There Are Bad Ideas ( Archived) (11)

did you mean/bad politicians???

To be honest, they are only going to be putting low to intermediate level waste in it, at a depth of 680 metres. That alone is overkill for something of that level.

Bear in mind, the waste to be buried is currently stored above ground level.

Environment minister expected to make final decision within 120 days

Which ones are the other options?

as I hold no quals in nuclear physics I'm kinda unclear as to the wisdom of this decision one way or another.
What I do know is that uranium is radioactive when we mine it. We then deplete it's radioactivity and put it back deep in the earth. Do we not?
The scaremongering of the environmental sector pays no heed to the fact that nuclear power is carbon free or at least neutral and way more efficient than coal or oil as an energy source.
In NZ we have a lot of hydro power, as green as this is it still entails destroying natural ecosystems by flooding valleys when dams are installed.
Progress in technology must surely be rendering our nuclear resource handling safer as time goes by.
Do you have an alternative? Deuterium perhaps? The holy grail of energy physics yet still a radioactive isotope.

low level waste will comprise 80% of the store inventory. This includes used mops rags and buckets. Used protective clothing etc.
As usual, some will try and whip up hysteria!

Before I begin,....your concerns are regarding this particular plan,...or nuclear energy in general?

would you prefer a oil fired station?