[Isolus]

Germany is a densely populated country. We already don't know where to put the nuclear waste. No one wants it on his or her doorstep. The cost of storage alone is a nightmare.

The nuclear exit was supported by the population and not decided against them by politicians.

And to your criticism: A lot of politicians in germany are lawyers. Are they allowed do decide for the country? Do they have an idea about nuclear topics?

[ClumsyPilot]

> We already don't know where to put the nuclear waste.

Most of the time people who wrote this argument have no concept what nuclear waste actually looks like.

Have you actually seen what nuclear waste looks like?

It is a solid substance, it doesnt go anywhere. Waste is compact, It fits in a small warehouse. Its in a radiation proof container and doesnt kill anyone who isn't trying to eat it. Of you leave and come back in 100 years thos nuclear waste will be exactly where you left it.

Instead of generating this nuclear waste that we can store, transport, or handle in any way we please.

We have replaced nuclear capacity with coal and gas.

Generating billions of tons of CO2. That cannot be stored. There is more CO2 produced ina year that we could fit in every gas canister himanity has ever produced. Also a gas canister doesnt stay sealed for very long by itself. Every attempt at economic carbon capture has not produced very much so far.

> A lot of politicians in germany are lawyers

Same here, and I think thats precisely the problem - there are few scientists and technical proffeshions in government. Like a huge chunk of human society is not present in decision making.

[Isolus]

> Have you actually seen what nuclear waste looks like?

Yes, it has numerous forms. Most high-level radioactive waste is stored in dry cask storage. Until you destroy the cask and the things in it, it's pretty safe. But if you keep too much at one place it becomes a great target for terrorists. If you put them below the surface you must find conditions which doesn't degrade the cask.

Medium and low-level radioactive (dry) waste is often stored in plastic bags in normal steel barrels. When they rust through, you have a big problem. And steel barrels tend to rust faster than radioactive waste decays. Germany put a lot if these barrels into the former mine Asse and had to get it back at really high cost after saline water entered the storage location. After that there was even more waste to store because you need new barrels and have to store parts of salt from the mine as well. So Germany practically had a nuclear waste storage. It didn't work out so well, so people there are skeptical when someone else says it's not a problem.

And then there are radioactive liquids in storage tanks. The only solution I have heard so far is to dilute them so that they can be dumped into the sea. That may work for small quantities of waste, but if it's done globally, we have a problem.

> Same here, and I think thats precisely the problem - there are few scientists and technical proffeshions in government. Like a huge chunk of human society is not present in decision making.

I just wanted to say that a formal degree doesn't necessarily qualify you more on the subject and I don't like someone saying "you haven't studied this shut up". I judge people by their arguments, not by their title.

But I think more expertise among politicians can never hurt.

[anonporridge]

> We already don't know where to put the nuclear waste. No one wants it on his or her doorstep.

How about with their very friendly neighbors across the Baltic Sea who are about to finish a facility for exactly this purpose? https://www.science.org/content/article/finland-built-tomb-s...

Even ignoring this, pearl clutching about the nuclear waste storage problem without directly contrasting it with the CO2 waste problem is highly problematic. Nuclear waste is a contained, tractable problem even if challenging. We barely even know where to begin with tackling the problem of removing gigatons of CO2 from the high atmosphere.

[o_1]

are you saying because you can't fix one problem you shouldn't approach another? What does removal of atmospheric C02 have to do with storing nuclear waste. I think Germany has even bigger problems with there natural gas policy. Extracting C02 shouldn't be your main concern versus much dangerously low in home temperatures in winter.

[knorker]

Whereas for coal and other fossil burnings we do know where to store it: in our (now less) breathable air.

More people die every year from radiation from coal, excluding accidents, than have died from nuclear (including accidents) since the beginning of time.

[timmg]

How do ya’ll manage to live next door to France? They seem to have it figured out.

[Isolus]

As France shut down a lot of their nuclear power plants due to safety reason (a lot of corrosion) people in Germany are really concerned. It is said that due to the price cap on energy from nuclear power plants there was never enough money for enough maintenance.

And France is still building their nuclear waste dump site not that far from the border. Many also have a problem with this.

[switch007]

Didn’t they have to shut down a load of nuclear this summer because they couldn’t cool it sufficiently?

Can’t see that getting any better climate wise