Germany’s hidden leaking nuclear waste dump

[@DWPlanetA]

Have you heard of Asse before? Do you know you of any similar cases from other parts of the world?

[@ВотТыНервный]

i haven't heard. i live near dry nuclear storage facility run by Mining Chemical Combine (MCC) in zheleznogorsk, russia

[@TiborRoussou]

Onkalo was supposed to be the worlds first nuclear repository. Onkalo is meant to contain nuclear waste for 100,000 years.

[@giovannigarbaccio4954]

THIS PROGRAM CREATES FEAR AND HARMS THE IMAGE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY, THE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY IS GRATEFUL DW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@oneshothunter9877]

Project iceworm/Camp Century in Greenland. US Army supposedly left 2000 tonnes of radioactive waste water from the reactor IN the inland ice of Greenland. This waste will pour out into ocean eventually. No plans to even try to clean it up. Probably impossible. Thank you for an interesting documentary.

[@user-ml8dm9fz6l]

herding donkeys?

[@mrkokolore6187]

4:26 Props to the DW Planet A team for showing and mentioning the radiation level or rather the lack thereof as well as the natural nuclear radiation coming from the environment naturally.

[@maxheim3802]

Big problem is that these substances are heavy metals which are highly toxic

[@mrkokolore6187]

@@maxheim3802 Yeah. Like those for which Germany has the largest final storage facility in the world. I'm talking about Herfa-Neurode. But when it is radioactive for some reason finding a final storage facility seems to be impossible.

[@Masterrunescapeer]

Yes? The issue has never been to temporarily store it, it's always been about long-term and the cost associated with it. This shows how issues crop up over time, and you have no guarantee that the country will be able to afford to maintain a nuclear dumping ground in a hundred years. Just look at Germany pre-WW1 economy vs post, same for WW2. Imagine that at the end of one they needed to still figure out how to maintain a nuclear storage facility.

[@ZrJiri]

​@@maxheim3802 The only heavy metal in any meaningful quantities in low/intermediate level waste would be lead used for shielding, and that's no more toxic than all the lead we still have in old drinking water pipes.

[@Artoootube]

Have you seen the pools of contaminated water my dear??? Or you watched only 1 min. of the above material???

[@chincemagnet]

Nuclear waste in steel barrels, plus salt water. That was a big brained idea to use that site.

[@davidallen6434]

It Doesn't Work The Way They Want If They Even Care. Water Only Hides Nuclear Waste Just Like Salt Only Hides The Signals. In Truth They Really Messed Up.

[@Waldemarvonanhalt]

Low- and intermediate-level waste is effectively just trash.

[@krazy.88]

and usualy they pour concrete into barels. this documentary is just another sht show.

[@RochaPartneristDeadFireHD]

you are not gonna find high level waste in steel barrels

[@chincemagnet]

@@RochaPartneristDeadFireHD I forget what they said, filters and some other stuff. Not spent fuel.

[@Paulkjoss]

It seems so un-German to not keep detailed records, let alone not stack things efficiently- whats going on? 😅

[@meerkathero6032]

The nuclear industry wanted something and politicians made it happen, no matter the cost.

[@gulliverthegullible6667]

you need to let go of your stereotypes, that is what is going on.

[@richardjones2811]

Germany is a user, not the boss of it.

[@spamstabber]

Yeah you should probably look up the state of German industry right now, your stereotype is a bit out of date. 😅

[@TyStyckify]

Faustian bargaining.

[@RB-xq7qh]

They literally just dumped it lol. Didnt stack or organize or nothing. Germany is wild

[@elonmuskes4874]

it is qite a commen method for desoposing of low level neuclier waste. this is also the method used in findald for long term disposal. the method ensure that as few people as posible have to come into contact with the material. when the "rooms" are alsost full they can simply fill the rest with concrete and leave it. As explaind in the video salt is an exilent insulator for the radioative materials.

[@sansmoi4168]

The Brits just duped it in the sea

[@mikemhz]

@@sansmoi4168 Not just the Brits. Belgium and France too. The Brits just dumped 3x more than anyone else. While this practice has been prohibited since 1982, it has not resulted in significant contamination

[@sonnigundbelanglos]

@@elonmuskes4874what a joke thinking a about the longterm consequences

[@neverrl3379]

It's no surprise that people try to invent technology to go to Mars :D Be it WW3 or anything else.

[@gabberking]

As always Citizens and Tax payers will pay for the mess not the actual responsible organization.

[@sarahmayer8539]

"but nuclear is soooo cheap!" /s

[@MultidimensionalSentinel]

That's the nuclear industry motto "Privatize the profits, publicize the risk"

[@cherriberri8373]

​@@sarahmayer8539 fossil fuel is not cheap either. You pay for it through your taxes in subsidies, you are just ignorant to it. You also, unlike nuclear, pay for fossil fuels in your health insurance and home insurances as well, as those are more expensive due to the strain fossil fuels puts on our health and the environment.

[@cherriberri8373]

​@@MultidimensionalSentinel if fossil fuels have zero risk, sure. Otherwise you just described most industries motto

[@user-ml8dm9fz6l]

Germany can recycle the nuclear waste [zirconium and uranium] as clean energy and have power for the next 100 years or so.. The US is trying to do it. (Resource: Oklo Inc)

[@Diamonddavej]

Note that low level waste often contains no radioactive materials at all. This is due to very stringent safety standards, that means everything (except people, mostly) within the fence of a nuclear power plant, is, by default, classified as at least low level nuclear waste and cannot be put into municipal waste. This includes e.g. old computers, office chairs, lights, overalls, tools, shoes, floor tiles, even that sheet of paper that didn’t print properly. When we think nuclear power generates a lot of waste, we’re often misled by low level waste, that is often not actually radioactive.

[@eitkoml]

If someone uses the toilet in a nuclear power plant is the waste that they sent down the toilet considered low level nuclear waste?

[@maxfjeld3791]

@@eitkomlyes that is if there was a toilet in a radiological zone (there are really none)

[@lepustimidus7016]

This story is essential in understanding why Germans are so opposed to nuclear power.

[@yarost12]

Muh brown coal yeeeessss I love sniffing s m o g

[@mnd7381]

It's really a mess, but then again with this population, what're you gonna do

[@Alte.Kameraden]

To be honest, they handled it poorly, and it's their own fault. Not Nuclear Power itself. US doesn't have this problem, we took the disposal of nuclear waste more seriously.

[@farariri]

Germans are opposed to nuclear power because the Russians told them to do so. It's all about money baby.

[@jfh667]

@@Alte.Kameraden The permanent US site was kicked down the road to the next administration for decades until it has been flat out abandoned. Now they just store it on site and they will need to watch over it for longer then most US states existed. While about 25% of the country talks about a civil war.

[@zanastumasonis]

without providing radioactivity levels, this could be blown out of proportion, it has been decaying and will continue to do so, depending on the waste, could be not as bad

[@q9260]

Problem is, that water is washing out the radioactive material, they found radioactive stuff in the sump in the lowest level of the mine. Thats why they have to return it.

[@brazensmusings2738]

@@q9260 The thing is they do not discuss the magnitude of contamination. They are just saying its contaminated. Anything even a fraction above normal is technically contaminated. The word nuclear is a free pass to gross exaggeration.

[@alexg9727]

Half a kilometer underground. Will never effect the water table

[@alexg9727]

As if Germans would be so stupid to just dig a cave a few meters deep

[@alexg9727]

the main issue is the water coming down the tunnels from the surface

[@ToeCutter454]

this kind of reminds me of that series "Dark" that was on Netflix, it was a German series and some of the story revolved around illegally dumped/stored radioactive waste in a small town.

[@TheRealSykx]

Yeah this issue has always been a later thing.. well later is eventually upon us

[@foxylovelace2679]

The show Dark makes a lot more sense now. The shady nuclear dealings really are a present issue in the minds of germans.

[@2147B]

All nuclear reactors produce waste, What are other countries methods for "throwing away"

[@joeleonard9965]

Pretty similar. Just look at​ Runit Island@@2147B

[@calcog5716]

​@@2147Bto store waste in big concrete and lead containers on the powerplant site or recycle it

[@KarlKarpfen]

Germany tries very hard to misreport absolutely everything that happens in or around the nuclear industry as a catastrophy of enormous proportions. Asse-2 almost exclusively contains municipal waste that German regulations made so hard to declare legally as what it is, that they just gave up and dumped it into an old mine. There are a few storage sites with different containers which actually contain radioactive substances, but those are known and well-placed there.

[@elsarm178]

I have been working in this field in France, it is actually very possible to recycle nuclear waste, that was my job.

[@zaired]

this is mostly low and medium level waste, it's not that easy to recycle, but at the same time it's not very radioactive, so not very dangerous.... germans are just drama queens when it comes to nuclear

[@MultidimensionalSentinel]

That's not a solution to the problem, only a tiny portion of nuclear waste can be "recycled". It is prohibitively expensive, and the process actually creates more radioactive waste, in forms that are more difficult to manage.

[@MultidimensionalSentinel]

@@mrbad3036 Nuclear fuel repreprocessing has never been a viable option, due to the expense, proliferation risk, and environmental impact. Only a small portion of the waste can be reused, and the process itself is enormously expensive, risky, and creates a lot more radioactive waste, in forms that are more difficult to manage.

[@gregorymalchuk272]

​@@MultidimensionalSentinel Fuel reprocessing certainly isn't more expensive than your ¢57 per kWh electricity prices.

[@gregorymalchuk272]

​@@MultidimensionalSentinel57% of global carbon emissions come from countries that already have nuclear weapons. And power reactors produce reactor grade plutonium which is useless for nuclear weapons.

[@Waldemarvonanhalt]

Ok, so by the look of the containers, which are barrels: Only low- and medium-level waste get stored in barrels instead of concrete casks. Which means that it's effectively almost just regular trash, but underground.

[@Withnail1969]

just mildly contaminated swabs and gloves, that sort of thing. trivial really.

[@nzoomed]

So most certainly not nuclear "fuel" waste like they would like you to believe!

[@Withnail1969]

@@nzoomed No I doubt it. Its not even just nuclear power stations that produce such waste, for example hospitals use radioactive materials for various purposes.

[@criticalevent]

Yes, Asse is a low and medium radioactive waste facility, materials include U-233, U-235 and Pu-239, contaminated arsenic, mercury and lead as well as contaminated biological materials (animals, body parts, fluids). If you are volunteering to have that in your back yard, please send them your address.

[@Psychobellic]

great so if there is an emergency while people are in the van, all oxygen is in the trunk lol

[@Chrispy4957]

😂 i thought the same thing.

[@robertvanderlinden2813]

piling nuclear waste in 1964? In 1964 the us was still researching how it could work, all plants that did exist where located in the us and experimental

[@KarlKarpfen]

The Asse-2's actually radioactive waste parts are from medical devices, research and technical applications, not from nuclear power generation. The nuclear power generation waste came later and was disposed of as "nuclear waste" not because it was actually radioactive to any reasonable extent, but because bureaucracy didn't allow nuclear power plants to dispose off non-radioactive waste the same way everyone else did.

[@Egalitare]

The problem with nuclear waste is most contractors and governments ignore the cost (including security) involved in maintaining and properly containing radioactive waste. I’m not against nuclear power, but any assessment which doesn’t realistically account for spent fuel waste on a 500 year horizon is a generational and environmental failure.

[@the_retag]

500? 500000

[@TheRealSykx]

@@SocialDownclimber nothing is permanent is the lesson to learn from nuclear waste storage problems

[@meerkathero6032]

500 years drastically underestimates the time horizon required to safely store the waste.

[@MTobias]

most governments of course take this into account. The full cost of nuclear power incl. waste disposal is around 5ct/kWh.

[@oljackie35]

More likely its nuclear disposal from before any regulation when u could dump radiocative waste into ocean, lake etc. Know nuclear waste is stored is caskets which could handle missle air strike. Litterly u couldnt get into that without specialized tools (ekhm big kaboomie)

[@williamkreth]

Very important report thank you

[@charlie15627]

Yeah, I knew about the problem but I didn't know the specifics of the situation. I'd just heard about an underground nuclear waste storage site, in Germany, that had numerous problems like water leaking in and poor storage practices. Thank you, for helping me to better understand the problem.

[@albertutrecht9627]

Dumped it in the channel too.

[@Arthur-f1i]

This gives “wir schaffen das” a whole new dimension🤷‍♂️🤣

[@BondJFK]

German engineering 😂

[@cavemann_]

Very insightful, thanks.

[@alerighi]

I think the problem is exaggerated. First, we talk of low and medium radioactive waste, something such as PPE, filters, contaminated materia, that is at best dangerous for 300 years, but really just after a few decades is no longer dangerous. There is no nuclear fuel or high level waste. Second taking that waste out it will be probably more dangerous than leaving it there. Even if the mine collapses, the waste is enclosed in salt. Yes, there is problem with water that can penetrate in the soil: not a big deal, you just capture and clean it, as you would do with any other dump site. Even if water is not pumped out, its effects will be negligible, not something able to produce effects on the population. Or the chambers where the waste is can be filled with concrete (or was it already done?) to mitigate the effects. Taking it out will cost a ton of money, and can be dangerous, either for the workers that will do the job, either for the population that lives nearby that will be exposed to radiation (minimal, but greater than zero). There is really no reason to do so, take out the waste and then? Dump it in another site? Just make that site suitable for keeping the waste in it.

[@WinahhTaylahh]

It's the same water leak issues with the Chernobyl site, that's the main reason for the structure that now covers it, preventing further reactions.

[@literarynick]

This channel is freaking awesome and I sincerely appreciate quality content like this. Keep it comin'!

[@DWPlanetA]

Hey there! Very glad to hear that you like the video! We post videos like these every Friday. If you want to be notified about new content, subscribe to us ✨

[@luddite333]

@@DWPlanetA it really is very rare to find this kind of very informative report about this important subject

[@DWPlanetA]

@@luddite333 Hey there! Thanks, happy to hear! Hope you're already subscribed to us to not miss new content.

[@christodoulosst]

Far better "storing" than the ones dumped in the Mediterranean.

[@commonwombat-h6r]

But how much is it radioactive? What is the real scope of the problem? Ground is radioactive too. Granite constantly leaks small amounts of Radon gas, but nobody proposes to remove all granite buildings

[@eskimo4130]

It's the potential for the mines to collapse and all the waste getting leaked eventually ending up into the water cycle near by. Wouldn't have been an issue if it wasn't dumped below ground

[@elonmuskes4874]

@@eskimo4130 were else should it have been dumped?

[@meerkathero6032]

@@holgernarrog You did not watch the video. 90% of the waste is from nuclear power plants, the records are not complete or falsified, some of the barrels are high toxic and high active waste, no one knows how many, flooding would happen over time and contaminate the ground water of the region, eventually bring the toxic and radioactive wast to the surface again.

[@Sigurdazie]

@@elonmuskes4874Good question… as nearly all Countrys just dump that crap

[@Diamonddavej]

​@@holgernarrogthis explains why the journalist didn't bring a Geiger Counter, the mine is naturally radioactive, and it's radiation level is likely higher than the waste stored there.

[@soggybiscotti8425]

Great fear mongering. Really helps people accept an almost perfectly clean energy source.

[@theblackwithin3457]

i didn't know of this yet, but i am 100% not surprised.

[@EstelonAgarwaen]

The road leading to the mine is part of one of my standard cycling training loops

[@Stellaknot]

Doesn’t transporting the waste somewhere else create a whole new set of risks and problems in addition to those posed already present. Everyone is going to say not in my backyard but it’s already there and moving it somewhere else temporarily til they find another permanent place doesn’t make sense if they are trying to reduce the overall risk. I’m open to other viewpoints I just don’t get their position considering their interest

[@KarlKarpfen]

It does, while all surveys undertaken after the problem arose came to the conclusion, that the waste will be perfectly fine in Asse-2, as long as you backfill the mine and don't try to remove it. Removing it was assessed to be by far the worst course of action to take. ... so of course, the political decision was to remove the waste from the mine.

[@alsternerd]

As someone who did protest against the Endlager and Zwischenlager in Gorleben of fucking course I know abaout that. You can visit greenpeaces first Boat, the Beluga, at Gorleben, too. There's nothing nuclear down in Gorleben and yet that mine will not be used to source salt for human consumption.

[@TE822]

Our predecessors really did not give a fuck about the future.

[@doodskie999]

My problem is the future's problem mindset

[@csibesz07]

Same going on now with CO2 and plastics.

[@Waldemarvonanhalt]

You're worried about rubber gloves and cotton smocks?

[@abramsstonks6076]

nor do I

[@juh4rtluka230]

nobody does.

[@mrkokolore6187]

Sadly the Asse is often used as an example for nuclear waste treatment when in reality this is no longer the case in Germany where today nuclear waste is one of the if not the most safely handled kind of waste there is.

[@TheHonestPeanut]

Imagine being so thick you still think governments and private energy producers are honest with their safety reports...

[@spacemonk26]

just wait until your economy declines ... slightly... then see how safely they still handle it, and thats not counting the scandals which are probably happening under your nose that you just haven't heard about yet

[@sarahmayer8539]

where is the vast majority of it stored?

[@MultidimensionalSentinel]

LOL, that's not actually true, there are radioactive waste dumps all over the globe that are nothing but glorified holes and piles like this

[@mrkokolore6187]

@@sarahmayer8539 On-site at the nuclear power plants. There is actually a final storage facility for low and intermediate-level nuclear waste under construction in Germany called Schacht Konrad.

[@Jakel79]

well dont dump it near Bornholm like you used to do with your chemical weapons

[@danielpicassomunoz2752]

Why the fork would they just dump them instead of having them neatly stacked?

[@meerkathero6032]

To reduce exposure of the workforce. Dumping is much faster compared to stacking. They knew what they are handling, however tried everything to cover it up. Today's generation and many generations in the future will pay the price for this.

[@DWPlanetA]

Hey Daniel! In the beginning, they have been stacked vertically. To use the space better, at one point it was decided to stack them horizontally. At some point they were dumped with a wheel loader because several could be handled at the same time and less radiation exposure. However, at that point there was no plan of retrieval at any point.

[@oljackie35]

Bcs its 60's and 70's before any regulations when u could dump nuclear waste into lake and sea

[@BondJFK]

​@@DWPlanetATo reduce labour cost , That's the correct answer

[@mwolkove]

​@DWPlanetA there shouldn't BE any radioactive exposure from a sealed cask, so that's complete nonsense on the part of the people mismanaging the disposal.

[@Artoootube]

Thank you for highlighting the problem, I wonder how many of these barrels have already leaked, good luck trying to retrieve them! What a MESS!

[@evilsam4]

Aka another one that didn't watch

[@neon-john]

This is a typically ignorant report from a reporter, the job one takes when she fails at being dog catcher. NO intermediate level waste is put in yellow drums. Neither do they contain office waste as someone mistakenly said in another comment. Intermediate level waste is stored in smaller stainless steel drums. She accidentally showed some of those drums for a few seconds. What is in those drums is typical industrial waste such as used gloves, masking tape, shoe covers, disposable anti-contamination uniforms, wiping rags and similar stuff that came out of an area controlled by a Radiation Work Permit or RWP. When work has to be done in a nuclear facility (not just nuclear power plants) in an area which might contain radioactive materials or radiation sources such as sediment settled out in a low spot of a pipe carrying radioactive water, health-physicists first survey the area, both for ambient radiation and for loose radioactive material that a worker could get on himself if he touched the contaminated surface. Hot spots are marked and then the area is cordoned off with either yellow and magenta rope or tape. An entry portal is established. This is usually just an absorbent mat taped to the floor. To do work in the controlled area, craftsmen first pull an RWP. Then they gather at the portal. Everyone strips down to their underwear (really became enjoyable when women started working in these fields :-). Then each worker dons an anti-contamination suit, commonly referred to as "anti-Cs", dons nitrile gloves and rubber low top boots. Every seam, from where the anti-C zips up in the front to the junction between the sleeves and the gloves, and the junction of uniform legs meeting the rubber boots is taped up with 2" wide masking tape. If there is likely to be radioactive water in the area, the health-physicist may specify another set of anti-Cs and in some cases, a plastic rain suit between the anti-Cs. All suited up, they step over the portal into the controlled zone. They do their work, which may or may not include coming in contact with radioactive materials. They may use wiping rags and if they're fixing something like an electric valve operator, they make have a lot of (probably not contaminated) grease to dispose of. When each worker is ready to leave the controlled area, he steps onto the absorbent pad. He removes all the duct tape, removes any head covering if used, the rubber boots, the gloves and the anti-C uniform. If the anti-C uniform is disposable, it, along with all the other waste goes into a yellow barrel. If the the anti-C is reusable then it goes into a second container which is taken to the rad laundry. At the portal are friskers, Geiger counters equipped with pancake probes which are very sensitive to even the smallest amount of radiation. Each worker checks himself over. There is usually a health-physicist watching things and is ready to help anyone who becomes contaminated. Then we put our street clothes back on and go about our business. The major US LLW disposal site in the US used to be in Barnwell, SC. Politicians got their panties in a wad and passed a law which prevented any yellow drums originating in other states were no longer accepted. Suddenly it got REALLY costly to dispose of those drums. My company was doing work at the Three Mile Island facility (for you younger readers, that's where the so-called "accident" happened in 1979. Knowing that most of the stuff in the yellow drums was not radioactive, they hired us to design and have manufactured a radwaste sorting machine. On this machine was a hopper where fork lift operators dumped the contents of the yellow drums. We designed a serializer, a gadget that took garbage from the hopper and streamed it onto a fairly high speed conveyor belt, one piece at a time. Over the belt was a large liquid scintillation radiation detector, shielded from outside radiation with a coincidence detector. When an occasional piece of radioactive material was detected, an air jet blew it off the conveyor and into another yellow drum. The inert garbage ran off the end of the conveyor into a conventional solid waste hopper which then went to the land fill. Over a fairly long term, it averaged that just about 1 in every 1,000 pieces were slightly contaminated. In other words, we cut TMI's low level "rad waste" production by a factor of 999. Most of the stuff that ended up in the yellow drum was so slightly contaminated that it could have simply been land-filled. But given the hysteria surrounding TMI at that time, the utility took no chances. I don't recall what they did with the very small number of actual radwaste drums produced every month but it ceased to be an issue. If that reporter had talked to a nuclear engineer or a health-physicist (I was both before I retired), she would have been set straight and would not have made such a fool of herself.

[@silvertongue3003]

Do you think there’s any turtles living down there in the water?

[@Imwhisper76ontwitch]

Teenage mutant ninja turtles 😂

[@nate8930]

@@Imwhisper76ontwitch :O

[@robertchanrussell2010]

I wonder if the US would go to such measures, 600ppl working there, all the time, daily monitoring, trying to keep things safe? From what I understand, the US only pays for new infrastructure, not maintenance. Hence what happened in Texas in the winter a few years ago.

[@adrianthoroughgood1191]

That's not really a similar situation. The problem in Texas wasn't lack of maintenance it was that the equipment wasn't designed to handle temperatures that low. It was a rare weather event much colder than their usual winters. The equipment is owned by private companies who can make more profit by producing and selling less electricity than they can by investing enough to keep running in cold weather to produce a little more electricity. The Texas government chose to leave it to the market rather than requiring them to protect against cold weather as is done in the rest of the country. The "maximise profits" goal is not aligned with the "produce reliable power 100% of the time" outcome that people want.

[@robertchanrussell2010]

@@adrianthoroughgood1191 winterization counts as maintenance. This isn’t just a free market problem in Texas. PG&E and wildfires have been linked to a lack of maintenance. Very sad.

[@meerkathero6032]

​@@robertchanrussell2010 No, gas valves and gas expansion stations got frozen in Texas. They had the choice to install valves with insulation and heating (it is a permanent feature, nothing you equip for winter and dismantle in summer) which are more expensive compared to the normal valve. Downside, the normal valve does not work if it gets really cold. Furthermore, the electricity market prices normally are low in winter. Most companies schedule power plant maintenance for the low profit time in January/ February. This free, unregulated market without any rules for minimum available capacity resulted into the load shedding. The wildfires are in deed a result of poor maintenance (we have projects in 3rd world countries which do a better job).

[@BondJFK]

You can see Mutants in few years in Txs​@@robertchanrussell2010

[@allyourcode]

It is totally crazy to me that they literally just dumped the barrels instead of stacking them neatly. You'd think that simply dumping would risk compromising the barrels and causing a leak!

[@Atom15]

what is inside is not a liquid.

[@the_retag]

You cant be sure​@@Atom15

[@the_retag]

The barrela were never meant to contain the waste long term inside tge mine

[@MutheiM_Marz]

It‘s low level….basically a glove or pant and plastic wrap…dude thought it was a coolant water or something?? Or maybe a graphite moderator..

[@KarlKarpfen]

They dumped it because it was according to regulation and the barrels don't contain actually radioactive waste, but waste that was not allowed to be disposed of in any reasonable way by overly precautious regulation. Those barrels aren't really radioactive and even then, it's the mine which is the long-term storage container, not the barrel.

[@stefanStefan-el8ix]

Radioactive waste from Germany was also brought to Eastern Europe...

[@Videomorgue]

And they wonder why more people don't support "safe" nuclear energy. Maybe it has something to do with human behavior and the long-term consequences?

[@J.Green-Rx]

Do you want Godzilla? Cause this is how you get Godzilla.

[@Atom15]

Would change the title since the waste is not leaking and the asse itself is also not leaking.

[@meerkathero6032]

It is leaking!

[@LabGecko]

Have you seen a geological report that the salt mine, with flowing water, will never leak further into the area's water supply? Such a study would surely shine more light on the issue.

[@John-pr6sw]

I guess they did notsee that coming

[@MickJ666]

Steel & salt don't go well together😬 most of those drums will have rusted open by now😬

[@ryn4181]

Totally fixable, yet costs have spiraled because Germany walked away from nuclear energy, the safest and most material-efficient form of energy ever harnessed. Germans are so smart, yet their radiophobia has stifled their science and technology leadership. This failure in public education is the actual tragedy, not a few barrels that are easily moved and re-contained.

[@SylviaRustyFae]

My auditory processin disorder can make certain accents rly hard for me to parse, and this is one of them; so glad for good captionin tho so i dont get too confused I cant even explain what it is rly but like when ya said "former salt mine" at the start, my APD meant i just heard "former mine" and the middle word was just gone until i rewound and listened again even closer (only noticed i didnt catch it tho bcuz youtube sucks and loads the vid and then loads the captions; assumin that no one needs them at the start of a vid ofc 9,9) I cant even pinpt what it is about how ya said former salt mine that made my brain ignore the middle word. I think its just it was said fast enuf that my brain just assumed ya mispoke or smth, as its normal to hear someone start a word wrong and then say the right word immediately. My brain just processes out the word it thinks is superfluous This is hardly the worst case of such tho, your accent is all around quite easy for me to parse; esp moreso when compared to some of the worst examples Heck, in college before i learned how to advocate for myself i got stuck twice in a row with diff Maths teachers who taught calculus and sounded like they were spkin a diff language half the time... And not bcuz of usin maths terms They had very thick eastern european accents and sadly captions dont exist in person; so i was just sat in those classes too confused and i didnt know i cud just drop the class for that reason... Id been raised to believe that if there was ever any problem, it was solely a me problem and i had to overcome it without outside help. So i just tried powerin thru and got a D both times, bringin my GPA low enuf so i cudnt get FAFSA anymore and ruinin any chance i had at higher ed

[@moniquem783]

That sounds rough to deal with. So you know though, I don't have an auditory processing disorder and I couldn't catch former salt mine the first time I heard it and had to rewind it. Even then, if the captions hadn't been there I wouldn't have caught it on the second try. Something about those few words was very difficult.

[@dipendragahamagar2386]

Informative video as always thanks a lot

[@ewzm]

I was studying German in college in 1986 & 1987. I remember reading an article (possibly in Der Spiegel) which contained an interview with the Greens environmental minister. I recall they said that he only shaved on Mondays, so they interviewed him on Monday. Anyway, I recall at the time that this minister described this waste storage area as a “Juwel” (a jewel). I wonder if he still feels that way today.

[@Diamonddavej]

I just realised why the journalist didn't measure the radioactivity using a Geiger Counter, to see how radioactive the waste is. This is an old Potash mine, it is already naturally radioactive. It's, possible the natural radioactivity is higher than the low and intermediate level waste, so it won't show up on a Geiger Counter, you end up detecting the Potash (which contains naturally radioactive potassium-40).

[@hrani]

As a fan of Well There's Your Problem, who did an episode of what can happen when water gets into a salt mine, this looks like a future episode just waiting to happen!

[@XSpImmaLion]

Great piece! The way societies and politics are set now, it's pretty predictable what will happen to this site, and several others spread around the world in many nations that face similar or even worse situations. It'll stay there until it starts leaking, at which point people will be evacuated and left without their homes, they family history, their places of origin. And it'll happen this way because of what this piece has shown - even in modern affluent developed nations, the problem is that you get a string of politicians promising to take care of the problem, but never delivering it because it's too costly, and too controversial to touch once they are in power. It's a system set for failure, as is many other large scale costly problems that several nations face. So you can only let things get to a point when the problem becomes impossible to ignore. And then it's reaction and remediation, rather than prevention. You can find many parallels to this - including the one thing that might exacerbate this very issue - Climate Change. The way out systems of governance, justice, politics and whatnot works right now, in several modern democratic nations, points out clearly to the inevitability of letting things escalate to ultimate consequences so immediate measures are needed. This is particularly true for public infrastructure failure. So, and I'm very sorry to say this for the poor people who will be directly affected by this, the most likely scenario for places like that in most nations, is that they mostly depend on luck for living in those neighborhoods, and even entire cities. At some point in the future, the inevitable will happen - radioactive material will leak on water table and contaminate the environment, a large area around it will be deemed unlivable, and then people will be left to scramble to save themselves. That's if the country is in good government hands, depending on who is elected people might not even get any warnings and just find out what happened when it's already too late. And then this zone could be chosen as a dump site, if well contained, because what else could you do there? This is the whole story of places where radioactive waste, toxic trash, and dangerous stuff ends up in. People encroach on it because they don't know, or because they ignored the warnings, and then generations later others will be paying for it. Problem here is that governments, even when they are competent enough to understand the size of the problem, won't touch the thing with a 10 foot pole because it is bound to make them unpopular one way or another. If they spend the money to do it, this will have an economic impact to the nation as a whole, and people unsympathetic to the problem will complain. If they say they won't do anything, then it's the electorate worried with the problem that will attack them. It's a loss no matter how you see it. So they will knowingly or not, try to ignore it as much as possible. And unfortunately, for all the good that the principle of alternance in power can have in funcional democracies, one of inevitable consequences is exactly the type of short term thinking that stops politicians from looking at problems for the long term. Even if we pick Germany itself, there is a contradictory move right there that shows this. And it is directly related to the topic of this very video. You see, despite this very case serving as food for anti-nuclear power types to say that we cannot safely use nuclear power for energy production, the anti-nuclear movement and how it convinced Germany's government to shut down nuclear power plants operations, turning to Russia gas production instead, is partially behind the whole crisis that the country is facing now. So, premeditated reaction based policies that are fueled by FUD will often end in a worsening situation. Which in turn gives and excuse for government to be slow to take action. Which also only worsens the situation. This whole system is why I'm making the prediction that I did. It can sound a bit alarmist and radical, but there are reasons why I think it's gonna go that way. What the people in that town, the site itself, or people vouching for a rational solution need is kind of a kamikaze politician committed to solving the problem no matter what even if it costs him his career, his life and everything else. In other words - a radical. That is very much unlikely to ever be elected. Because this is a problem that the majority of people in the country can continue living their lives ignoring, turning their backs to, and living their everyday lives not really worried about it - until the worse happens. Just like Climate Change.

[@aravinddnivara803]

Germany hid its nuclear waste in unsafe place and went on to talk going green.

[@beyondfossil]

Not surprising. Human nature is so good at keeping things out of sight and out of mind. It's the "next guy's" problem.

[@hareram-g]

Didn't know about this storage story

[@bobchannell3553]

The last time I heard anything about this in the US, they had decided on a permanent location out west, but the locals got cold feet and were blocking it. If we had begun using our permanent storage site, we'd probably be dealing with something like the situation described in this video.

[@ChimeraX0401]

Still US is really good at storing nuclear waste because of their idea of putting high level nuclear waste inside a metal cask filled with concrete and decontaminating low level nuclear trash....

[@kansascityshuffle8526]

No

[@astronautdolphindetective6908]

2:50 all i could think of was "keep all hands and feet inside the ride"

[@TheHonestPeanut]

*Sabine Hossenfelder has left the chat*

[@dynamogaming4953]

She is seems really abusive girl thank god atleast you are not her fan 😅

[@TheHonestPeanut]

@@dynamogaming4953 she's a world class nut job.

[@MutheiM_Marz]

And Kyle Hill keep being based.

[@TheHonestPeanut]

@@MutheiM_Marz if by based you mean he's also a dishonest hack then yeah he's based AF.

[@neverrl3379]

Too many problems to handle. And all of them come at once.

[@vernepavreal7296]

as a blind person I usually enjoy your videos with their voice over in English this one however is very frustrating as I assume there are subtitles but I don't benefit from these Cheers

[@DWPlanetA]

Thank you for your feedback! This was rather exceptional video for its large proportion of German. Please stay tuned for next week's video again. 🌸

[@the_retag]

Is there possibly an option for automatic subtitle readers?

[@vernepavreal7296]

@@the_retag no I've heard of nothing but it would be a great idea Cheers

[@Praecantetia]

​@@the_retagthere is, there's certain screen readers depending on your operating system that allow you to read out subtitles. Alternatively I think the transcript might be usable enough to feed into a translator.

[@Praecantetia]

​@@vernepavreal7296the unfortunate reality of being blind is that experimental software such as computer vision based ones, the thing needed here, are harder to install and test.

[@hafo821]

leaking water with salt and the metal barrels, horrible disaster..

[@paytonturner1421]

I think there should be a bigger discussion on where to store nuclear waste safely and effectively.

[@DWPlanetA]

Yes! ☢️ Previously we went to explore the world's only high-level nuclear storage in Finland. Watch the video here 👉 kzbin.info/www/bejne/h3eolWiIoNSnfKc

[@MultidimensionalSentinel]

The truth is that there simply is no safe or effective way to store radioactive waste for the timescales that it will remain dangerous. It is incredibly reckless and irresponsible to keep making it

[@vioheubach3112]

@@MultidimensionalSentinel Exactly. It shouldn't be produced at all!

[@MultidimensionalSentinel]

@@vioheubach3112 Yup, continuing to prop up nuclear fission is super irresponsible, and selfish.

[@eskimo4130]

@@MultidimensionalSentinel Nuclear waste today is a mere drop in the ocean compared to the by products from other human consumption. Nuclear is a useful tool, and it'll take us a while to get better at it

[@trickedouttech321]

The first thing you can do is reuse the waste, we have the tech today. In fact, you can reuse it many times making the radioactive part very low in comparison, For example, you can take it from 100k years of active storage down to 1k years.

[@TomMcinerney-g9b]

This explains probably, why A. Merkle ceased the nuclear power program. In U.S. southwest, we also store some nuclear waste in underground salt formations. We had a mistake (hundreds of millions $ +) when a chemical explosion in a storage drum caused a chemical fire (both non-nuclear), this past decade. High level waste must be stored separately, and in different technology to sequester, from low level waste. Britain and France (& Japan) have/had facilities which reprocessed the high level wasted from used fuel (and both experienced significant challenges with the processing, despite good designs). IFF the used fuel (depleted uranium needs storage/reprocessing after only a few % of the uranium has been fissioned, because the byproducts interfere with further fission) is reprocessed, OR is fed into a 'fast' neutron reactor, it can be further fissioned, which (1) yields more power generation from the fuel, and (2) the end products of this further fissioning process have high radioactivity for only ~ 1,000 years. The half life of plutonium is on order of 25,000 years, requiring sequestration for about 1,000,000 years. Very useful research on means of stable sequestration in geologic storage has been done by Alfred Edward "Ted" Ringwood FRS FAA (19 April 1930 - 12 November 1993) [in Australia... invented 'synroc'], and Rodney C. Ewing (in U.S.A. at U. Michigan and Stanford, where now emeritus). I 'think' progress over next 40 years will achieve viable stable storage. In U.S. at Hanford, Wash (site of reactors for plutonium manufacture for WWII bombs), we still have not achieved a good fix. {I had not previously heard of Asse, thank you!}

[@Raygeemusic]

Merkel was the one who authorized this in the first place, before she was chancellor. To shut off the power plants was just because of the elections.

[@jamaljames2578]

Always watching from Georgetown Guyana south America 🇬🇾🇬🇾🇬🇾

[@franciscovessani6720]

They dumped that in a salt mine??? It was better to hire a geologist. Huge mistake!

[@oljackie35]

60's and 70's before any regulations were wild

[@franciscovessani6720]

@@oljackie35 we know salt is a porous, liquid-sucking layer of rock since way earlier

[@KarlKarpfen]

Salt is perfectly suitable for such endeavours. The instability and water ingress of the 3 Asse mines, which actually lead to their discontinued operation in 1964, is the only reason you shouldn't use these three particular salt mines for such endeavours.

[@ghostdevill]

Salt and steel drums with radioactive waist? What were they thinking? Everyone knows that salt corrodes steel! And they still did it!

[@guyintheshado]

So overblown. And they didn’t even see barrels on the tour. A camera with a radiation detector on a long cable can’t be lowered inside? Ridiculous

[@Danger_mouse]

Wet salty water and steel drums containing nuclear waste... What could possibly go wrong? Seriously! 😏

[@samuxan]

Even if it's moved elsewhere the mine won't be clean. I don't see the point, it's probably cheaper and safer in the long run to isolate the mine, invest in making all areas as water proof as possible and all that.

[@Vnifit]

....how exactly do you plan to make the mine magically waterproof? That is not an engineering solution, waterproofing (not water resistance, but proofing) even small electronic devices is incredibly challenging. For a massive radioactive undergroud mine though?

[@the_retag]

Tgey will have to dig and wash out tge contaminated salt

[@colchronic]

This is just mostly low-level waste that is really easy to get rid of

[@desertrose7776]

Naja, wenn man weiß, dass allein aus der Automobilindustrie tagtäglich die umliegenden Gewässer kontaminiert werden... ist der unteriridsche Atommüll nur 1 Tropfen auf dem heißen Stein.

[@Luca-nx5xf]

Interesting video as usual, but could you please add subtitles too :))

[@DWPlanetA]

Thank you for watching! We have English subtitles - you might just need to turn them on. ✨

[@commieTerminator]

Just go renewables... much cheaper, faster to build, no dependency on fuel imports, very low carbon footprint BUT you gotta build a robust grid with cheap energy storage methods (eg: pumped hydro, used EV batteries, sodium batteries, thermal batteries)

[@RadekPilich]

...and conpletely rebuild the generation infrastructure (wind turbines, solar panels...) every 20 years

[@TheRealSykx]

Geothermal or bust

[@commieTerminator]

@@RadekPilich source?

[@RadekPilich]

@@commieTerminator thegreatsimplification

[@commieTerminator]

@@RadekPilich well, many solar panels already come with 25 years warranty for max 20% performance loss. The main materials in solar panels are silicon, glass and aluminium (frame) which are all recyclable. The problem is with the blades of wind turbines made of fibre glass. I did some research and found that many startups and research institutes in Europe are working to either make the fiber glass recyclable or to develop a more sustainable wind blade. For now and future, operating and maintaining fuel fed power plants every single day is not any better in terms of cost or environment

[@KuruGDI]

7:42 Wait a second: The _salt_ mine had to be filled in with _salt_ again to stabalse it?

[@RynaxAlien]

Nuclear energy is very ecofriendly if done correctly. It got bad rap from Chernobyl disaster which was result of vatnik stupidity

[@davidallen6434]

They Already Killed The Earth So How Do You Figure?

[@ProjectPhysX]

9:32 holy f, how could the people in charge have been so incompetent to just dump barrels containing radioactive material into this pit, damaging their seals? It wouldn't be nearly as catastrophic today if they had just properly stacked them. Saved a few Euros back in 1970, now costs billions to fix.

[@KarlKarpfen]

Those barrels don't contain really any noticeable amount of radioactivity and that's known to those who dumped them there. The decision to clear the mine was taken against several surveys and recommendations of what best to do with them, as all those had the same answer: Just leave it and backfill the mine, the waste will be fine there.

[@anikettripathi7991]

Radio activities on waste remains active for thousands years without any external requirements. To make nuclear reactor fully effective we usually keep discarding weak and alive rods that makes it more dangerous. We could always have small reactor for low productivity requirements and use discarded rods completely. It's not possible to provide safety and security for thousands years. Aren't we creating and leaving problems for our own children. Just playing and laughing with children's can't be sufficient we have to keep some resources and leave healthy planet to live.

[@midnooid]

Waste doesn't stay dangerous for thousands of years, especially not low and mid level waste. While yes it will stay radioactive, its not dangerous levels after a few tens to hundred years. Radiation is everywhere, dose is the keyword

[@oljackie35]

Low lvl waste can be recycle, mid and high lvl is stored mostly on site or specialised storage facilities. Its few dozens of times better than coal ash and oil fumes from which millions of people worldwide die from hearth, breathing illneses every year

[@Waldemarvonanhalt]

"Leaking" is a very misleading term.

[@BurritoNikito]

Is it safe to walk in a windy mine full of salt without any respiratory protection? After a few years of such work one can earn the silicosis.

[@laloola]

1st..DW deserve a credit on this news being the world independent news broadcaster 2nd.. We knew there will be an opportunities cost being a nuclear energy country 3rd.. Humans never learn after the chenorbly Russia Nuclear disaster till today 4th.. The human suffering on radioactive side effects will be next in line in the near future 5th.. Respect nature, human will be respected or vice versa 6th.. Last nor least.. Comes 2033, this waste will remain the same coz the clean up is too dangerous and costly for human being. Thank you DW for this great documentary.

[@SisterSunny]

Jesus, how is Germany so laughably bad at nuclear energy?

[@adrianappleyard4005]

Really interesting and well documented.

[@DWPlanetA]

Hey there! Glad you like our video. We post videos like these every Friday. Subscribe to our channel to not miss any ✨

[@g-l8492]

2:13 what I never understand... why do they THROW that stuff around like this? it's so unnecessary, just pile them up orderly and check them every year, and if one leaks, repair the barrel or replace it somehow. Don't just throw that shit down in that pit!?

[@vioheubach3112]

Exactly my thoughts.

[@Vnifit]

They mention this in the video if you watched it. They used to stack them orderly, but due to safety concerns for the truck drivers spending too much time putting them in an orderly fashion, they decided to instead just have them dump them in a pile like that.

[@g-l8492]

ok, now I watched further and... it just makes me angry.

[@vioheubach3112]

@@Vnifit It's still not safe in the long run. It's even more complicated to get the barrels out now.

[@adrianthoroughgood1191]

Using remote controlled robots to stack the barrels so a human can stay at a safe distance would be much better.

[@user-mo5hz9kp6y]

What about putting it into the walls of a fusion reactor and using it as an extra source of neutrons? Also it'd be struck by neutrons itself breaking up the isotopes atomic neuclei into other elements.

[@antonisantoniou5668]

If there is not profit to be made none will take action capitalist world😂😂😂

[@egverlander]

You are delusional if you actually believe the Communist world does better.

[@aether_antares7761]

And nuclear power is still "better" then the "green" options out there.

[@timothytaylor5867]

Trust DWPlanet to not explain the differences in high-level waste, intermediate-level waste and low level waste and the different elements and different isotopes of these elements found within each. Or quantities or concentrations or types of radioisotopes or the chemical toxicity within these wastes or the amounts of water required to dissolve them and carry them through bed rock and groundwater and reach humans to accumulate in doses that would raise concern? We're not even told what chemical state the wastes are within the barrels, are they within cement or vitrified? Jeez, the level of investigative journalism is frustratingly bad... but good enough to instil fear in the less educated, it would appear...

[@ThePlayerOfGames]

Yeah all the DW channels just output propoganda. Planet A just exists to prevent the move to renewables by attracting people who are pro renewable and demoralising then. Main channel DW just exists to reinforce existing anti renewable propoganda to those that are already receptive to it.

[@fyzphilia8689]

This is like the Netflix season ,,ragnarok,, same nuclear dump struggles

[@kingk5013]

We mine the salt then put it back in the mine 😂 humans are jokes

[@nathanlloyd1179]

How you get a dam car down there

[@spacemonk26]

yeah this is why we can't do nuclear, this will ALWAYS happen, especially under a system of capitalism and/or representative democracy, or dictatorship

[@MultidimensionalSentinel]

Yup, it will always be the lowest bidder who gets the contract

[@ggandalff]

That's why we need to spend more money in coal, which is really health...

[@MultidimensionalSentinel]

@@ggandalff That's just a false dichotomy, we have much safer, much cheaper, and much easier to deploy solutions today, that are actually renewable, unlike nuclear fission. In fact all over the globe, that is exactly what is happening.

[@theblackwithin3457]

@@ggandalff no, that's obviously _not_ the alternative that anyone has in mind.

[@ggandalff]

@@theblackwithin3457 so Germany didn't approve bringing coal-fired power plants back online on winter?

[@lukasHenchman]

radiactive waste underground where water could be contaminated, they needed a better solution in the first place, or atleast carefully dumb the barrels, and use metal that can last

[@ab-td7gq]

Nothing again about animal agriculture that is one of the biggest issue worldwide, from climate change to biodiversity loss and pollution.

[@DWPlanetA]

No, not in this video on nuclear waste in Asse, but we do have videos on agriculture and one you might want to see particularly 👇 🐄 "Can we produce beef that doesn't ruin the planet?" kzbin.info/www/bejne/g5vTeKZ9Zsx0qdE

[@ab-td7gq]

@@DWPlanetA Do more. It deserves way more attention then just a video.

[@vioheubach3112]

@@DWPlanetA That you even have to ask that question is absurd. Shows that you don't take the topic seriously.

[@Aweburn82]

And even after things like this nuclear energy is still the most sustainable.

[@AradRostamzad]

And they say nuclear energy is renewable and safe!

[@MultidimensionalSentinel]

Nuclear fission has never been renewable, safe, or cheap, and it never will be

[@ggandalff]

But it is

[@MultidimensionalSentinel]

Nuclear fission is absolutely not safe, or renewable. It is also much, much more expensive.

[@ggandalff]

@@MultidimensionalSentinel it is safe and clean, but yes, it's not renewable. Expensive in comparison to what? Because you have to consider that all energy production is not equal. You cannot just install solar panels and wind farms, you also need baseload energy production. And in those cases, you need either hydro damns, fossil fuels or nuclear. And in that case, if we actually want to reduce the amount of CO2 we produce, fossil fuels are a no go. So it's either damns (which cannot be built anywhere) or nuclear (which still can't be built anywhere, but it's much less restrictive than hydro). Batteries can also be added to the mix, but that would also require the energy production side.

[@MultidimensionalSentinel]

@@ggandalff It is absolutely NOT safe or clean, and compared to literally every other energy technology, it is far more expensive than any other currently in use. Actually, no, you do not need "baseload power", that is just an outdated myth. We are already in the process of redistributing the electrical grid to accommodate renewable energy. We actually do not need nuclear anymore, we have much safer, cheaper, easier to deploy technologies today. That is exactly what people are building too. There are many locations where hydro can be built, or retrofitted Solar is really taking off now, with some of the largest solar farms ever conceived, like the one in China, and wind is coming into it's own as well, with large scale projects moving forward across the globe. Nuclear fission is a failed technology, and will never be financially viable, or a responsible way to generate electricity. It never was.

[@scoobydo-m1v]

Why no criminal charges

[@lindasvensson593]

i knew it, dark tv series is based on real life

[@KarinaMilne]

This is how *not* to do nuclear waste, but we are learning every day