kravietz 🦇 @kravietz@social.privacytools.io

@hushroom @feld

> you have made many assumptions

This one I understand, and I understand your concern. There's plenty of improvement we can add to the current farming practices. There's biochar, permaculture, hydroponics etc.

But there's one thing you can't do: you cannot move people from their lives back to farming from before the Green Revolution, when whole countries were largely agrarian, and people were working 16 h per day, 200 days per year just to feed themselves.

@hushroom @feld

> so you can make fun of people based on a technicality

Sorry, I'm honestly trying but I don't understand what is your argument here?

@hushroom @feld

> unable to plant their fields because of protestors

Just search for "activists destroy gmo" in any search engine. You will find hundreds of such cases worldwide.

And then search "activists attack gmo scientist" and you will not believe your eyes, but they're actually doing it, a lot.

@loweel @guenther

But it's there:

https://www.kpluss.com/en-us/our-business-products/waste-management/underground-disposal/

And now the best: radioactive decay *reduces* the activity of the waste over time. But the arsenic and mercury waste will be just as toxic in 100 years as it will be in 1000 or 10'000.

Now, this is engineering. It's dirty. But we know how to deal with it safely. So either you do engineering, and you solve problems, or you histerically shout about "ban old people from voting" and just stick to the old "safe" crap.

@loweel @guenther

> For “just” 300 years

Do you realize that just as we speak, millions of tons of toxic waste containing mercury, arsenic and cyanide are being taken to underground storage in Herfa-Neurode and Zielitz in Germany? Have you seen any Greenpeace protesting? Have you ever even heard about it?

@loweel @guenther

> 96% of what? Of how much?

Well, I have given you all the information already - you just don't want to see it, you just want to hate :) An average nuclear plant produces 27 tons of raw waste per 1 MW before reprocessing.

> must be kept in some facility

Would you agree that it's easier to safely store 100 tons per year than 130'000'000 tons per year? Because the coal ash doesn't disappear. We just dump it on heaps, like this one:

@loweel @guenther

> Your strategy in discussing is to focus on a single detail every time

Absolutely, because in your every comment you clearly demonstrate a number of misconceptions that you believe in. I don't blame you because Greenpeace spent a lot of effort to spread these misconceptions.

> you are comparing what you have in facts with something you could have

Isn't that what the proponents of 100% renewable are doing all the time, except their strategy has 0% chance to work?

@loweel @guenther

> some 20,000 years-long issue

Spent fuel is 95% recycled. Then what is left will lose 70% of radiotoxicity in just 10 years, 93% in 100 years and so on.

@loweel @guenther

> clean the location

Do you know how many years it takes to close a coal mine or recultivate a coal ash heaps?

The *whole* UK nuclear industry over 60 years left ~2000 m3 of high-nuclear waste.

That's roughly how much ash coal-powered power plant outputs IN A DAY!

And it's also slightly radioactive, it contains mercury, arsenic and other crap.

So yes, tell me about the huge cost of decomissioning :)

@loweel @guenther

> the issue of depleted fuel

What "issue" exactly? 96% of spent fuel is recycled back into MOX fuel. Here's video that shows the process exactly:

https://scitech.video/videos/watch/53184e23-6490-4158-a616-68af6afc0925

What is left? Not much - here's almost all high-level waste from Swiss nuclear power plants over ~50 years of operations. Yes, there's a guy in the middle.

@loweel @guenther

> in 100% safety

Yes, most of the 400 nuclear reactors active today operate at 100% safety. And this is in spite of the fact that media will hype every single broken cable issue if it happens at a nuclear plant, even if totally unrelated to the reactor operations. Love hydro power? A single Banqiao dam failure in 1973 killed 230'000 people, some 80 people killed in Russia 10 years ago, 200 in Brazil... but you never heard about because it's not nuclear.

Want facts? Here:

@loweel @guenther

> then it would work for 20 years

Now, this is what *actually* happened in France - between 1978 and 1988 they reduced their CO2 emissions by 90% and most of the power plants built there are still operational after 30 years.

@loweel @guenther

> would take ~15 years to have them

Actually, new nuclear power plants are built in 4-7 years today. And it took 4 years to build Rampion off-shore wind farm too.

@loweel @guenther

Except an average gas plant outputs 490 gCO2eq/kWh and an average nuclear plant - 12.

(per https://www.electricitymap.org/)

@loweel @guenther

These are the reactors currently operational in Germany and planned to be shut down in 2022. As an example, Brokdorf is generation 3 reactor and in 2005 it produced 12 billions kWh of zero-carbon energy.

@loweel @guenther

So you essentially found a single *prototype* reactor that was connected to the grid once in 80's to represent the currently operational German nuclear power plants providing 7 GW of zero-emissions power?