Finland Might Have Solved Nuclear Power’s Biggest Problem

Alot of engineers and architects will thank you one day for inspiring them.

FUKUSHIMA WAS EARTH QUAKE PROOF AND TSUNAMI PROOF, SO ITS JUST A FALSE FLAG.

I like the long term deep undergeound storage because if we can iron out the kinks of reactors running on waste then we can just go get the waste and use it and use the tunnel for the much shorter double burned waste

imagine future generations find this radioactive "ancient egpytian tomb" and start to explore😂

The background music is extremely annoying.

Hoeveel Finnen kunnen er in😂

BS ! Recycling nuclear waste is needed.

Nuclear power's biggest problem is politics 😢

They should build a thorium reactor and use it to break dowm the spent fuel rods into isotopes wich have uses in cancer treatment and industry that was the original concept but my country decided to make icbms instead

the utube education channel accent 😂😅 "wElLll? ..... I doN't kNoW wHy I mAkE aWkwArd pauses aNd taLK lIKe tV nEwS aNcHoRs"

the cost is tooo much for the whole supply, operation and disposal! and no one will insure it here in the usa and that threat as a target will never be solved. AND we don't need to use the amount of energy we do now! we waste 1/2 of what we produce. look at our cars, our houses, our big buildings, our city design, look at our land use and diet! all of it is poorly designed and useing much more energy than needed. all we need is a tax on all forms of pollution (this money should be used on developing the cleaner and better design (public transportation, human powered transportation, and more) and the renewables, storage and extreme conservation of energy to be happy. we will need more animal and human laborers- and the climate refugees will become a valuable source of labor.

how is this a solved problem? the biggest problem is recycling the used fuel, hiding it better realy solves nothing.

All people who complain about "we just bury it". burying underground is much, much better than the co2 we pump into the air 24/7 with fossil fuel

there is no need to worry about CO2.

Neah, very inefficient, waste of land and soil too, just send it all off to space, better solution!

Those cannisters would get rusted in 200 years or a little more, the clay wont hold it, and the whole underground area wold get polluted, they should have used concrete mixed with quick lime which would increase concrete strength after every 10 years. They should send the material in space towards the sun.

💚

PALESTINE IS PALESTINE JERUSALEM CAPITAL OF PALESTINE SUPORT PALESTINANS

Just sweep it under the carpet!

Imagine someone having a proper dig of the site in a hundred or so years time, they will get a shock

Can’t we send it into space deep space

Nuclear power is NOT clean !!!

All these reactors are dead, just this month usa aquared full control of stars. Hydrogen as fuel witch is clean no waste, hydrogen is everywhere in water. Its same process and power hapened in or star called sun. Basically after 10 years we will see this reactor for bussiness making energy price almost to zero. No need uranium or any waste

We don't pull Uranium out of the ground in huge, glowing, fist-sized chunks. It's more like the size of a grain of sand, embedded in plain rock the size of a cinder block. In other words: our Uranium supply comes out of the ground at a very, very low percent of the surrounding rock. This is why the radioactivity from it is simply part of the natural background radiation and not a radioactive-hotspot topped by a death-zone. So, correctly disposing of the spent fuel is to put it back into the ground the way it came out.

That would be, however, exceedingly expensive. Imagine having to reduce the fuel rods back down to grains, then mixing those grains into concrete at a low enough density that the waste's radioactivity is back down to the background levels. Now take the equipment used to do all of that that itself has become radioactive, and reduce it down to similarly-sized grains. Then you need to put the concrete blocks with the embedded radioactive grains back into the ground, deep enough to be out of the way.

It's prohibitively expensive. But it's the only correct way to deal with the waste.

It’s clean but the USA just put the waste in a hole in the ground and put a dome on it thinking it’s all ok and now it’s leaking into the sea and they are destroying the entire ecosystem

Wouldn't say this is exactly revolutionary. Unlike what Greenpeace would have you believe, radioactive waste isn't dumped into the oceans. The Netherlands has had a dedicated facility like this on a much smaller scale, but doing essentially the same thing. Building the size of a football field, highest radioactive waste goes in the deepest basement, and that building is able to handle pretty much all the waste we'd produce for the next 50 years or so. And since it barely takes any space, it's simple to just build another facility like it. Nuclear waste is a problem that was solved long ago, and there is barely any risk to just storing the stuff until we have a better way of getting rid of it completely. If we ever find a way of recycling it completely, we can just dig it up again. Easy.

What's the big problem with scientifically demonstrating fission energy in public? There ought to be a size of U235 that will generate heat and can be dropped into a cold bucket of water, making it boil. Let's see it. Bet you never will. There's no conduit for any release of fission energy. These are breeder reactors, not energy creating reactors. The sun operates on fusion+hydrino energy, not fission. Fission energy has never been scientifically demonstrated even once in the last 100 years.

The biggest problem of nuclear that nobody talks about.... heat byproduct.
Residual unused heat is dismissed as "by-product". While reactors are very efficient at utilizing the heat they use, they still only use 15% of the total heat production and the rest is discharged as by-product. Approximately 85% of the heat is not utilized. There is so much heat produced that distinct microclimates are seen near reactors. Areas of fog, rain, and even wind can be localized and attributed to a nearby nuclear plant. If we worry that greenhouse gas production will lead to increased heat, then why are we so quick to dismiss ALL THE UNUSED HEAT that reactors generate??

Cam't the wast be used in a sodium unit?

We need to find a way to use the power rather than burying it.

Nuclear power’s biggest problem is fucking morons think it’s dangerous.

"So much more than just burying it."
The solution? Burying it.

If you can believe what you read Canada have already solved the problem with a new kind of nuclear plant that burns off the waste can this be true?

Galen Winsor was already saying 40 years ago that there's no such thing as nuclear waste, just fissionable material that can be passed through a reactor again.

The whole idea of nuclear "waste" is just to get the taxpayer to pay to bury the uranium where the billionaires will have it. They get to say it's worthless rather than have to pay taxes on it. It's all lies. The narrator sounds like a nice guy but he is necessarily a shill or a chump.

this is total bullshit and idiocy. We already know that small portable reactors can be made cheaply in factories and delivered in trucks. Every small town could have one, you could have a drunken slob of a cantonnier taking care of the reactor and he couldn't hurt himself or anybody else. You could pull a couple wires between it and the three or four surrounding it so that it could be shut down when necessary. We could melt down millions of tons of steel used for the electricity distribution network which was only necessary to keep billionaires in charge of a monopoly.

Making a giant reactor is just fucking stupid. Stop believing this crap.

I am sorry but you are burying a good source of energy for the future and closeby generations. We should use these wastes in fast breeders like the Superphenix super generators. They would reduce the nuclear waste by 80%, bring them to a less dangerous format and produce so much energy that we could supply developped countries energy for 100 years.

“Environmentalist” groups blow me away with their ignorance and stupidity, by that I define stupidity as stubbornness. Yes I am biased being a supporter of nuclear but I wouldn’t be laughing as hard if they had done their research. If they researched what they’re fighting against and then composed an actually fact based argument then I’d take them seriously, but no, right now their only education on nuclear power is the simpsons😂

Good but very below 400 feet of reinforced concrete and above that 20 to 30 feet of tungsten carbide addition to SAM sites

Finland is so cool.

Burying it in individual capsule. Adamsometing better not hear this. Train is the better solution for everything

Not a long term option at all.

Revolutionary............................................

Those storage facilities…how well will they handle earthquakes. I see many possible points of failure and inevitably one of those entombments will fail and end up becoming an environmental concern. I was thinking maybe sending it to space but that’s not a very good idea either. Hmmm what’s other ways to deal with spent fuel?

Great video

There has never been a bigger waste of time and treasure.
Fusion, I have it on great authority, is only 20 years away.

Putting the toxic waste and the contaminates in the Earth does not solve any problems

It seems to me if they could take the nuclear waste down in the earth to a safe distance below any water tables they could just turn the waste lose, then it would just melt the earth taking it deeper and deeper .