Inside Finland's nuclear dump | BBC News

After two decades of construction, work will soon be completed on the world's first geological tomb for spent nuclear fuel - half a kilometre underground.

Finland opened Europe’s most powerful nuclear reactor last April - it's betting on nuclear to boost energy security and help it reach its climate goals.

#NuclearEnergy #Finland #BBCNews

[daandanx]

Calling it a "dump" gives off a very bad impression of the place to the people only reading headlines

[zapfanzapfan]

Pragmatic and level headed, the Finns. We need more of them.

[Alexandros.Mograine]

My friend works there. He says locals are happy for many high paying jobs it has created.

[BryanKerr]

"Dump" is a pretty misleading name

[velisvideos]

A nice report. I just cannot fathom you still had to get the Greenpeace guy at the end. He did really not contribute anything.

[rikulappi]

Even the Greepeace bloke in the end couldn't elaborate dangerous scenario!

[JohnRMTurner]

Good news story but your "dump" title is a little misleading. This is a well engineering deep geologic repository. Well done Finland!

[sallymoen]

If the storage facility is well-planned and dry, it is as safe as can be made. Salt mines have also been suggested for nuclear waste depositories.
Washington state, US, where I live, has for years been a recipient of our nation's nuclear waste, at Hanford, which has deep bedrock in a dry desert area. The area was a part of the Manhatten Project manufacturing nuclear bombs in WW2 (along with 2 other locations), and later developing nuclear technology for energy production, etc.
The by-products were stored there with technology available, which lead to leaking into accompanying soil. There has been years-long cleanup of that mess, with similar burial of waste into tubes drilled into rock, then covered with concrete.
The biggest problem is that there is limited places for such waste. Safety is a consideration: has to be an earthquake-safe, dry place, maintained for hundreds of years.
Its not just spent rods from nuclear power plants that is the waste, its also all that radiation and nuclear medical waste from healthcare. Think about it, where do you put the chemotherapy treatment waste after its used for a patient? You cannot burn it, you would release radiation into the air, causing pollution and possibly cancer to those people breathing it. You gotta bury it. So facilities like this one in Finland is so very important. I applaud them for this work.

[Alexandros.Mograine]

We benefit from living in a geologically dead area.

[bobsnabby]

It's not a dump, it is a storage. Holy crap these news agencies language 😂

[THEBIGZED]

Gus Fring would be proud of those tunnels.

[peacecraft]

Really good documentary about this from 2010 called "Into Eternity". Really fascinating thought experiments, like how do they signal to whatever people far in the future that it's dangerous and to stay away.

[radeee]

Posiva has evaluated the worst possible consequences of nuclear waste. In the scenario, a nuclear canister would corrode through in a thousand years instead of the calculated hundred thousand years, and at the same time, the surrounding clay buffer would inexplicably disappear. Additionally, groundwater would flow upwards, and a city would be built on the site. A person who lived from cradle to grave on the most contaminated square meter, eating only food grown there and drinking the most contaminated water, would receive only three times the radiation dose compared to people currently living in Pispala, Tampere (a typical Finnish residential area with slightly higher than normal radiation).

Discussion has arisen regarding the corrosion resistance of the 5-centimeter-thick copper wall of the nuclear waste final disposal canisters due to a study conducted at a Swedish university, which suggests that the canister might last intact for only about a thousand years instead of the planned 100, 000 years. Based on corrosion tests, even a 1.5 cm thick copper wall would be sufficient to provide protection for over 100, 000 years.

A three-kilometer-thick ice layer would cause a pressure of 30 MPa. The combined pressure of the ice, protective clay, and groundwater would be 45 MPa. The containers have been found to withstand three times this pressure.

[fdk]

No it takes about 300 years for the worst parts of the radio active waste to decay. After about 1000 years the waste is pretty much harmless but still radioactive.

[Hnkka]

dump is kinda misleading term for this, i tought its something like they trow all the waste somewhere and forget about it

[bigh]

If we close the fuel cycle (meaning, reuse fuel cause 99% of the energy is still left in the fuel after it's been used), we won't have much waste

[jaker]

It's safe until Godzilla finds it.

[pekkatoikkanen]

Spent fuel contains a mixture of isotopes, some of which have a shorter half life. But you could have a fuel rod as a decorative object in your living room just after a 1000 yrs. No prob unless you eat it. Geologically 1000 years is just a blink of an eye considering changes in old bedrock. 100 000 years is considered safe as radioactivity has decayed to same level as natural uranium ore.

[aleks]

It's not a "nuclear dump" unless you call your petrol stations as "dumps". All the material stored in this facility is capable to be re-used as fuel for nuclear reactors. The tech has been around since the 60s but it has been rather expensive to re-use it until now. Gen 4 reactors are all going to have such reactors. Not to mention dozens of nations utilising such reactors for decades despite the added cost.

[psycele]

Finnish Walter White, no way! Suomi Perkele