[defrost]

When did dang die and who elected you the moderator?

The topic I replied to was nuclear waste (check your very own comment) and it's relevant to nuclear power that dealing with radioactive waste is a persistent issue regardless of whether nuclear power exists or not.

[Lutzb]

The thread was about nuclear power and the accompanying issue with nuclear waste types. You brought up mining for rare earth and naturally occurring radioactive waste in the process.

I don't see how this relates to nuclear power and it's waste issue.

[defrost]

I'm not responsible for your inability to see a connection, FWiW I do have a few decades in global scale geophysics and environmental background radiation maping, but what would I know.

WRT your self annointed command and control of thread comments, have you read:

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html ?

Best read cephalic sans rectum.

[Lutzb]

defrost, I assume you meant that most mining for rare earth also produces LLW. I don't see any other connection to nuclear power/nuclear waste besides that. So I assume your argument is that nuclear waste is not bad (or equally bad), since rare earth mining is also a source of LLW?

> I'm not responsible for your inability to see a connection ...

> WRT your self annointed command and control of thread comments ...

> When did dang die and who elected you the moderator?

> Best read cephalic sans rectum.

Be kind. Don't be snarky, Edit out swipes.

[AnthonyMouse]

Rare earths are used in the production of solar panels and wind turbines and the associated electronics and storage batteries. The point is that if you're concerned about "low-level waste" then you can't propose these things as an alternative since they generate even more of it.