Post comment on The Verge to
"Wasteland: the 50-year battle to entomb our toxic nuclear remains"
Reply to: by FishyJoe
One thing that should be considered is the risk of other sources of energy. The only that could put a dent into the amount of energy that nuclear produces is coal. Coal contains radioisotopes which gets released into the atmosphere. When you burn billions of tons of coal, that radiation adds up to be statistically significant. There is also the problem with the production of greenhouse gasses. Not to mention the hundreds that die in coal mine accidents and the environmental risks associated with coal mining.
Also, the reprocessing of spent fuel is different after a few hundred years. Some of the waste by-products are reduced through decay which makes reprocessing significantly more attractive.
Reply to: by FishyJoe
One thing that should be considered is the risk of other sources of energy. The only that could put a dent into the amount of energy that nuclear produces is coal. Coal contains radioisotopes which gets released into the atmosphere. When you burn billions of tons of coal, that radiation adds up to be statistically significant. There is also the problem with the production of greenhouse gasses. Not to mention the hundreds that die in coal mine accidents and the environmental risks associated with coal mining.
Also, the reprocessing of spent fuel is different after a few hundred years. Some of the waste by-products are reduced through decay which makes reprocessing significantly more attractive.