1626
posted ago by IM_A_TRIVIAL_PURSUIT ago by IM_A_TRIVIAL_PURSUIT +1627 / -1

THE FRENCH HAVE BEEN USING NUCLEAR POWER SAFELY FOR MANY MANY DECADES (70% OF THEIR POWER).

USE THAT TYPE OF REACTOR.

Comments (98)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
26
IM_A_TRIVIAL_PURSUIT [S] 26 points ago +27 / -1

WHY NOT BOTH?

WHY NOT USE US URANIUM TO CREATE CHEAP, ABUNDANT HIGH-LOAD ENERGY INSTEAD OF LETTING HILLARY SELL IT ALL OFF TO EVERYONE ELSE?

2
deleted 2 points ago +6 / -4
13
MapleBaconWaffles 13 points ago +13 / -0

You don't need to store it for 100,000 years. Probably a few hundred. The stuff with super long half-lives isn't that dangerous. Short half-life means you get all the radiation at once. Long half life means about the same total amount of radiation, but spread out over a longer time. Also, most of the next gen designs they're working on can reuse spent fuel from current gen reactors.

11
IM_A_TRIVIAL_PURSUIT [S] 11 points ago +11 / -0

PRETTY SURE IT WILL ALL BE SAFELY DECAYED LONG BEFORE HALF LIFE 3 COMES OUT.