Do We Really Want Nuclear Power?

My knowledge of “nuculer” power is ordinary. Nuclear is dangerous; many accidents have occurred in our day. Ask the people who have to live near its waste products: “NIMBY” (“Not in my back yard!”) Transporting it to a site is equally dangerous for everyone living along the way. The advocates (politicians) so easily mention it as an alternative that now is getting prominent attention in the campaigns. Easy to spring to the lips of demegogues who are saying what people want to hear, but beware! BEWARE! ASK THE TOUGH QUESTIONS!

Nuclear waste may have a half-life of 30,000 (give or take) years (depending on the type of waste). That means its killing and/or tissue-damaging effect will remain potent for that long. It piles up in great amounts in different forms that have to be buried in the ground far away from any living beings. Warning signs and barriers must be installed at safe distances. Signs must be maintained in both materials and language that can withstand the ravages of time by both weather and linguistic-symbolic evolution. Maintaining such graveyards of waste and adding territory to its enlarginmg boundaries, along with providing guards over 30,000 yearswhat a waste! Will it be worth that cost? Will the citizens of the future let down their vigil? How much territory will have to be added to the graveyard over 30,000 years

A child falls into an abandoned well-pipe. Nuclear waste dumps are the abandoned well-pipes of the future.

However, there may be a fourth generation of nuclear fuel that burns nearly all of it, leaving little waste. But be warned. Be careful.

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.


  1. Hi there very nice blog!! Man .. Stunning .. Wonderful .. I’ll bookmark your blog and take the feeds also…

  2. There’s clearly rather a lot to learn about this. I believe you made some good points in Options also.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: