| > stick it in dry casks and just let it sit there. Well, yes. We have to stick it in something, and then let it sit somewhere. I'm not sure that on the surface, anywhere it can be reached by weather, anywhere close to the ocean, is a good place to let it sit. > They will know better which solution is best for them. Sure. So we shouldn't close off their options. That doesn't mean we don't have a problem now, that we need to solve. [Edit] Actually, I'm not at all sure that "they will know better". It could well be that human interest in fundamental physics fades away completely in the next 5,000 years. That would leave our descendants without the tools to even understand the problem, let alone fix it, or try to exploit it. > This question is mostly orthogonal to the question of whether more waste should be made I don't agree. We have a problem now, of how to deal with the waste (and devastated land) we've already created; we don't have a way of dealing with it. We shouldn't make more waste until the problem is solved. > bludgeon to force the other issue > for rhetorical reasons Hey, I'm taking you seriously, there's no need to suggest bad faith. Your other remarks have been pretty straight-arrow; I'm not sure why you're switching to ad-hominem now. |