# Explain the Nuclear Power waste storage problem to me. **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [July 18, 2009, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472 "2009-07-18T20:46:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/41 "2009-07-20T15:43:01Z")
What would be the realistic costs/risks associated with sending it into space? I assume the primary risk (other than transporting it to a launch site) would be disaster during or soon after launch. How frequently do such disasters occur? Would they be less if the rocket were designed for a one-way trip with cargo less sensitive than humans/satellites/etc? Even if it were safe, would this be a significantly costlier solution than storage? ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/42 "2009-07-20T15:48:42Z")
> [@jackdavinci](#): > > Radioactive materials are extremely toxic, long lasting, contaminating, have a unique method of harm, and weapons related potential. It’s hardly comparable to any of the other things on your list without having to resort to “seeming more sciency”. And yet somehow have created less death and injury by several orders of magnitide than the other things I listed. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/43 "2009-07-20T19:57:33Z")
> [@Dinsdale](#): > > What would be the realistic costs/risks associated with sending it into space? > I assume the primary risk (other than transporting it to a launch site) would be disaster during or soon after launch. > How frequently do such disasters occur? > Would they be less if the rocket were designed for a one-way trip with cargo less sensitive than humans/satellites/etc? > Even if it were safe, would this be a significantly costlier solution than storage? Much, much, much more expensive. > [@SmashTheState](#): > > If the idea that our descendants who may live in a post-technological age are endangered by our waste disposal is “nonsense,” perhaps you can explain why a great number of people, including many scientists, have spent a lot of time thinking about the best way to communicate “danger” to those who come after us? Mainly, to deal with the raving paranoia of the anti-nuclear people. As I said, they aren’t doing anything similar with waste that will stay dangerous for much longer. ---
**Author:** ![Doug\_Bowe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/df788c/32.png) [@Doug\_Bowe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Doug_Bowe)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/44 "2009-07-20T20:25:25Z")
Hasn’t France been recycling their nuclear waste? When they finish recycling a few times they end up with a small amount of residual to bury? ---
**Author:** ![ashman165](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e8cbc/32.png) [@ashman165](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ashman165)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/45 "2009-07-20T20:44:21Z")
> [@SmashTheState](#): > > A geiger counter and a shovel are quite different levels of technology. And a shovel that can dig that deep would be leaps and bounds beyond a Geiger Counter. So, if they have a shovel they can use to dig through a mountain and break through the storage containers (if they’re still around that is), it will be of a small technological moment for them to have the ability to test for radiation in the first case. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/46 "2009-07-20T20:53:18Z")
> [@jackdavinci](#): > > Radioactive materials are extremely toxic, long lasting, contaminating, have a unique method of harm, and weapons related potential. It’s hardly comparable to any of the other things on your list without having to resort to “seeming more sciency”. Actually, none of this is true, or rather it cannot all be true at once. usually only one or two of these things are true. Nuclear waste is frequently nontoxic, or at worst is toxic like heavy metals (which are commonly shipped everywhere). They do not have a “unique method of harm”, and are much less dangerous than many other things also shipped on a daily basis. Normal nuclear waste does not have any particularly bad weapons potential, certainly not worse than what any schmoe could whip up. All of those fears are, at heart, made up or grossly exaggerated… because people don’t understand science. ---
**Author:** ![JonathanTheRed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/8491ac/32.png) [@JonathanTheRed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JonathanTheRed)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/47 "2009-07-20T21:05:36Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Right, the radioactive material was dug up out of the ground in the first place. I’m all for expanding nuclear energy, but this is not fair. It was dug out of the ground, yes… then it was processed, enriched, and bombarded with neutrons. Radioactive waste bears little resemblance to the uranium ore from whence it originated. Saying it was “dug up out of the ground in the first place” is rather like saying that since you can get hydrogen from water, carbon from the ground, and nitrogen from the atmosphere, there’s nothing wrong with dumping HCN into the sea, land, or air. ---
**Author:** ![dracoi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/90db22/32.png) [@dracoi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dracoi)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/48 "2009-07-20T23:02:36Z")
> [@jackdavinci](#): > > Having seen the results of government lowest bidder practices and the work ethic of your average contractor’s help I’m sympathetic to the various concerns. I wonder though, where is all the radioactive material coming from in the first place, and why isn’t it creating a huge potential hazard there? Nuclear waste from power generation is currently stored on-site at each nuclear power plant. I don’t know the details about how each stores it, but I do know that the Yucca Mountain plans are partly in recognition of the fact that we can’t keep storing increasing amounts of material at each reactor. It’s also because many plants aren’t in good places for storage either. Diablo Nuclear Power Plant near San Luis Obispo, California, is right on the Pacific coast in an area prone to earthquakes. Any danger critics can point to at Yucca Mountain is at least ten times as bad at Diablo. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/49 "2009-07-20T23:34:08Z")
Who the Hell names a nuclear power plant “Diablo”? If the folks running the plants think it’s Satanic, who can blame Joe Sixpack for fearing nuclear power? ---
**Author:** ![Sundrop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/da6949/32.png) [@Sundrop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sundrop)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/50 "2009-07-20T23:58:59Z")
Let me get this straight, you’re worried about the danger nuclear waste might represent to neo-neolithic degenerate descendants? The potential increased cancer risk to such a theoretical posterity would be way the fuck down the list of things that would shorten their lives. The hyper-intelligent squids that would be hunting them, or the damn dirty apes that enslave them would be a way worse risk than a few tons of nuclear waste stored in Nevada. Putting aside those fanciful risks, their own shit, of which there would be exponentially larger quantities, would represent a greater risk to health and safety. ---
**Author:** ![dracoi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/90db22/32.png) [@dracoi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dracoi)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2009, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/51 "2009-07-21T00:02:34Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Who the Hell names a nuclear power plant “Diablo”? If the folks running the plants think it’s Satanic, who can blame Joe Sixpack for fearing nuclear power? It was built in Diablo Canyon so the name comes from the pre-existing geography, but I always felt exactly the same way. ---
**Author:** ![jackdavinci](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackdavinci/32/3259_2.png) [@jackdavinci](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jackdavinci)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2009, 8:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/52 "2009-07-22T08:51:04Z")
> [@dracoi](#): > > Nuclear waste from power generation is currently stored on-site at each nuclear power plant. I meant more along the lines of why isn’t it causing a problem in the places it’s mined from. > [@smiling\_bandit](#): > > Nuclear waste is frequently nontoxic, or at worst is toxic like heavy metals (which are commonly shipped everywhere). They do not have a “unique method of harm”, and are much less dangerous than many other things also shipped on a daily basis. Normal nuclear waste does not have any particularly bad weapons potential, certainly not worse than what any schmoe could whip up. I’ll concede your point about toxicity as being technically correct - but it’s harmful to come into direct contact with it or get it inside of you which amounts to the same thing or potentially worse. But certainly radiation is a method of harm unlike other methods as it well.. radiates. Whether or not it actually has weapons potential when being shipped it’s an alluring target for stupid people. ---
**Author:** ![dracoi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/90db22/32.png) [@dracoi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dracoi)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2009, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/53 "2009-07-22T17:44:02Z")
> [@jackdavinci](#): > > I meant more along the lines of why isn’t it causing a problem in the places it’s mined from. I suspect it is - uranium ore is a major source for radon gas, for one - but it’s a matter of concentration. A drop of cyanide in a swimming pool is not noticeable. A drop of cyanide in your water bottle is probably fatal. Looking at the Wikipedia page on Uranium Mining I notice that seawater has uranium concentrations of 3.3 parts per billion. So I guess we’d consider it relatively safe at that concentration. However, one of the major challenges in developing nuclear fuels is the enriching process… and even before the enriching process, you have to refine the uranium out of thousands of tons of rocky ore or millions of tons of seawater. Even if we tried to dilute the waste back into seawater, you’d have “hot spots” where the concentrations were more dangerous than the background amounts… and I’m not sure we really want even the uranium that’s already in the oceans, but there’s nothing we can do about it. ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2009, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/54 "2009-07-22T18:18:09Z")
> [@DWMarch](#): > > I don’t get this concern unless they’re reprocessing it in the parking lot of the nearest Wal Mart. Is it really that hard to protect something precious/dangerous like this? Yes. [http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/sep2002/2002-09-12-06.asp](http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/sep2002/2002-09-12-06.asp) [http://blogs.knoxnews.com/munger/2009/07/nnsa\_concerned\_about\_guards\_ga.html](http://blogs.knoxnews.com/munger/2009/07/nnsa_concerned_about_guards_ga.html) [http://a4nr.org/library/safety/01.04.2008-washingtonpost](http://a4nr.org/library/safety/01.04.2008-washingtonpost) Warning: PDF [http://www.hss.energy.gov/HealthSafety/WSHA/vpp/reports/oseval/WSI-NVRecertification2007Final.pdf](http://www.hss.energy.gov/HealthSafety/WSHA/vpp/reports/oseval/WSI-NVRecertification2007Final.pdf) > **[Page Not Found](https://www.govinfo.gov/error)** > > Error occurred. The page you requested cannot be found. Please report this error to askGPO. Provide the following information to help us resolve this problem: the URL of the page you were trying to access, the steps you followed to produce the error,... [http://www.pogo.org/pogo-files/alerts/nuclear-security-safety/nss-y12-20041023.html](http://www.pogo.org/pogo-files/alerts/nuclear-security-safety/nss-y12-20041023.html) ---
**Author:** ![janeslogin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/df788c/32.png) [@janeslogin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/janeslogin)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2009, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/55 "2009-07-22T19:03:32Z")
I live a couple of hours from Yucca Mountain. Never been there. There probably is a place to buy gas between here and there. That place probably sells alcohol and has a couple of slots. Anyhow, persons in Nevada are just plane crazy. They will get down right belligerent if one mentions nuclear waste here in these remote part - I’ve never been to Las Vegas (We call it Lost Wages.). Ask some here why they are against it and they have no reason. They just don’t want it. Just crazy in my opinion. ---
**Author:** ![Minnie\_Luna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4bbf92/32.png) [@Minnie\_Luna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Minnie_Luna)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2009, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/56 "2009-07-22T19:40:34Z")
I did a project at [WIPP](http://www.wipp.energy.gov/) when I was in college. The containers used to store the waste have been so thoroughly tested to withstand collision, bombing, burning etc. I remember watching videos of trains crashing into the containers, things being dropped on them and they were tested to make sure they would survive just about anything that they might possibly encounter while en route to the disposal site (including terrorism). I’ve been in the mine and toured the site. It was a truly unique experience. The big debate going on when I was there was how to mark the site for future generations as a radioactive waste dump. My suggestion was “Mr. Yuck” stickers, lol. They didn’t use my idea, instead they are using [Passive Institutional Controls.](http://www.wipp.energy.gov/fctshts/PICs.pdf) The site is now taking defense related trans-uranic waste for disposal. The salt bed is part of a Permian Salt Formation, which has been geologically stable for 250 million years. Pre-dinosaur stable. No water moving in or out, no movement in the formation for a very long time. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2009, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/57 "2009-07-22T20:03:56Z")
If Pu is an alpha emitter, that means it’s dumping ionized helium into the environment. In the short term, alpha rays are trivially easy to protect against. They burn what they hit, then become nice, inert, valuable helium. I foresee industrial applications! ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2009, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/58 "2009-07-22T20:48:17Z")
Glass is one of the most stable substances known. Glass was recovered from a Bronze Age shipwreck off Turkey (ca. 800 BC) , and the glass showed no evidence of deterioration. So, if we really felt the need, we could mix the dried waste with glass and melt it into small bricks. place these in a deep stone vault, and we have nothing to worry about. And, for comparison, buring coal releases lots of radioctive waste into the environment-far more than nuclear power generaion. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2009, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/59 "2009-07-22T22:03:46Z")
> [@Doug\_Bowe](#): > > Hasn’t France been recycling their nuclear waste? When they finish recycling a few times they end up with a small amount of residual to bury? Sort of. We had, for a time, a big ass fast breeder reactor, which basically takes “spent” fissile matter as input and produces regular fissile matter as output (to be re-used in a standard reactor). Oh, and as a bonus, the fast breeder produces electricity as well. Sounds great, right ? Except the process apparently creates huge amounts of conventional pollutants (mercury, dioxin…), and the plant was the favorite target of green activists (as well as eco-terrorists), and it never really worked at its supposed capacity. Eventually it was closed down in 1997 - some say because it was a technical failure, others think its political weight was greater than its energy output. Read all about it [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superphenix). ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2009, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472/60 "2009-07-23T00:40:02Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > If Pu is an alpha emitter, that means it’s dumping ionized helium into the environment. In the short term, alpha rays are trivially easy to protect against. They burn what they hit, then become nice, inert, valuable helium. I foresee industrial applications! Yes, alpha is extremely easy to shield against. The problem is if the alpha emitter substance is already inside your body. In theory, a microgram of plutonium inhaled and lodged in your lungs would guarantee a fatal case of lung cancer. Which of course means that seven kilos of plutonium could kill the entire human race, provided you could arrange for everyone to breath in one microgram. :rolleyes: [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-nuclear-power-waste-storage-problem-to-me/503472.md?page=4)