"How about storing waste for a period of time longer than recorded human history?"
How about naturally occurring uranium? Isn't it just as unsafe as nuclear waste, it radiates too you know. You just need lot's of it to be dangerous.
Now let's assume that we have 1 sievert natural occurrence of uranium. Then let's assume we have ten times as bad pile of nuclear waste, so it emits 10 sieverts. Now, let's bury that waste in ten different locations, and it's no more dangerous as natural occurrence.. Am I right?
Let's then wind 100 years to the future. Unsurprisingly the natural occurrence radiates somewhat less than it did. And any one of our ten hideouts of radioactive waste radiates less than the natural hideout, because they originally had relatively big percentages of isotopes with half-lives less than 30 years.
If you just put the waste back where you took it in the first place what's the problem? (there are abandoned coal mines and mineral mines too, so there should be enough places).
How about naturally occurring uranium? Isn't it just as unsafe as nuclear waste, it radiates too you know. You just need lot's of it to be dangerous.
Now let's assume that we have 1 sievert natural occurrence of uranium. Then let's assume we have ten times as bad pile of nuclear waste, so it emits 10 sieverts. Now, let's bury that waste in ten different locations, and it's no more dangerous as natural occurrence.. Am I right?
Let's then wind 100 years to the future. Unsurprisingly the natural occurrence radiates somewhat less than it did. And any one of our ten hideouts of radioactive waste radiates less than the natural hideout, because they originally had relatively big percentages of isotopes with half-lives less than 30 years.
If you just put the waste back where you took it in the first place what's the problem? (there are abandoned coal mines and mineral mines too, so there should be enough places).