According to the CNA commercials (Canadian Nuclear Association??) nuclear power is safe and environmentally friendly, and for more info go to their website. So I went to their site and read about waste management programs in place and proposed programs for long-term storage. All programs entail underground long-term storage. This got me thinking. Why don't we send nuclear waste into space, towards nowhere, or towards the sun, or some other planet or moon? Why are we considering filling up our underground when we could be rid of the waste forever? This to me would be the only way nuclear power is environmentally safe. I'm sure that I am not the only one to have thought this, any insight would be appreciated, thanks.
2007-02-20 23:24:31 · 3 answers · asked by shaun n 1 in Environment
There is another consideration in addition to the cost and launch safety aspects given above. We currently utilize only a small fraction of the energy in the fuel used in nuclear reactors. Because of the political and safety concerns, the spent fuel is not being re-enriched to tap the remaining energy. Burial of the fuel in long term storage may provide the opportunity for future generations to tap the remaining energy (perhaps in the distant future) after the technical and safety problems (and political concerns) have been resolved.
2007-02-23 11:24:53 · answer #1 · answered by Ray 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the Cost. it's cheaper to dig than send thousands of Rockets into space... Not to mentont h Risks involved with "launching" Radioactive waste
2007-02-21 07:28:44 · answer #2 · answered by mdlbldrmatt135 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What happens when a launch goes wrong?
2007-02-21 07:30:03 · answer #3 · answered by lunchtime_browser 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋