The Way Nuclear Waste Can Be Used Has Shocked the World

[@screddot7074]

I live in Barnwell, SC. Projected to be the fastest growing town in the USA until Jimmy Carter denied a license for the reprocessing plant being built. They now use it as a training area for terrorist attacks on other nuclear facilities. We are also home to the Savannah River Site. A government owned facility of 300 square miles that has been in operation since the early 1950's. We can overcome any technical problem except politics.

[@spankmynubs]

From Oregon and I’ve been to that facility! We have a drone event there every year!

[@jonanderson7355]

It's extremely expensive, and not yet worth it.

[@transistor754]

What is the cancer rate in your town?

[@longshadowfarmstead1102]

Amen to that!

[@TheRealestHi]

Democrats always stand in the way of American greatness. Their globalist masters need America poor and weak.

[@danekappler2422]

As a Nuclear Health Physicist, I was annoyed by your previous video, as it was deceptive in its lack of complete information. You have thoroughly redeemed yourself. This was good.

[@safffff1000]

Originally in the 50's the USA nuclear plants were supposed to recycle the waste, but the powers to be refuse to do it. More profit that way. And it could be made into bombs

[@occashares]

But is it shocking?

[@richardmccann4815]

NHP? THATS SUCH A COMPLETE CONTRADICTION!

[@alanhat5252]

​@@richardmccann4815where do you think X-rays come from?

[@harrywalker5836]

there is no health in nuclear.. sodium reactors were banned by the military in 1954. in favour of nuke.. funny..eh..

[@BlackJacx1]

Thanks for the video! 23:00 I've seen trench 94 in person with my father who worked at "The Evaporator," the Hanford Waste Treatment Plant, and the trench is HUGE. The plan is to close the trench with the Sub cross sections serving as the containment vessels for the nuclear reactor, fuel and all, because it's considered a higher level of containment that is currently required and is estimated to be secure in the dry climate of eastern Washington indefinitely. "The Evaporator" is an interesting bit of technology, It's the Hanford Waste Treatment Plant, and my dad described it as being a giant tea kettle that "you never want to boil" when he let me run the simulator they have on site. It takes low density liquid nuclear waste and condenses it for long term storage, by removing the water into a huge water vessel that is then filtered and cleaned, with the waste product being moved back into a secure holding tank, while the cleaned and tested water(almost literally only H20) is released back into the Columbia River(where huge sturgeon like to swim in the relatively warm water, since the Columbia is quite cold). At the same site they have a mothballed Plutonium refinement plant adjacent to the Evaporator, a lake that my father said actually glows green at night from the glass ingots that contain old fissile material from a much earlier containment programs. It was super interesting to visit the site in person, and see the work that is done to contain and reclaim waste from the nuclear escalation era.

[@SukhdevSingh-ge5rj]

Great 😃😃👍👍 video 😊😊 from Malaysia 🇲🇾🇲🇾🇲🇾🇲🇾🇲🇾

[@MaxB6851]

The prob;em with Uranium fueled nuclear reactors is, they typically operate at several atmospheric pressures and need a very strong Ferro Concrete containment vessell and several Chimneys to vent steam. Bui;lding them typically cost ssabout $500,000 which takes about ten years . Onl;y 3% of the energy is extracted from fuel rods before they crack and have to be replaced., reprocessing the uranium is not an option as it is cheaper to manufacture new rods from yellow cake, therefor cracked rods have to be stored in a high security atomic waste dump and be guarded at great expense for 100,000 years, this is to prevent terrorists gaining acces to atomic waste and making dirty bombs which will render out cities unlivable. Whereas if Thorium is used as a fuel no Ferro Concrete pressure vessel is necessary as they operate at normal air pressure, no chimneys are requiresd as Liquid Salt is the coolant and because they do not need to be located near water they can be located anywhere such as a desert or on Mars. In using Thorium as a fuel typically 97% of the energy can be extracted before the fuel ihas to be replaced.

[@seannabaine5478]

Its so stupid that we are storing all the waste, instead of using it. It is all still completely useful material.

[@BlackJacx1]

it could also be a useful resource if for some reason it becomes unavailable due to shortages or long term conflicts...

[@jmatos316]

It’s always stupid… until someone does the “unthinkable” and año the vast swath of earth become uninhabitable for a century.

[@wakeUPdummies]

Tell Haliburton

[@joshuasmith-holley72]

did you watch the whole video?

[@jmatos316]

@ yeah actually… that’s why I was commenting on what seannabaine said.

[@ricktotty2283]

The real reason they don’t use fast reactors is it cuts into the profits of making fuel rods. You need to watch Sabin Hossenfelder video on how much nuclear waste there really is. She clears up how much and how it’s stored. There are new nuclear waste sites under construction and she tells you where they are. The sites not only store but recycle nuclear waste.

[@joeysplats3209]

But don't build one on the shore next to a major fault line.

[@ben148ify]

Yes indeed. the American public has subjected to a vastly exaggerated propaganda regarding nuclear power.

[@alanhat5252]

​@@ben148ifythere's been so much propaganda back & forth for the last 80 years you need to be a scientist like Sabine to sort through the mess & get to the truth 😢

[@district5198]

100% it’s all about profits. Could not agree with you more.

[@timsherry-s6q]

That broad is wacko.

[@AngelCook-s8u]

Love these videos this is why I keep watching your channel because I’m fully invested in going to school under my disability to study nuclear engineering

[@RuslanKovtun]

Russia is building full cycle facility that works on fast neutrons. It can burn minor actinides and use it as reactor fuel. This means all nuclear waste is a fuel for this plant.

[@heapofrocks]

What they don’t tell you is how many workers die, get seriously ill or have long term effects that affect genetics and generations to come. 😅

[@heapofrocks]

We care about our people more than them and don’t want to work with question marks like they do

[@TheDoomsdayzoner]

And surprisingly the casualties are low. Like all time low.

[@CarlosOddone-z6k]

Reprocessing nuclear waste is v costly and " creates " more n waste, reason few countries do it .

[@supernova743]

@CarlosOddone-z6k it's more about how cheap it is to make new as compared to used. Recycling is more as expensive than new if you have access to cheap uraium. Places like japan recycle because they dont' have their own sources of uranium so it must all be imported. The US doesn't recycle because they're concerned about byproducts being used for nuclear weapon development.

[@lesliefish4753]

This is a great argument for developing Thorium nuclear plants.

[@matildamarmaduke1096]

Sure is

[@rtqii]

I will remind you that India is rich in Thorium and have spent over $100 billion equivalent and has no reactor working. This is an expensive idea and it is not completely thought out yet.

[@peteseed5383]

China has already developed and been using a thorium plant for a while now.

[@philly2ks]

Ideally, there would be a progression of reactors that could taper off of full power while maximizing the power source. Even something compared to putting one battery into a remote with the other one dead. Idk, but seemingly a set of reactors that size down so they're not required to put out max power to be efficient. What do you think?

[@peteseed5383]

@philly2ks gas, hydro , pumped hydro as spickers for peak demand, and to a lesser extent, molten salt would do a better job at less than a tenth the price with a much larger safety margin .

[@gregkelmis2435]

I don’t know if you’re gonna get to it, but the French have spent fuel rod reactors instead of running for five years you feel them up and they were on for about 40 years.

[@pastorjerrykliner3162]

You know, back in the day, the old "Triple Expansion" steam engines used the "spent" steam pressure... The first set of cylinders were the smallest, and used "high pressure" steam right out of the boiler. The second set was a middle sized set of pistons, but then the cooling steam was sent to a third set of "large" pistons that were "low pressure" before the steam was recondensed and sent back to the boiler. My point is this: Spent fuel still is hot (thermally hot). It needs to be kept in a "cooling pool", but that decay heat is largely wasted. But what if we found ways to harness that heat, which right now is just wasted? Kind of like how the old "triple expansion" steam engines continued to use the "low pressure" steam that was almost spent. Yeah, you're not getting the same power that spins the high-pressure turbines, but there's so much decay heat that is just wasted...

[@joycemyers8140]

Run steam turbines to generate electricity.

[@debravictoria7452]

Sounds better than getting thermal energy from volcanoes.

[@joycemyers8140]

@@debravictoria7452 the hot water geysers up from the underground lava activity runs the turbines, used in hot water heating systems and returned to the cycle.

[@alanhat5252]

There's enough waste heat for district heating of whole cities but would it be publicly acceptable?

[@thomasmacdiarmid8251]

Around the 16:00 mark, you called reactors that turn waste into fuel 'fast reactors.' In itself, that is inaccurate. The correct term is 'breeder reactor' because it breeds fissile material from non-fissile material. There are essentially two types: slow and fast breeders. A fast breeder produces substantially more fuel than the reactor can use, so the excess has to be shipped off to other reactors. However, most commonly the fuel produced is plutonium, usually high-grade (i.e. concentration) which is relatively easy to turn into a nuclear explosive. (Plutonium can have uncontrolled chain reactions just by putting enough of it together; with uranium-235, you have to compress the nuclei closer than they would normally exist, which requires precisely placed conventional explosives to set it off into a nuclear explosion). Shipping explosive-grade plutonium all over the country was deemed to much of a risk of hijacking, etc. However, slow breeders produce only as much fuel as they use. They generally require some on-site processing it to get rid of pollutants that would interfere with the reactions, but still, not fissile materials leave the reactor site, and in fact, the concentrations are insufficient for a nuclear explosion. There are many proposed designs, at varying levels of detail. The first of anything is generally expensive, but once a safe reliable design is chosen and the first built, the following versions should not be prohibitively expensive.

[@jeeppayton]

So knowledgable, yet full of wishful thinking. There's only a couple solutions to safely storing spent fuel. Do you know that. No! One is to dig down in the earth 18,000ft, the other is rocket launch into sun. Both extremely expensive. Tesla theorized and later experiments confirm, fissile material loses all radioactivity at depths greater than 17,000 ft. in the earth. All other solutions are eventually unsafe. Are you a lib? What's the point of recycling if the national debt has to increase by 2x! Just dispose it! Or, you pay for it if that's what you want. That's real wishful thinking

[@ChristophersMum]

Like he said...'' he's not a scientist...and the system is way complicated ''...give him some slack...at least he has given the difficulty in the process an airing

[@howdarei6761]

china made one not so long ago

[@Shaker626]

Russia does not consider Plutonium hijacking a concern. Their entire breeder programme was fast reactors with very high breeding ratios (> 4:1).

[@thomasmacdiarmid8251]

@@ChristophersMum That's fine. I wasn't slamming him. But clarity is needed. Understanding basic distinctions helps the discussion. It's like discussions of vaccines in which on the one hand some people have taken to reject all vaccines and others call anybody who questions the safety and efficacy of any particular vaccines 'anti-vaxxer'. When we are not clear on the situation, not meaningful discussion can be had.

[@nathanbedford9178]

Might discuss Irradiation plants and how Cobolt 60 is shipped to Australia from a Canadian Reactor and used in irradiation facilities to sterilise packaging and food, herbs and spices etc. Irradiation plants used in other countries too. Yummy.

[@chrislaub845]

Love you videos. Watch them all. No bs great job

[@johnslugger]

*There are many type of BREEDER reactors including LFTR types. Bury it fine but we should be ready to dig it all back up when we develop the TECH to extract the remaining energy.*

[@jeeppayton]

Nikola Tesla theorized all radiation from nuclear material would be nullified if below earth surface 17,500ft. Later experiments have confirmed it as fact. There is a safe solution to disposal but not on the surface of earth or even under the surface until getting to 17,500 foot. Do you know why it has no radiation at that depth?

[@JongJande]

But be prepared that the elite will have you dearly for it as they have always known the value of the nuclear waste !!!! And count on it that they took care it is their property.

[@russellcollins4291]

Thank you for being the first American in some time that I've heard pronounce the word 'nuclear' correctly. 😂

[@George-nc4yc]

Great comment- where the hell did Nookquelure come from? Reelater drives me crazy too, especially when realtors pronounce it that way!

[@kathrynck]

I'm in the US and I don't hear it mispronounced very often. Must be a regional thing.

[@russellcollins4291]

@@kathrynck Interesting. I remember correcting an Austrian friend in high school on it, and he was genuinely appreciative as English was about his third language. I guess some people slip through the cracks. I just notice it more in American media, even movies, that's all.

[@kathrynck]

@@russellcollins4291 To be fair, when people talk fast it can be hard to tell. I DO see it spelled wrong fairly often, maybe I've just tuned my ears to ignore it being pronounced wrong. American media/tv/movies is pretty much unilaterally "lowest common denominator" in content. Half the country doesn't even consume it anymore. On the other hand, half the country does, so I don't mean to paint a picture of a utopia exactly ;) Though it's not necessarily the half which the media would lead one to believe. They at least know enough to flatter their audience. The geography stereotype is true though. 90% could be beat on a geography test by a trained dog.

[@russellcollins4291]

@@kathrynck It's sad, but the anti-intellectualism is real over here, too. I find it interesting how much capitalism has changed the language, too. For instance, Americans generally spell colour without a U, since people had to pay by the letter to advertise in the newspaper. It stuck.

[@OnlyKaerius]

Thorium reactors can also use most of this spent fuel instead. Much less waste products, and most of the waste useful in medical applications.

[@knowahnosenothing4862]

and munitions?

[@NonyaBuzinezz]

​@@knowahnosenothing4862it is not used to make bombs.

[@borshardsd]

Idky but feeling sad after no 2nd cup of coffee clip

[@debravictoria7452]

What happens if there's an EMP and power is out for months? How can they keep things cooled down? I've heard that backup power is available for a few days.

[@alanhat5252]

that's why there isn't nuclear war (yet)

[@bakedpye]

Thank you WATOP

[@adamfrazer5150]

There's never a plan - I grew up thinking the gov't knew what needed doing....we are too trusting.

[@JongJande]

That is indeed by far the biggest problem. The government is not our friend. They are 100 % controlled by the banks and large corporations.

[@vincebaker2754]

Why didn't you cover India's nuclear power plant. You know, the one that will use thorium when it's done being built. The main reason the US doesn't use thorium is because you can't make bombs from the waste. Making bombs are apparently more important than people's safety.

[@corvid1968]

Well screw the u.s!

[@peteseed5383]

China has a operating thorium reactor already in general use. But you are correct most nuclear plants are built for nuclear bomb and medical isotope production.

[@3D_Printing]

5:40 direct into the sea, dump

[@omegaz3393]

@vincebaker2754 Nonsense. The U.S. has been degrading both U.S. & Russian weapons grade uranium for near 30 years to be used in powerplants. Around 80k nuclear weapons eliminated through the Reagan initiated START agreement. Both countries still have enough to produce around 6000 warheads each. This won't need replenished with fresh material for like 20k years. Thus this argument is bull💩. Thorium reactors are like 99% theoretical. Likely Decades away from real world use. China built a small prototype that was supposed to start test operations in 2021. They've not said much since. Issues likely.

[@DavidJohnson-yg8qm]

Well there's another reason, they can run for a very long time. It doesn't make economical sense.

[@covan16]

Love your videos man 💯💯

[@NonyaBuzinezz]

Nuclear energy is so TERRIFYING that hundreds of ships have been nuclear powered for over 80 years with 0 accidents!!!! Bone chilling I know.

[@LocomotiveThought]

Depleted Uranium is my favorite. It has so many different applications due to it being minimally radioactive & incredibly dense.

[@arthurzettel6618]

What do you think the Abram tanks are made out of ? (Depleted Uranium)

[@LocomotiveThought]

@arthurzettel6618 It only fires Depleted Uranium Sabots. It's made out of Cold, Rolled Steel. It has explosive reactive shielding though

[@JongJande]

That seems a good deal to me. You may have the depleted uranium then I will take the spent fuel that has still 99.3 % of its energy in it.

[@LocomotiveThought]

@JongJande Depleted Uranium is the spent fuel.

[@JongJande]

@@LocomotiveThought The criminals call it spent fuel. The reality is that "spent" fuel still contains more than 90 % of the nuclear energy. You have been used by the criminal elite behind the screens.

[@johnlord8337]

Technically, we do. Uranium depleted ammo in tanks and other artillery shells, maybe even with other naval ships. Especially ATACMs multiple ammo barrage missiles.

[@SeedlingNL]

The problem with DU shells is that the uranium dust it creates is very troublesome.. especially when it ends up in a town's water supply, like in Iraq...

[@johnlord8337]

@@SeedlingNL No one said it was healthy, but it is recycling nuclear waste instead of stockpiling it.

[@jesses1589]

@@SeedlingNL Indeed, you can find a documentary on the effects of DU rounds. It causes birth defects similar to what was seen after Chernobyl and around Russian nuclear testing sites. America is at fault too with the testing that was done on Bikini atoll and the natives that lived on islands nearby.

[@man_at_the_end_of_time]

​@@SeedlingNLAs a certain radiochemist said "You want to remember uranium is not only radioactive but also is a heavy metal with a toxicology all its own." And from those in the threads of conversation his name would be recognized.

[@arkrainflood]

@@SeedlingNL a single uranium particle generated from the collision of the DU anti tank rod hitting the armor is thought to eventually cause cancer in 20 years. check out the documentary "Beyond Treason"

[@Italliving]

the moment you showed yourself your anonymity just faded away in multiple ways

[@wilcalint]

There was a commercial nongovernmental nuclear fuel rod reprocessing faculty here in the United States. Actually quite a big one. And located in a top 10 population USA City. It operated quietly and profitably but ultimately the company decided to shut it all down. The buildings were bulldozed back to dirt. I was an Engineer who worked in that facility. There are nuclear (re)processing plants in the USA that are owned and operated by the US Government.

[@JongJande]

You can count on it that the elite did not like what that private company was doing ..... as there would be many who would follow that idea. The elite wanted all the hardly used fuel for themselves when they would be in total power.

[@miloszkraszewski3533]

Thank you for the information. As always like earned.

[@fe6646]

What’s the cost of Hanford, in the billion. You have ground water, the Columbia river providing irrigation for million of acres of agricultural products, you have contractors milking taxpayers, you have high school degrees managing Hanford decade of their their offspring and milking taxpayer, undiversified labor practices, corruption masqueraded as incompetence. No, it’s not cheaper to mine it.

[@ShadowWalker-sj9zu]

I love your informative content. And I love coffee.

[@jamesplatt1352]

You deserve that like 😊

[@ledenhimeganidleshitz144]

Molten salt reactors can burn about 98% of the fuel. Also, Thorium Molten Salt reactors can use uranium from repressed fuel as a kick starter for the better neutron economy or be co-fuled with uranium, further using repressed, spent rods

[@richardchiriboga4424]

Super informative video!!! Thank you!!!

[@CB-68-westcreations]

Here's another crazy thing to consider, some of those virtually useless fision products can produce batteries that will run for thousands of years. While I understand the danger of producing and releasing this technology to the open market, it could still be used for power generation, such as remote charge stations. And could also be encased in such a way as to pose zero risk to the surrounding environment. And since it's technically a spent product, it can't be used to make anything illegal or too dangerous if it's turned into a solid core battery. The only reason we're not using these things is because companies want to continue selling us their outdated products and too many people are paranoid due to all the propaganda they have been fed.

[@antonvesely6606]

A) REPROCESSING Reprocess spent fuel with fast breeder reactors, as France has been doing for decades. B) THREAT SECURITY Store spent or unspent fissile material with military three-level fenced zones. Innermost double-fence zone has guards with dogs within sight of each other. C) WE USE both A) and B) to maximize military nuclear safety. It costs more, but we can't afford anything less for civilian reactors.

[@bmclean2083]

Excellent information! Thanks for another great video 🙏😀

[@heapofrocks]

0:37 it’s because of radioactive decay. Once the decay takes place it can no longer produce radiation level required to power the station and its to risky to handle radioactive byproducts it’s called radiological contamination at that point and it will cause a huge risk of health problems trying to ship it elsewhere and reuse it without sacrificing health. You need to keep exposable radiation levels as low as reasonably achievable to not submit the workers into a cut or chronic radiation. Like I said once the radioactive decay takes place it’s like haveing a batter with a little bit of juice that turns your device on for a second before it powers off again. Radiation doesn’t power the generators radiation turns water into steam that powers the generators. You can’t use dead battery’s to power your gameboy and you can use elector fuel undergone radioactive decay to power cities except this battery becomes “poisonous” to our health and environment. Im gunna watch the whole video and think about adding a comment to my comment

[@heapofrocks]

Also our nuclear waste is monitored by our DOT to make sure it is what it is and goes to where it’s suppose to go so no one steals it for what you stated about foreign countries

[@williamgrimberg2510]

You should check into how much waste and what is done with it after it’s use in a Thorium Molten Salt Reactor.

[@SuperAgentman007]

They gotta keep that fuel cool so it doesn’t overheat, and it takes years for that to happen

[@patrickrussell1888]

Creating climate change issues?

[@barry99705]

@@patrickrussell1888 it's not that much heat.

[@WhiteHillCZ]

As someone who lives 10 kilometers from the largest nuclear power plant on the planet, it is frightening to think of the possibility of an attack from a hacker, or even enemy nation. All we can do is hooe for the best.

[@Qusin111]

When fuel rods in a nuclear reactor are “spent,” or no longer usable, they are removed from the reactor core and replaced with fresh fuel rods. The spent fuel rods are still highly radioactive and continue to generate significant heat for decades.

[@JongJande]

No, they are not radiating heat. The energy is still in the waste ....

[@Kawasaki1-m4l]

What happens to the radioactive cooling water after use?

[@drewkoenen8334]

They dilute it 😂😂😂 pour it into lakes and the they will lie to you about it

[@dcxvi7016]

Turns into bottled drink water.

[@DieselDSM69]

It can be filtered and cleaned but how many of them actually do that is questionable.

[@sammyc3091]

They dump it in the ocean

[@angelreder9064]

In America companies don't recycle, the corporate mindset is disposable for profit, not recycle and reuse. There's not enough profit in recycling according to corporate America.

[@Fstop5.6]

You can’t have this material running around this country freely. Too much opportunity for it to fall into the wrong hands.

[@kev5406]

In Australia we produce Uranium but we do NOT produce nuclear waste as you stated. We used to have a single small reactor which was used mostly for medical isotopes as far as I know, which I believe was decommissioned sometime in the last couple of decades, but we have never had an energy producing reactor or any noteworthy quantity of waste from that single tiny reactor. We are about to get nuclear submarines though so I guess there will be some waste eventually ! Ironic that we get nuclear subs before nuclear power...

[@mitchellheckethorn6003]

Umm, fast reactors are what we use today. They produce helium, plutonium, and nuclear waste. Thorium reactors are the ones that burn through all of the nuclear material. But then there's no Helium or Bombs, see. I could see a world with both kinds of reactors being used for efficiency and radioactive pollution control. Burying it or throwing it in the ocean are both horrible ideas.

[@wmgthilgen]

UNTIL there's a significant profit to be had. It ain't gonna happen.

[@ankitsarkar3158]

I wanna get into astrophysics phd . Can you guys may be suggest some good universities ? Also i have a masters degree in Astrophysics. So just the names of the college/university will help

[@blueicevirus]

i noticed your fidget clay, nice! do you sell your masks?

[@chuckr7871]

I enjoy coffee also 😊

[@UbberMapper]

7 years to cool down...i had no idea...that's and incredible amount of energy!

[@acatnamedtaz2167]

I don't care what you look like, I like the sound of your voice and way you do your videos, that's what I'm here for

[@troyallen8223]

Storing is always temporary as natural erosion will eventually occur and lead to leakage.

[@KPrent82]

Nuclear power is one of the cleanest types of energy that we have and there is no amount of solar panels and wind turbines that can replace it

[@jacksnhts]

Fascinating. I respect the anonymity. Adds to the intrigue. I get to imagine what you look like. I know there is at least a goatee. But I think it’s just the chin.

[@shintsu01]

basicly the same we did in the early times when oil was pumped out, the "whaste" materials like gass and voletile molecules where burned off, good part of the nuke fuel is that there is still a chance to go and recover what us stored today.

[@jhansen2649]

We should all have ev’s so we can use more electricity and nuclear waste! We are so clever!

[@JongJande]

You still need a cheap and powerfull and dureable battery or instead a clean combustable fuel that is clean and can be transported easily. Or even better: a free energy system ...

[@billm3589]

It would seem further use from spillover (no negative connotation here) “benefits” such as the heat generated in the 7 year cool down. For example running shielded water pipes through to create radiated heat for nearby facilities etc

[@Mashtaggreeny]

I must be missing something out of the way this all works. So they make these nuclear rods which give off heat that is then used to super heat water to turn into steam which turns turbines. Which the same as gas or coal power stations correct. Both gas and coal gets used and that leaves almost nothing as waste apart from the fumes given off from burning it. This nuclear waste you say is then kept under water for 6 to 7 years under water that is constantly cooled down as it's extremely hot still and is clearly hot which isn't that the whole point of having it in the first place so he it needs cooling diwn for many years and is still giving off all this heat why is that heat steam being used to generate more electricity. Surely the massive amount of heat from these spent rods and the amount of time needed to cool them down can be used also. Wouldn't it be better to let the heat given off to be harnessed by the circulation of the water that's constantly being heated to stay at a temperature that is useful. These circulation pumps need electricity to operate 24/7 yet the process to contain the waste is just a lesser version of super heating water to power turbines. The handling of waste is still all about the heat given off from it. Wouldn't increasing the water cooling temperature to the point it can still generate boiling water still be able to turn the blades to produce more electricity. Maybe its unstable which would explain why this isn't done. Its same same process to generate heat just one is called usable and then its called spent.

[@jackrowland1652]

Burning coal produces toxic was and tons of it. It also releases lots of Radon.

[@amonpanganaimhlanga3095]

you are so good and at some point please bring back "Better Ask Steve". .

[@joelaichner3025]

On Hogans Heroes , Col. Klink drank what he thought was Fountain of Youth water, or the equivalent , didn’t actually grow hair back

[@thatjeff7550]

[Weakness in security at nuclear plants] I'm surprised you didn't mention the break-in at ORNL by a couple of elderly protesters--a couple of 80 year old nuns if I recall correctly. They just waltzed into the facility, poured either red paint or blood all over the admin building offices, then had to furiously wave at the cameras to get someone's attention that they were there. Needless to say, the security contractor lost their contract over that. How do I know all of this? I live near there.

[@SgtStarSlayer]

7:03 handle radioactive material with no protective gear 😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@asimjabbar8445]

Processing nuclear waste isn't expensive when you get plutonium nuclear warheads in the process. Much if the Nuclear powers utilize this process to increase their stockpile.

[@SeedlingNL]

That's how plutonium is created to begin with.. it doesn't occur in nature beyond trace quantities in uranium deposits, so it's always made in reactors. It's cheaper to go straight from uranium to plutonium, as you produce less fission products, but at the cost of energy production loss.

[@jesses1589]

Humanity already has enough warheads to destroy ourselves several times over.

[@man_at_the_end_of_time]

​@@jesses1589That negates your reason for concern as humanity is already there.

[@patrickrussell1888]

​@@SeedlingNL, makes me feel secure, considering all the sable rattlers in the world who don't seem too stable, including one just elected. 😢.

[@PaulSchauble-ug9ro]

Plutonium from power reactors is usable in bombs. The even weight isotopes like Pu 238 interfere with detonation. The reactors that make Pu for bombs are quite different from power reactors and would be inefficient at generating electricity.

[@RonGetty-io6yc]

Good to know thank you.

[@1982hargon]

Can you do a video on alternative nuclear energy like lftr or msr ( cold reactors, salt reactors )

[@dubsydubs5234]

14:40 what's the random graph referring to?

[@kevyd8428]

I think it was uranium prices over time

[@caledon66]

Hey! We're you in New York a week ago?

[@Etheoma]

That less spent fuel than you would think, 1 cubic meter of nuclear waste is 19.05 tonnes so it's 4199 cubed meters, so a little bit over 4/5 of a football field of nuclear waste if it was 1 meter deep, which sounds like a lot, but that's like 70 years worth of spent fuel.

[@keithjansen2409]

Plutonium can be used to power interplanetary or interstellar space travel as onboard batteries.

[@christinemarshall7777]

First coffee he said and then he drank the fluoridated water in the coffee without even knowing that the nuclear by-product was already in his cup of joe wow I am flabbergasted

[@ianlaidlaw6279]

Simplistic arguments can made for recycling SNF. Once you get into the realities of the process, you lose the simplicity, and realise what the risks of separating Pu and the Actinites really are. Also we (as humans) don’t have a long term passively safe route for storing separated Pu. I used to advocate SNF recycling, I have understood the risks associated with this. Take my advice - the best current policy for Uranic fuels is ‘once through the reactor, through the pools, then into the underground depository , in fuel casks’!!

[@longshadowfarmstead1102]

You didn't mention Thorium. Solves most of the problems with Uranium fuel cycles.

[@AmandaHugnKiss-g4x]

My uncle worked at 3 mile Island, When I was a kid he took me out there and I got to walk the meltdown zone, stand inside the empty, decommissioned cooling tower, They're even bigger than they look,! Gives you vertigo looking up and out from the inside. The things you could do before 9/11...

[@3D_Printing]

Not just "The Bomb" but also Dirty Bombs

[@nati1025]

I was really hoping that you would talk about the traveling wave nuclear reactors or other fourth gen breeder reactors that can use nuclear waste with only a small amount of U 235

[@mikefromspace]

Strontium-90 is a waste but is also a power source for nuclear batteries and IS in use in at least one powerplant. The inventor, Paul Maurice Brown, died racing his car and I'm willing to bet his patent is expired. There is SO MUCH of this waste, we could simply shut down every reactor and just switch to using his batteries that run exclusively off Strongtium90. That said, other isotopes can be used. They're just not as powerful.

[@icesphere1205]

Who was... Galen Winsor a notable figure in the nuclear industry, was known for his work as a safety officer As manager of safety, he swam in a pool cooling high level nuclear waste at a nuclear reactor, and even used spent nuclear fuel to heat his pool

[@JongJande]

Galen Winsor said much more: spent fuel still contains 99.3 % of its nuclear energy ... and is more valuable than gold. Parties behind the screens (the same guys we hear more about these days) took care of the spent fuel ... to keep it for themselves. They pretended that it was unsafe .... and that is had no value. They reckoned that times would come they just would have to dig up their "gold" ......

[@NafrytiNosferatu]

22:00 Uh, yes there is actually, it was Doctor Otto Octavius from Spider-Man 2, he created what I considered to be a comically small micro star that looked nearly identical to our sun from a drop of Tritium, and it had then become self sustaining and starting sucking matter into it, the only way to stop it was to drown it in water and they dumped it into the river. I honestly find it hilarious that even stopped it.

[@JoyceAdkins-q8t]

It would be good if you do a talk on thorium nuclear technology. Thorium is much much safer and less costly. We could have small ones even underground to protect them from storms. Please fill in the blanks, with the tech. Joyce Adkins

[@skryptre]

Do we just cool the rods for years, or do we harvest the heat energy while they cool?

[@ashleycnossen3157]

The more I look at the thumbnail the more questions I have

[@Tawheed_101]

Remembering Dr. APJ abdul Kalaam

[@sopiagotim]

So far, I haven’t had to have any security problems with my solar array!

[@matthew164]

Australia has no nuclear facilities that I'm aware of. There's good debate about that atm here down under

[@Etheoma]

Also it's not taken out of the pools "if possible" it's when possible, because it's done as soon as they isotopes decay enough that it can't cook it's self and release a bunch of radioactive material into the air.

[@howarddugan798]

the amount of heat coming from these plants would melt the area it sits on and if they couldn't put it out, turn it off, then game over man

[@ben148ify]

You didn't mention thorium. Despite apparent vested negative coverage of thorium, China is building a commercial plant now. India is attempting to build a thorium breeder reactor that in theory, could run forever. Kirk Sorenson has done an outstanding job recently of raising awareness of MSTR at Oak Ridge, 50 years ago. The future of nuclear power may be thorium.

[@DiskoBiskits]

Didnt even realise that should be the question but it suddenly seemed so obvious and j was suddenly so interested

[@garreysellars5525]

Why do you show water vapour from the cooling towers as poulition 😮

[@SemperFi-MAGA]

It takes 5 to 7 years for the rods to cool down... WHAT!? How bout some ice over here 😂

[@djangodredd763]

Title never disappoints❤

[@RiggyRonnie]

Nuclear is the way to go so far, especially if we’re gonna be using EVs

[@Cyan2003]

Wait so that means nuclear reactors is just a fancy/overengineered steam engines? I thought they use those uranium/plutonium to create battery cells to power an entire city.

[@MarkYoung-l8f]

Jet produced Q10 power for >40 seconds. Or in English an Output 10 x Input. The 1st Large Reactor is under construction and 6 Tritium Reactors are under Construction for Tritium Fuel. It will be cooled by Cryogenic Helium at 4k. -270'c. The Fuel will be Deuterium Tritium Isotopes to produce a constant Fusion Stream. The Containment shell will operate at 400'c with an internal Fusion Temperature of 10 Millionk. Each Magnet will operate at 16 Tesla. Cryogenic Injectors will be able to cool the reactor with Cryogenically Frozen Helium Gas if needed for rapid shut down.

[@walterulasinksi7031]

There is another means by which fission products can be reused. Since these are radioactive, they can be the base source for nuclear batteries. Similar to the plutonium based batteries used on the Voyager spacecraft. With proper shielding such batteries could last at least as long as the plutonium ones . These have been going for 45 years now. Imagine, a smart phone that never needs recharging.

[@adrianneill5014]

In the UK, we spent billions on a reprocessing facility....

[@gandalfgimlilegolas6663]

The waste produced by nuclear reactors is minimal compared to that generated by petroleum and even so-called “green” energy sources like wind and solar. As for concerns about nuclear weapons, the cat is already out of the bag, and those fears have to be addressed in a different way. If the United States was truly concerned about nuclear weapons, it wouldn’t have detonated two of them in Japan.

[@Etheoma]

because it's currently more expensive to recycle it than dig up new uranium, which is part of the reason why there is so much hype around molten fuelled salt reactors because your fuel is already dissolved in the salt which you have to melt down the fuel rods, devolve them into a solvent then, process them then turn them back into fuel rods. Where as with a molten fuelled salt reactor you just have to process them. And theoretically you can do online reprocessing where you reprocess the fuel in operation, there are multiple benefits to this that reduce the cost of reprocessing, first you can have the reprocessing equipment housed next to the reactor which is already going to be shielded for radiation, also the reprocessing equipment doesn't need to be anywhere near the size of a standalone reprocessing plan because your reprocessing the fuel regularly if not almost constantly rather than after 18 months having to reprocess all that fuel in 1 shot and having to have a special facility that can remove the pellets from the cladding, melt down the pellets, dissolve the pellets in molten salt, reprocess the fuel, extract reprocessed fuel from the molten salt and all this needs to be done in heavily radiation shielded rooms. Then finally turn the fuel back into pellets and clad it, although honestly you would probably send the fuel in the form of yellow cake to a plant that already makes fuel rods, but it's still a cost. Although even if you still want to do reprocess the fuel in a centralized location it still provides you of the benefit of cutting all the steps apart from 3 form the reprocessing sequence transporting it to the reprocessing facility, reprocessing the fuel then transporting it back. Although I think due to how much the fuel salt would add to the bulk of transporting the fuel you would want to do online reprocessing although for proliferation concerns the government might force you to do it in a centralized and heavily controlled place. In which case you probably at least want to be able to remove some of the salt content to make transporting the fuel more economical, also molten fuelled salt reactors have improved safety, can theoretically be built much cheaper due to their relatively low pressure operation like not 300 atmospheres of pressure, more like 6, which is a lot easier to build something that will absolutely contain 6 atmospheres of pressure, no need for a massive dome to contain the expansion of water if it were ever to be breached because the fuel salt is only kept under pressure to stop gaseous fission products bubbling out in the wrong place and getting trapped in the wrong place within the reactor.

[@3D_Printing]

1:39 hundred's of years, half live is thousnds