demanding that I re-answer every concern that I've already addressed otherwise you're going to label me a troll

Sounds like abuse to me.

We don't have a lot of technology that we knew existed in earlier civilisations - the Aztecs, Mayans, pueblo peoples, the Easter islanders, to name just a few were doing things we have no idea how to do

Yeah, i know about that one and it kind of proves my point, it's been active as a nuclear reactor for roughly a billion years if i recall correctly - every time water seeped into the rock it slowed the neutrons down and the reactor started up, created steam, which then evaporated and stopped the reaction

Dangerous the whole time.

It's non porous right up until an earthquake or some movement of the area makes it not

Until we find the Rosetta stone hieroglyphs were unintelligible, and that language only stopped being used 2000 years ago.

I like that answer, but never say never

Neither concrete nor steel have the lifespans we're discussing thousands, or tens of thousands of years.

And. Bacteria.

This has to be snark - Waste is never safe to store - the containment has to prevent leeching - over a lifespan of thousand, or tens of thousands of years

And it only takes one earthquake, or animal digging to completely upend that strategy

1. Ukraine nuclear power plants are a massive liability - they make for easy targets for the Russians to obliterate the country - is that what you want for Switzerland?

2. The waste - nobody wants it - it's a hazard for tens of thousands of years - what's the plan for managing it?

Yes energy generation (and independence) is important, no nuclear ain't it.

Even just as a user of nix there has been this problem of how to manage dotfiles - people have git repositories for them but they are copies, because the actual dotfile in use is never tracked

For a System administrator the problem is many orders of magnitude worse

It disheartens me a great deal to see how the US (in particular, but they are not alone) has turned its back on good science, largely, but not exclusively, on the back of populist politics.

Science has had waves, and people have over pushed its advances (for profit) and hidden some of its shortcomings (we can point to a lot of problems) and is going through a massive reckoning where its influence is being curtailed.

Probably (IMO) the biggest problem science has, is that people don't realise that the key to its strength isn't that it finds all these advances/truths, but that it's comfortable with the idea that we really don't know anything.

Fundamentally science says - this is the best understanding we have of the given data, AND, reiterating that this is what people miss, science absolutely accepts that a better understanding or fresh data can at any moment in time change things.

That confuses most people, they like their understanding of the world to be concrete.

Academic's, FTR, have to have a huge amount of people skills. Their job isn't just to discover, it's to share.

You cannot share (effectively) if you cannot communicate in a way that others can understand.

Further the entire ecosystem that academics rely on to get what they need to do for their research (grants, and other funding, resources, and so on) necessitate them to convince people who control those, who do not necessarily understand the purpose of the work

The magic for me, to this day in fact, is knowing that mail is essentially anyone on the internet being allowed to write to a mail servers disk.

There are rules now, but the concept is still almost intact, random people writing to the servers disk - to be later read by someone