Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
1. This is the problem with nuclear energy and its waste.
Wed Apr 18, 2012, 07:01 PM
Apr 2012

We think we are depositing the waste in a "safe" area that will never be inhabited, and area in which it will never cause harm to humans or even wildlife. But the world gets smaller and smaller and there is less and less wasteland in which to throw our poisonous waste.

We cannot impose our nuclear waste on future generations. That is one of the main reasons that I oppose nuclear energy.

This is the problem with nuclear energy and its waste. JDPriestly Apr 2012 #1
Yep. You can't just bury it LiberalEsto Apr 2012 #2
Nonsease. Long term nuclear waste storage is perfectly safe. cstanleytech Apr 2012 #4
LOL!! You're funny but it makes a point! Ecumenist Apr 2012 #8
teehee w0nderer Apr 2012 #16
New or pre-owned? Fumesucker Apr 2012 #21
Pre-owned but yes it has a fantastic vista of the bay. cstanleytech Apr 2012 #25
Check's in the mail.. n/t Fumesucker Apr 2012 #27
This message was self-deleted by its author Tesha Apr 2012 #3
die marshall gaines Apr 2012 #5
Depends. Really depends. Taverner Apr 2012 #17
They lie so rich people can get richer. The most important thing in the world is for valerief Apr 2012 #18
''....why do governments lie to us so much?'' DeSwiss Apr 2012 #23
200,000 years of this. Oh, boy. saras Apr 2012 #6
Invisible hazards KT2000 Apr 2012 #7
If they were vomiting after a brief exposure drm604 Apr 2012 #9
Come on, this is Fox News. TheWraith Apr 2012 #11
Something like that does seem a lot more likely, yeah Posteritatis Apr 2012 #14
Not necessarily. enlightenment Apr 2012 #32
Yeah, but for it to be immediate it needs to be a huge, dramatic dose Posteritatis Apr 2012 #40
the article doesn't say how long got root Apr 2012 #42
I was going by the PM saying it happened when they got close to it Posteritatis Apr 2012 #44
Faux News is suddenly warning of nuke waste dangers? I doubt it wordpix Apr 2012 #31
No freaking kidding. I hope it's psychosomatic, or some other less potentially fatal toxic exposure enki23 Apr 2012 #12
Unbelievable! Liber-AL Apr 2012 #10
Pacific Highway site 'clear' of radioactive waste, Roads Minister Duncan Gay says FarCenter Apr 2012 #13
WHAT? "Sick with worry." wordpix Apr 2012 #33
It is either psychosomatic or possibly ordinary chemical waste FarCenter Apr 2012 #43
But nuclear waste is NATURAL Taverner Apr 2012 #15
Post removed Post removed Apr 2012 #19
"You people" is unfortunate language.. Fumesucker Apr 2012 #22
And THAT had/has absolutely nothing to do with civilian nuclear power. TheMadMonk Apr 2012 #24
I guess you missed the part about humans not being particularly rational? Fumesucker Apr 2012 #26
This message was self-deleted by its author guyton Apr 2012 #28
It's not going to hurt anything sitting on the Moon.. Fumesucker Apr 2012 #36
You sure? csziggy Apr 2012 #39
why are you kowtowing to Mr. Pro-nuke-with=the-bad-language? wordpix Apr 2012 #30
The poster turned out to be right in this case for one thing.. Fumesucker Apr 2012 #34
where do you get THAT info? Just b/c the gov't of Aust. says it? wordpix Apr 2012 #35
Radiation intense enough to cause nausea that quickly would have killed quickly too.. Fumesucker Apr 2012 #37
To sicken someone with radiation that immediately, you'd need a huge dose Posteritatis Apr 2012 #41
Post removed Post removed Apr 2012 #29
You know so much about me do you? TheMadMonk Apr 2012 #38
Skylab! Wait, it's Fox News. Clinton's dick! n/t Bossy Monkey Apr 2012 #20
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Vomiting road workers hos...»Reply #1