Why doesnt the USA recycle and reuse its nuclear waste like some other countries are already doing? Their solution is to instead just store it all in underground warehouses. the preferred fuel for nuclear reactors is U235 which is very rare in nature with most uranium being U238. So with the correct uranium isotope hard to find they could recycle the waste and reuse it again the power reactors. It would make nuclear energy safer and less expensive and it solves the question of what to do with nuclear waste. Is there a down side to it or something I'm missing?
>WHY DOESNT AMERICA RECYCLE NUCLEAR WASTE?? We do. We invented depleted uranium shells.
Luis Allen
Its not just you guys. We dont either but we have only a hand full of small reactors mostly for medical isotopes. But yeah China doesnt. Russia doesnt. France does though
Isaiah Powell
First off radioactive waste is a marketing term for spent fuel. It's funny because ash from a coal plant is significantly more radioactive than spent fuel. As for recycling it? Until something changes spent fuel isn't that useful and if it ever becomes useful we have it in storage basically.
Jacob Nguyen
Uranium is not a waste produced by nuclear power
Jacob Turner
Yeah but a nuclear reactor can be also powered by plutonium which is in the "waste" so instead of storing spent fuel just recycle it and reuse it thus over time there us much less waste
Parker Morris
because not all "nuclear waste" is nuclear materials much of it is irradiated equipment such as hazmat suits and tools which are radioactive and need to be handled correctly.
Ryder James
>Depleted uranium was originally stored as an unusable waste product (uranium hexafluoride) in the hope that improved enrichment processes could extract additional quantities of the fissionable U-235 isotope. It's like I'm talking to 60 IQ niggers
Robert Barnes
Depleted uranium was never in a nuclear reactor
Gavin Harris
You are. Most of Jow Forums, hell most people in general, wouldn't understand anything about nuclear power even if you sat down and explained it to them for hours.
Samuel Collins
Spent nuclear fuel contains very large quantities of U-238. The fact that it wasn't _created_ in the reactor doesn't mean it isn't there.
Aiden Watson
This is a thread about nuclear waste you nigger
Aiden Green
both of you are niggers nuclear waste does not contain the useful U235, that's why it's waste..
Sebastian Hughes
Because the industry has been crippled for decades over fearmongering and nobody wants to bring more reactors online or update shit because "muh China Syndrome". I've gotten in arguments with Normies saying we shouldn't even update current reactors with safer tech because "durr just shut them down before they blow!"
David Foster
>significantly more radioactive than spent fuel
What the fuck? Are you saying ash is more radioactive than the shit they store in underground warehouses?
John Wood
likely because the industry exists making money on their existing method, regardless of its efficiency. if someone proposes a better way, they will be ignored by politicians who have been bought.
Camden Adams
From what little I've seen on the topic. The environmentalist types have a massive sperg-out over NPPs because of the perceived danger of a meltdown or leak and get the uninformed masses to reject the construction of new plants. They are one of the cleanest, cheapest, most efficient ways to produce electricity, and people are terrified by them.
The only serious NPP disaster was with a communist built and run plant where anything to save money was done or not done to get the plant running.
Ryder Baker
Does that sunlight shining through the cracks look like UNDERGROUND anything?
Once recycled the waste can be used to once again power a reactor so why not do it?
Robert Morgan
Nuclear engineer here. You want the real answer? Go ask Jimmy Carter while he’s still breathing. The fucking traitor was deathly afraid of nuclear and put in so many anti nuke tech regulations that it’s financially impossible for any company to get into reprocessing. The government won’t touch the subject either. That mother fucker needs to die already and rot in hell for what he did to the industry. Can’t believe he represents my state
Henry Howard
Holy shit! For some reason this hit me as hard as when I first learned about 3d printers.
Cooper Miller
Why don't we just turn depleted U-238 into U-235? All you have to do is remove 3 neurons and throw them away.
Oliver Powell
We do! What do you think is in our food?
John Gonzalez
The only correct answer is Sloppy job mossad
Alexander Robinson
Holy shit that's cool
Oliver Morris
>depleted
Jack Morgan
It's just that if you would reuse the spent fuel by recycling it thus making less waste you have to store why wouldnt you
Carter Fisher
No, but actually yes He's autistic and he can't talk properly, but he's not wrong. A bunch of coal ash is obviously not as radioactive as a spent fuel rod, but the issue is that it DOES contain uranium, thorium and other radioactive isotopes, and coal plants churn out millions of tons of ash, so the total radiation they reales is higher. Nukes only produce a couple tons of highly radioactive material per year, and those are fully contained unlike ash.
Mason Davis
He never recovered from the radiation exposure in 1952.
>WHY DOESNT AMERICA RECYCLE NUCLEAR WASTE?? It's isn't cost effective.
Aaron Foster
It would be easier to convert U-238 into Pu-239.
Tyler Foster
Ok but like how much power could say a fist sized nuclear dimond generate?
Dominic Mitchell
50 pacemakers worth of electricity.
William Robinson
What’s the point? The state of the Earth won’t be relevant when Jesus comes back (which will be very soon).
Jason Jones
forever.
Eli Hill
Correct and since a reactor can also run on plutonium 239 you could use it to power a reactor again
Robert Hall
Actually you should blame the Germans for figuring out that reactor grade fuel can be used to build nuclear weapons. That is why the Carter Admin. imposed all those new rules. See also the 'natural nuclear explosion that occurred in the Republic of South Africa's German Zone for more detail.
It's required to make nuclear bombs so we were actually first to do so
Getting tired of winning yet fellow Americans?
Christian Bell
Only France has the technology
Aaron King
I always ignore Jow Forums threads about topics that I consider myself to be knowledgeable on. I assume there are some nuke anons here are doing the same thing, or lurking with cringe at retards who are armchair experts.
Oliver Ortiz
we need that nuclear waste to dip foster children in to make soldiers to fill the ranks of Space Force
Brandon Ward
>Why wont x do y >knows nothing about y Just caught third person embarrassment from this shit. Sure doesn't help that you're a leaf.
Oliver Hall
Yah, could recycle poo too get the unabsorbed nutrients out and feed the masses. India could become a super power selling to the Chinese they eat everything
Sebastian White
Gen IV tech has shown promise in using already depleted fuel to an even greater extent and producing less waste.
Hudson Bennett
>hardest material known to man >therefore best material to block radiation kek
Ryder Johnson
Ask the ecotards, they're the reason we're behind regarding nuclear technology.
Oliver Gray
This is the first step towards a real iron man suit. This is our miniaturized arc reactor
Jaxson Collins
I'm gonna redpill you fuckers. The REAL reason they store them underground, is in case (((they))) ever decide to launch nukes at us. Think about how much damage that'd do.
Jacob Jones
Lol no, it's a very long lasting lemon battery (in terms of power output).
John James
This. So much Jimmy fucking retard Carter.
Zachary Campbell
Because Americans are pretty uninformed especially about important things like nuclear power. For example there is no such thing as nuclear waste; there are only fuel rods which have reached the limits of their structural integrity. "Nuclear waste" typically consists of 90% unreacted uranium fuel in little ceramic pellets lined up in tubes (fuel rods). If not for the xenon gas trapped in the pellets, which would blow the pellets to pieces as the pressure built up, the rods would stay in the fucking reactor.
Environmentalists won't let us. We can't build newer reactors that can use the waste as fuel and we can't transport the waste anywhere but their current containment facility to be used in other capacities.
Zachary Adams
We are saving it for when Canada gets to cheeky, and then we will fly a squadron of b-52s over canada and drop the barrels at random
Owen James
The NRX cleanup gave him PTSD.
Cooper Campbell
why the fuck is there Armenian text on those barrels? t. Armenian but forgot how to read Armenian
Plant Vogtle in Georgia is getting two new reactors, as we speak.
Ryan Sullivan
Canada actually sends waste to the US.
Jaxon Long
ok makes more sense, thank you Luigi. Had no idea ash contained Uranium, thorium and all that other shit. Interdasting
Carson Jackson
Because ecofags will oppose anything related to nuclear because they're afraid of Hiroshima in their backyard due to lack of adequate education and thinking ability.
This of course means we also have no safe waste disposal except for concrete casks distributed across rural and suburban areas guarded by mall cops, because everybody screeched when we tried to build Yucca mountain for safe storage and later retrieval. Not even fusion is safe, because the ecofags lack the critical IQ necessary to comprehend hydrogen producing only helium as waste in the sun.
It's taken decades and they aren't even finished because contractors refuse to do any work so they can milk the contract in pereptuity. China is the only country which has successfully completed 2 and almost 3 of the same design due to contracting from Westinghouse. They are somehow unable to do the same here.
Aaron Barnes
most americans fell for the oil and coal industries propaganda. the retards actually think a reactor meltdown will vaporize miles of land like some retarded hollywood movie
Parker Gomez
nuclear reactors are exactly the same as bombs bro. Theyre both nuclear!!
Noah Young
>You claim nuclear waste is reusable. >You remark that the US stores it.
So essentially, all you've told us is that the US is storing a re-usable energy source instead of using it immediately.
Can it not be used in the future?
What if they believe future technological advancements will make it more efficient & valuable?
>2060 - "holy shit, scientists discovered a way to create 100x more energy from nuclear waste"
>mfw you have tonnes of the shit stored away underground.
The main reason for this is that metals in an aqueous solution tend to adhere to organ material that is decomposing (AKA dead dinosaurs, plant life, etc.). The metal is attracted to the organic material and slowly replaces the decaying compounds as it fossilizes. This is why many dinosaur skeletons are actually coated in heavy lead paint when seen in a museum: because they are actually radioactive.
Owen Lee
Ecofag here. I love nuclear. It should be way more widespread. No doubt the technology to deal with the waste would've improved significantly if not for the bad rap it has been given in (((Hollywood)) disaster flicks and the like.
Jaxon Howard
no longer contains useful ..... = depleted
fucking mongaloids itt
Jack Butler
This. It's not like it's going anywhere.
Robert Smith
It's our piggy bank you maple cuck. Do you seriously think we aren't saving all that tasty nuclear waste for a time when it will be useful and economically viable to process it?
America will recycle when it needs to. Right now I bet its cheaper to do this. Remember americans only like seeing green, not red.
Easton Bell
Why do you think we keep the B52 flying? You can load 100 55gallon drums of nuclear waste into a B52. Drop that shit in your enemies water supplies, agriculture centers and guess what no more enemies.
