Well we better start making progress on fusion then ;) On Apr 1, 2016 8:53 PM, "Stefan Englhardt" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Reprocessing does not solve the problem. This waste does not vanish for an > insane amount of time. No covering material lasts long enough. You have to > reencapsule it to keep radiation inside. You need a place to store it and > watch nothing leaks. Our power companies try to split the responsibility to > a separate company. They know this company will die sometimes in the future. > > -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -------- > Von: Chuck McCown <[email protected]> > Datum: 02.04.2016 03:04 (GMT+01:00) > An: [email protected] > Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] Tesla Model 3... who else is getting one? > > And why are you thinking the waste needs to be encapsulated? > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis > > Just reprocess it. And really it is not that dangerous. A tanker of > chlorine or ammonia is much more dangerous. > > > *From:* Stefan Englhardt <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Friday, April 01, 2016 6:56 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Tesla Model 3... who else is getting one? > > Nuclear is very expensive. If you calculate the cost of moving and > reencapsulating the waste for some thousand years. Your ancestors will > learn that no energy company will exist long enough to take responsibility > for the waste they generated. This will be done by the tax payer. > > -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -------- > Von: Josh Luthman <[email protected]> > Datum: 01.04.2016 22:18 (GMT+01:00) > An: [email protected] > Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] Tesla Model 3... who else is getting one? > >
