1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. NZ.GENERAL

  • Nuclear Waste Storage Facility In =?UTF-8?B?TWFuYXdhdMWr?=

    From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to All on Wed Nov 27 06:03:54 2024
    So this nuclear waste-storage facility was set up on redesignated Defence
    Force land, and went into operation back in May, but is only now coming to light.

    Ostensibly the plan was kept under wraps because of “national security”
    and potential “terrorism” concerns, which is nonsense, since its cover is now blown. More likely it was kept quiet to avoid attracting protests
    against its construction.

    Still, though: the assumption behind all these statements that such
    storage facilities have to remain secure for hundreds of years, or
    thousands of years, or whatever, is that nuclear power technology will
    remain stagnant during that time. The radioactivity that makes this
    material dangerous is also a potential energy source; all we have to do is figure out how to make use of it. So what if that takes a century or two?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Crash@21:1/5 to ldo@nz.invalid on Wed Nov 27 19:46:56 2024
    On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 06:03:54 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

    So this nuclear waste-storage facility was set up on redesignated Defence >Force land, and went into operation back in May, but is only now coming to >light.

    Cite please.

    Ostensibly the plan was kept under wraps because of national security
    and potential terrorism concerns, which is nonsense, since its cover is
    now blown. More likely it was kept quiet to avoid attracting protests
    against its construction.

    Still, though: the assumption behind all these statements that such
    storage facilities have to remain secure for hundreds of years, or
    thousands of years, or whatever, is that nuclear power technology will
    remain stagnant during that time. The radioactivity that makes this
    material dangerous is also a potential energy source; all we have to do is >figure out how to make use of it. So what if that takes a century or two?


    --
    Crash McBash

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From sameold@news.paper@21:1/5 to Crash on Wed Nov 27 22:46:06 2024
    Crash wrote:
    On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 06:03:54 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

    So this nuclear waste-storage facility was set up on redesignated Defence
    Force land, and went into operation back in May, but is only now coming to >> light.

    Cite please.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/secret-radioactive-waste-facility-built-near-palmerston-north/7UUF5NZCLZHJTEKGT5NBH5PPBU/
    (paywalled)

    Ostensibly the plan was kept under wraps because of “national security” >> and potential “terrorism” concerns, which is nonsense, since its cover is
    now blown. More likely it was kept quiet to avoid attracting protests
    against its construction.

    Still, though: the assumption behind all these statements that such
    storage facilities have to remain secure for hundreds of years, or
    thousands of years, or whatever, is that nuclear power technology will
    remain stagnant during that time. The radioactivity that makes this
    material dangerous is also a potential energy source; all we have to do is >> figure out how to make use of it. So what if that takes a century or two?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)