Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Handling nuclear waste should factor into the ROI however the costs are relatively minimal. Nuclear waste does not remain dangerous for that long. The numbers you're misquoting (its 220k years not 200m years) from that bad source are for the half life of particular elements. It does not address the safety of these particular elements, nor does it discuss what particular fuel cycles produce those or at what concentrations.

Nuclear waste only remains seriously dangerous for "a few" decades after which it can be inertly stored indefinitely at minimal expense.

This is also assuming that we're not talking about any new/exotic fuel cycles, but, only with fuel cycles that were proven working 30+ years ago. If you want to discuss exotic fuel cycles things can be even better, though the science is less firm with less data on them (for now).




Applications are open for YC Winter 2020

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: