Oklo, the Earth's Two-billion-year-old only Known Natural Nuclear Reactor (2018) • Hacker News Board

Re: Oklo, the Earth's Two-billion-year-old only Known Natural Nuclear Reactor (2018)

#121

Post by bobmcnamara » Sun, Jun 22, 2025, 1:19 AM UTC

Manuel_D wrote: post #97

bobmcnamara wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Nuclear power is an incredible technology, but understand that the nuclear industry has done little to earn trust. Just feels like an abusive ex plastered on the porch shouting "it'll be different this time I've changed" and doesn't inspire confidence. > Care to elaborate on what you mean by this? Because even if you include Chernobyl, nuclear power is one of the safest form of energy generation: https://ourworldi…

> I grew up in a place and time where nuclear waste was routinely dumped, records lost, EPA government consultants lied, and people got sick. Nobody was held accountable other than token fines. Can you provide even one example where nuclear waste from power generation - not nuclear weapons production - got people sick in the United States?

The people here primarily got sick because their machining waste wasn't recognized as dangerous, it wasn't appropriately collected, spread through the site, and hury people that didn't even work in those areas.

https://www.ncronline.org/earthbeat/government-workers-were-...

https://www.kansas.com/news/local/article49479255.html

The local uranium mills were primarily weapons related -fuel for breeder reactors.

For the power industry we have to drive to the other side of the state, over to Hematite, where each time a former employee comes down with any rare cancer from a long list, it's assumed to from working at the plant.

What about mining waste causing increased cancer and largely poisoning a river? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Rock_uranium_mill_spi...

"Pre-burnup doesn't count" is exactly what an abusive ex would say.

Re: Oklo, the Earth's Two-billion-year-old only Known Natural Nuclear Reactor (2018)

#122

Post by Manuel_D » Sun, Jun 22, 2025, 6:12 AM UTC

bobmcnamara wrote: post #121

Manuel_D wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I grew up in a place and time where nuclear waste was routinely dumped, records lost, EPA government consultants lied, and people got sick. Nobody was held accountable other than token fines. Can you provide even one example where nuclear waste from power generation - not nuclear weapons production - got people sick in the United States?

The people here primarily got sick because their machining waste wasn't recognized as dangerous, it wasn't appropriately collected, spread through the site, and hury people that didn't even work in those areas. https://www.ncronline.org/earthbeat/government-workers-were-... https://www.kansas.com/news/local/article49479255.html The local uranium mills were primarily weapons related -fuel for breeder reactors. For the…

Yet again, none of the examples you've posted are contamination from nuclear waste from power generation. Pre-burnup radiation exposure is not nuclear waste. This isn't a pedantic distinction, someone getting contaminated while manufacturing fuel rods is a totally different failure mode than what we're discussing about waste buried deep underground.

> What about mining waste causing increased cancer and largely poisoning a river?

What about it? Mining copper and rare earth minerals for magnets is polluting too. Producing aluminum to build transmission lines is also polluting. Mining, in general, is a pretty dirty industry. But surely nobody is suggesting we stop building electric motors or transmission lines? Uranium mining is not an exception in this regard.

You've given 3 examples, none of them are contamination from spent nuclear waste from power generation.

Re: Oklo, the Earth's Two-billion-year-old only Known Natural Nuclear Reactor (2018)

#123

Post by mystified5016 » Sun, Jun 22, 2025, 3:59 PM UTC

legitster wrote: post #25

Richard Rhodes brought this up in an interview. He made it a point for critics who say nuclear waste can't be safely disposed of through burial. Well, we have pretty good natural evidence that nuclear fission products can remain buried and undisturbed for a pretty long time!

It was undisturbed until humans came around and specifically went looking for uranium and dug up the spent reactor fuel.

Which is kind of a problem for future burials because humans exist now and want and know how to find uranium.

The time between humans cracking the atom and the excavation of this nuclear waste is only a few decades. It took less than a hundred years for humans to find this nuclear waste in the ground.

Your argument is not well-founded. Burying nuclear waste for it to be discovered and excavated in less than a century is not nearly long enough.

Re: Oklo, the Earth's Two-billion-year-old only Known Natural Nuclear Reactor (2018)

#124

Post by bobmcnamara » Mon, Jun 23, 2025, 1:16 PM UTC

Manuel_D wrote: post #122

bobmcnamara wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people here primarily got sick because their machining waste wasn't recognized as dangerous, it wasn't appropriately collected, spread through the site, and hury people that didn't even work in those areas. https://www.ncronline.org/earthbeat/government-workers-were-... https://www.kansas.com/news/local/article49479255.html The local uranium mills were primarily weapons related -fuel for breeder reactors. For the…

Yet again, none of the examples you've posted are contamination from nuclear waste from power generation. Pre-burnup radiation exposure is not nuclear waste. This isn't a pedantic distinction, someone getting contaminated while manufacturing fuel rods is a totally different failure mode than what we're discussing about waste buried deep underground. > What about mining waste causing increased cancer and largely poiso…

> none of them are contamination from spent nuclear waste from power generation.

I have no more energy to give people who cannot be precise with their requirements. I get enough of that at work.