Stuff that's "still dangerous in a million years" is not very dangerous to begin with. You've been told this before but choose to ignore it and foam at the mouth instead.
Try again harry - raise a real problem instead of trivial ones.
Well you should know. To you it's "simple" that nuclear is "too expensive" - and you never provide any evidence.
You can't frack it for oil if you have put waste in.
So what, it doesn't need to last that long for it to decay to a very safe level.
Judging by today's announcement about oil discoveries there, fracking isn't going to be necessary.
From
"But UKOG has consistently stated that it is not intending to use fracking...It says that the oil at Horse Hill is held in rocks that are naturally fractured, which gives strong encouragement that these reservoirs can be successfully produced using conventional horizontal drilling and completion techniques".
and the jet black no iridescent one is basalt or gabbro. Still makes a great worktop...
Volcanic glass been around millions
Er no, it is chalk over clay over greensand over clay over sandstone.
Yes. I was simplifying for Harry's benefit. A fair N-S section is here:
Your usual drivel. [Quote] Because some radioactive species have half-lives longer than one million years, even very low container leakage and radionuclide migration rates must be taken into account.[30] Moreover, it may require more than one half-life until some nuclear materials lose enough radioactivity to no longer be lethal to living organisms. A 1983 review of the Swedish radioactive waste disposal program by the National Academy of Sciences found that country?s estimate of several hundred thousand years?perhaps up to one million years?being necessary for waste isolation ?fully justified.?[31] [Unquote]
Drivel
Drivel.
The French company going bust is proof enough. And the cost of nuclear waste disposal. The nuclear establishment likes tohidethe costs. But they can't do it forever.
Just dig another hole and dump it in there
Blackburn, Lancashire. 4000 of them there. No digging required, although the holes were rather small.
The only relevance of it being an aquifer is that it means there is a significant amount of groundwater and the storage needs to be dry.
It isn't, if handled properly. Burying it in wet sand is not handling it properly.
Misleading, as it refers to the transuranic by-products, which only represent a tiny fraction of the whole. As a general rule, the radiation and heat generated by high level waste will drop to one thousandth of its original level in about 40-50 years.
Clay is good according to some theories.
Self sealing and water tight. That's what the frogs are doing apparently.
More drivel. You're wriggling again because you don't know sweet FA. But prepared to guess.
So why is the 1940s/50s stuff at Sellafield still dangerous?
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.