As I already said, the dumbest way to permanently dispose of nuclear waste requires orbital elevator (which may require development of carbon nanotubes). The technology should be available within few hundreds of years, if not sooner. "few hundreds" is less than "millions".

I'd recommend to stop using "us" - you're one person.

It's the old issue of "I believe I am right but have no proof and don't want to admit it but will put the onus on you to prove your stance." Unfortunately it does nothing for academic and/or adult discussion when people get so knotted and bogged down in their own dogma.

Who -- other than you -- said anything about orbital elevators or rockets to the moon or such? If you want to set up a straw man to knock down, do so, but at least be intellectually honest enough to admit that you are doing so. I plump for avoiding nuclear waste entirely by not using it.

And thank you for admitting that you have no solution for dealing with nucelar waste other than clicking your heels three times and praying. The authoritarian approach would be to build nukes and then impose on our children the task of coming up with a solution other than storing it for millions of years. IF, of course, an alternative solution exists.

Sing and dance all you want, Sig, but the only person building space elevators around here is you.

There is no current alternative to storage for millions of years. That is a fact. Sig has not shown us one. You have not shown us one. NO ONE has shown us one. Why? Because there is no current alternative. Sig's plan is that "maybe" in the future we "should" be able to come up with a different solution. I submit that such a position is too slender a reed on which to rest a course of action that would have such onerous consequences if the course of action (build it and pray for a future solution) fails.

Sig's solution is like planning for one's retirement by buying lottery tickets. After all, it "could" happen, you know.

It seems that your only goal is to prove (no matter what) that you're "right".
I gave you a fairly realistic solution that will be available within a few centuries, and you decided to dismiss it.
You also failed to tell me about any reasonable replacement for nuclear power, and ignored problems associated with "alternative" power sources listed. The solution you offered is to build utopia, which is completely unrealistic (people tried to build utopias in the past, and it is easier to invent one technology that to change the whole society. Russians tried to build "utopia", and you know what happened). You also forgot that the goal is not to STORE nuclear waste until it decays, but to turn it into something that is not dangerous. You could disperse the fuel, for example, till the remaining will be below dangerous levels.

I conclude that you have chosen to believe that "nuclear power id \"bad\"", and in order to support your point, you will twist all information given to you to make it look like there is no solution. You have also chosen to believe that the only way to handle waste is to store it, and that it will be necessarry to store it for "millions of years". I do not deal with blind faith. Your beliefs are not my problem, so welcome to ignore list. As I said, if you know better power source - make it happen. If you believe in your utopic society (which definitely looks like a pipe dream to me) - build it.

P.S. It looks like in addition to "windows vs linux", religion, "what is the best programming language", I found a new thing that causes flamewars - discussions of nuclear power. Just great. At this rate there will be nothing left to talk about.

First of all, you haven't given us ANY solutions. You stated that we'd be able to recycle nuclear fuel (which breeder reactors do to a certain extent already) and that we could look for "disposal" not "storage" solutions. You never gave any specifics about either, which is to be expected, because those "solutions" do not exist.

Second, you have given us no basis whatsoever as to how you deem these non-existent "solutions" to be "realistic." You've given us no assumptions, no facts, nothing.

Nothing except your apparent agreement that "space elevators" -- which no one else ever mentioned here -- is a bad idea.

Third, you have utterly run away from the consequences of failure of your idea (being, of course, build it and pray that our children can solve the problem.

And you want to say that you're grounded in reality? Not even a nice try.

As for alternative power source, yes, they have problems. Those problems, however, will not cause cancer, nor entail millions of years of storage. As for conservation, fficiency, and population control through educating women, etc, -- already happenning. Look at declining birthrates across the world.

Utopians, and lottery ticket buyers, need not apply.

I posted that on a day that I had huge blind spots. I posted that to the best of my ability in an attempt, seems it was a failure, to show you a little bit of support and say hey your right. I'm not arguing against you. I merely tried to state that Sig has backed himself into a dogmatic corner just, it appears to me anyway, to disagree with you.

Map of radiation in Japan:
http://www.targetmap.com/viewer.aspx?reportId=4870

Would be nice to have one of the western US.

EDIT:
As for higher power mentioned earlier, I'm positive that this is the work of the Dark Lord.

It may not be as fancy, but here you go.
http://www.epa.gov/radiation/index.html

Oh, wait, that is a government site, must be all lies.

Good enough.

EDIT:
If you want more answers, I'm thinking of a word that starts with 'S'

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/03...lown-reactors/

This is one time I agree with Michio Kaku. This is the only thing that would work. No amount of power will help cool the reactors, because the cooling pumps have been taken offline permanently ... you can bring all the power you want, it will not work. The pumps may work mechanically, but have been taken out of commission ... see hint in previous post.

http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/201...cenario-61951/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8Zyw...&feature=share
http://theintelhub.com/2011/08/09/da...oklahoma-city/
http://theintelhub.com/2011/08/18/ra...ngers-exposed/
http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/201...kground-62561/

Impossible eh ?

My sympathies go out to the people of Japan who are being lied to every day about the
consequences of their disaster. Folks on the west coast of the U.S.A are finding radioactive
particles in their car's air filters from Japan. It's a sad shame!!

You know what's even more of a shame ? That they'll never find out the truth behind the incident ... they call it an accident ...