this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2024
174 points (95.3% liked)

Technology

58698 readers
3962 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 0 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

Actually, it's billions of public dollars. And if we don't find a proper permanent solution, it's going to become more: https://sustainability.stanford.edu/news/steep-costs-nuclear-waste-us

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 5 minutes ago

That article is pretty inflammatory, on purpose I believe. It rolls all of the costs into one, including nuclear weapons testing, costs of the Manhattan project, and even the costs other forms of energy entail at times. It's clearly an anti-nuclear article doing it's best to make the reader believe the costs are higher than they actually are.

I do agree with the article that we need to implement solutions, but they aren't difficult. We know how to solve it, and it isn't particularly expensive. These videos give good insight into how easy to contain nuclear waste is and solutions that we already have for it.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=4aUODXeAM-k

https://youtube.com/watch?v=lhHHbgIy9jU