this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2024
294 points (93.2% liked)

solarpunk memes

2870 readers
1135 users here now

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] denaggels@feddit.org 15 points 1 day ago (9 children)

Do we have a solution for nuclear waste yet?

[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 7 points 7 hours ago

We put it back in the ground where we found it in the first place.

I don't see how people are A-OK with uranium and other naturally occurring nuclear isotopes beneath their feet, but used fuel rods from a nuclear power plant? No fucking way!

Your house is full of radon Joe, the nuclear waste in a sealed casket, buried in the side of a mountain nowhere near you isn't what is going to give you cancer.

[–] RecluseRamble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

The picture shows cooling towers (which could be anything) and a Tokamak reactor. Fusion doesn't produce any nuclear waste. Doesn't work either though, unfortunately. Any time now...

[–] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 hours ago

Is nuclear waste more radioactive than the uranium we started with?

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

We have many. Most aren't in effect yet though, but it also isn't a serious issue. They're stored safely in cement caskets, with molten glass and stuff to keep it together and safe, with effectively zero chance to cause an issue. There are permanent ways to store it safely, but we haven't invested in them yet for many reason. Mostly, dirty energy companies pushing the anti-nuclear message have purposefully hamstrung nuclear from becoming a great solution, and people who think they're being smart believe them.

[–] cloud_herder@lemmy.world 6 points 8 hours ago

That and they have ways to reuse “spent” nuclear fuel in newer reactors that can use fuel that older reactors have finished using.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 35 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Reprocess it, salvage useful isotopes for known uses, keep a few others for research purposes, don't put it too far away because most of it could be useful in the future.

[–] denaggels@feddit.org 4 points 23 hours ago (4 children)

Afaik that is not an economically viable option.

[–] TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 7 points 14 hours ago

clutches pearls won't someone think of the stock market?

[–] Fosheze@lemmy.world 16 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

France literally does that. They reprocess 96% all of their used fuel back into usable fuel and useful materials.

[–] gnygnygny@lemm.ee 1 points 4 hours ago

The number is false. You make a confusion between what could be recycled and what is actually recycled. And MOX is not a good option (expensive, 1 cycle, toxicity).

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 15 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Which part? France is basically doing this already.

[–] gnygnygny@lemm.ee 1 points 4 hours ago
  • Economically it's not interesting
  • It's one cycle only
  • Waste in output is even worst and more toxic
[–] A7thStone@lemmy.world 8 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Ah yes, economically viable like destroying the planet.

If destroying the planet weren't economically viable, no one would do it.

This has been your daily depressing fact.

[–] Elwynn@lemmy.ml 15 points 23 hours ago

Permanent underground storage where it will naturally decay. Are a couple of different methods available from what I understand. And the amount of material that actually needs to be stored is a fraction of what is instead released into the air, water & soil from fossil based fuel. Not to mention toxins like mercury etc.

[–] Johanno@feddit.org 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Eat it! So many calories. You will never have to eat again.

[–] RandomVideos@programming.dev 2 points 16 hours ago

You could feed every single person on earth for life and solve hunger

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 20 hours ago

Do we have a solution for atmospheric CO2 release yet?

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 0 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Do we have a problem with nuclear waste yet?

[–] denaggels@feddit.org 10 points 23 hours ago (1 children)
[–] ghen@sh.itjust.works 3 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

Define problem, because it's less waste than old solar panels per megawatt. Both of which we just throw away in special places designed specifically for that waste.

[–] gnygnygny@lemm.ee 1 points 4 hours ago

In EU you recycling is included in the price. It is mandatory and must be done in EU.

[–] Excrubulent 8 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Define "less". By volume? Mass? Ecological impact? If you want to say "per megawatt" then you obviously have numbers, let's see them.