It is astonishing that the smartest, and most technologically advanced nations say this is the best method, when in fact this is the worst method, the best method is actually a molten salt breeder reactor, as this type of reactor can use spent fuel as its fuel, the only reason that I know of why nations refuse to acknowledge this is because it is orders of magnitude harder to make weapons grade materials with a molten salt breeder reactor. The funniest thing about all this is that this type of reactor was discovered and built in the USA back in the 50's, yet no one uses it. If we just install molten salt reactors in conjunction with the current light water reactors we will prevent high level waste from even existing, and at the same time get power from that very process that reduces radioactivity. And if you think current reactors are safe, molten salt reactors are orders of magnitude safer then current light water reactors, just a few of its benefits over LWR are they operate at atmospheric pressure, thus no chance of an explosion no matter what the reactor is put through, it will at most have a little overflow due to thermal expansion of the salt, which is easily handled with overflow tank. Another benefit is the fact that when built correctly it has natural safety features that are not prone to failure or neglect as LWR safety measures. But enough of that, if you really want a full breakdown, check this video out: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/fLd1m5qisbS6ook.html

C02 is plant food, the grate oxygenation even required grate amount of C02. If there is only .05% C02 in the air atm how much O2 can plant produces from that for us to breath. Think about that, and this is not my opinion.

soon, China's LFTR is online it can burn these waste as fuel.

But it makes Greta sad

Dealing with nuclear waste is a huge positive step towards promoting benefits of the nuclear fission energy. Nuclear energy is zero carbon and its benefits completely outcome its negatives if its done right. Nuclear needs to be considered as viable source of energy besides renewables like solar and wind. Fission served us very well and it will continue to do so at least till the time fusion will hopefully replace one day in the future.

Great perspective, from what I understand they need to find a way to make reusing the spent uranium cheaper than using virgin uranium, then hopefully recycling the waste will be much more common

I think with in 10 years the trash stream of major cities will be sorted by AI robot arms and most of it recycled. We have the ability now.

@chrisk8208 A resource storage facility ? You sound like a politician! Yes right.Glad you believe that. But i I think that future generations might not agree with you. But by then , you and I will be dead. Leaving this garbage to future generations.

Spot on. Why even build 3rd generation tech designed in the late 1950s. Unless it's for plutonium production that is.

This is something I've long wondered. Why can't this energy be harnessed?

I'm completely guessing here, but I assume it's still possible to use it for energy generation. However, is likely not *profitable* compared to replacing it with new fuel rods, so it's a better business decision to retire spent fuel rods

what are you trying to say, current way of keeping radioactive waste does not have chance to leak. also they choose where it burried so there no ground water around it. the main radioactive component of those high nuclear waste is Strontium-90 and cesium-137 that has like a half life of 30 year, stuff like isotope plutonium is as per usualy extracted from the waste before burial because of its many usage.

No, unfortunately Fission and Fusion are only energy positive when going *towards* iron, imagine pushing something down a hill, your going to have to put more energy in if your trying to go uphill. Edit: This is also why stars can't survive with elements heavier than iron, they can't fuse it anymore so gravity takes over

@@notgad3130 okay 🙂

The death rates of nuclear are among the lowest of all energy sources, including all these terrible incidents. I had more of a discussion of this in the video draft, but it took away from the point of the video and there are many other good videos discussing it in detail!

TMI is actually a good example of how safe nuclear power is. The core partially melted and yet no radiation escaped. Chernobyl and Fukushima were certainly bad but one was caused by human a combination of human arrogance and stupidity and the other a tsunami which killed a huge number of people. Windscale wasn't built to generate power, it was operated to produce plutonium for the UK's nuclear weapons. Even so considering the reactor caught fire it's more a testament to how safe how safe even a poorly designed facility can be. What I don't like is the whole idea of burying high level waste deep underground. It still contains a considerable amount of energy which could be put to good use in the right type of reactors.