If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Christian Science Monitor)   Are you having difficulty finding a place to dump your nuclear waste? Japan has a solution for you: public playgrounds   (csmonitor.com) divider line 57
    More: Scary, Japan, nuclear waste, public playground, Fukushima Daiichi, free daily  
•       •       •

5368 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Nov 2012 at 2:32 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



57 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-08 10:50:31 AM
I just want to let subby know that the headline made me literally snarf on my granola bar before LOLling out loud....

/weird sense of humor
 
2012-11-08 11:22:08 AM
It's not nukular, but this is pretty close to the plan with toxic areas from the old airport here. Putting a park on top of it supposedly means people spend less time near it - compared to housing. And the exposure to air and UV helps to dissipate the toxins (mostly deicing runoff, and probably fuel related leaks in spots).
 
2012-11-08 03:34:26 PM

m1ke: I'm no nuclear scientist and I'm also not being snarky....but why not just dump it in a really deep part of the ocean?


Water circulates. Plastic degrades, metal corrodes, et cetera. Honestly, a dry landfill in a desert cave is by far safer than the ocean. If you went the Marianas Trench route, you would have to find a way to be sure that the contents of the sunken containers were actually recycled back into the earth's crust, not just crushed open so the contents could escape. Yucca Flats was by far one of America's better ideas for containment, and yet delay after delay leaves our shiatload of waste rotting away at places like Savannah and Clearwater. Scary scary! Japan is about one of the least safe places to store anything radioactive.
 
2012-11-08 05:37:44 PM

thespindrifter: m1ke: I'm no nuclear scientist and I'm also not being snarky....but why not just dump it in a really deep part of the ocean?

Water circulates. Plastic degrades, metal corrodes, et cetera. Honestly, a dry landfill in a desert cave is by far safer than the ocean. If you went the Marianas Trench route, you would have to find a way to be sure that the contents of the sunken containers were actually recycled back into the earth's crust, not just crushed open so the contents could escape. Yucca Flats was by far one of America's better ideas for containment, and yet delay after delay leaves our shiatload of waste rotting away at places like Savannah and Clearwater. Scary scary! Japan is about one of the least safe places to store anything radioactive.


I thought one idea was to embed the waste in a glassy matrix, then drop THAT into the Marianas subduction zone?

No crushing/leaking/circulation problems.

Cost the problem, I assume?
 
2012-11-08 06:32:46 PM

moothemagiccow: [deadon.files.wordpress.com image 450x113]


Came for this!
 
2012-11-09 02:42:03 AM

m1ke: I'm no nuclear scientist and I'm also not being snarky....but why not just dump it in a really deep part of the ocean?


no you are not.

they already are.

like you, nuclear radiation is unconcerned with "depth".
 
2012-11-09 06:16:53 AM

Haliburton Cummings: like you, nuclear radiation is unconcerned with "depth".


Yet the suggestions to bury, submerge, or otherwise subduct nuclear waste continue in this thread and elsewhere unabated.

Did every one of you ask your dog what to do with radioactive waste?

I'd really like to know how insanity like this breeds.
 
Displayed 7 of 57 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report