this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2023
246 points (95.6% liked)

Technology

59342 readers
5233 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] qooqie@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Have others been uneconomical?

[–] viking@infosec.pub 7 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Not at all, but long term storage of exhausted nuclear rods still costs an unknown amount of money endless centuries into the future. So you can't really put a number on the final bill.

[–] realitista@lemm.ee 8 points 11 months ago

Some types of reactors can also use those waste products as fuel and in turn make them into other waste products that only last a couple hundred years, so it's not a easy calculation to make unless you know what's deployed in the future.

[–] TheDarkKnight@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Eh we’ll just dump em into the Sun someday if we start running out of space here on earth.

[–] viking@infosec.pub 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

That has been suggested for decades, problem is that if any of the transporters blow up on their way to space, you essentially have a dirty bomb covering half the planet. No bueno.

[–] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 2 points 11 months ago

It was usually old-style (insecure) and expensive, covered with hidden funding, or new tech (somewhat secure) and even more expensive.