Comment on We can do all three things at once

• racemaniac@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  roflmao XD I’m sorry, but you trying to sound smart by saying how much energy a kg of U235 has, and then using the wrong unit (a unit of power, not of energy) is just the funniest thing ever XD.

  And yeah, nuclear waste is kind of solvable, but it will be an issue for at least a thousand years to come, and that’s a LONG time… I can get that environmentalists are like “yeah, this is just another way of shoving our current issues FAAAAR into the future”. Even if we just bury it all in some safe space…

  source
• janet_catcus@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  i do not think something that stays dangerous for longer than you have not shat your pants is negligible.

  if shitting your pants was the way to get rid of radioactive waste, i would be all for it, but as it stands all you would be left with would be tainted with nobody to clean it up for you. and somebody would still have to take care of the radioactive waste… it doesnt just vanish. there are no organisms that eat it up and make it into foodstuffs for others.

  maths can say it is negligible, but then sad hard reality kicks in and you have to be holding on to something that can kill not just you but anybody you tell to watch over you. this is not a place of honor

  source

  • Rakonat@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    [deleted]

    source

    • janet_catcus@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      toxic waste is more managable than radioactive waste. that is the logic that i am pounding on here.

      your logic says: let future generations take care of stuff we cant manage.

      and i say: it would be very irresponsible as we already have messed up the planet enough. let’s not add harder to manage waste to what’s already there.

      can we just agree to disagree?

      im not even saying we should ban research or something, there is still radioactive waste to manage

      source