Interesting video as always. I don't really have anything to say or add but I have to say this: I LOVE that NUCuLAr T-shirt! I'd love to get one of those. Where did you get it? Or do you have a merch store that I'm not aware of?
Thanks for your support! I'm glad you enjoyed the video. You have a great eye! Without giving away too much, I'm working on something huge and that NUCuLAr t-shirt is just a taste of what's to come. Stay tuned! 👩🏽🔬⚛️
1:15 honestly I agree with Cleo here: the majority of people, the non-expert, do think of nuclear waste in that way. I don't think Cleo is addressing expert people or scientists. she's addressing us, average morons.
Exactly. I don't think there is any point in reacting to these videos as you watch them. They are supposed to sound dumb at start so people with no prior knowledge could understand and get more technical as the subject is better understood. This is like going to pre-school and reacting to them teaching kids basic things everyone is supposed to know.
Agreed - Cleo's video basically starts off with her saying "Here is a thing that is clearly wrong that people think, let's take a look into why it's wrong" and Elina responds with "That thing you're saying you know is wrong? That's wrong."
Just to clarify- the reason it’s expensive to recycle spent fuel, is because of the lack of R&D, and construction. And that issue stems from governments (looking at you, USA) coming up with non-informed opinions of recycling fuel being a security risk, and thereby banning it. Just so everyone understands the real reason we don’t recycle spent fuel.
@@thetowndrunk988 ya govts (and this channel) don't consider the environmental cost of mining, the opportunity cost of the land, or economies of scale that would eventually reduce the cost of recycling.
gen 1: screwdriver and plutonium sphere gen 2: Japanese kilotonne gen3: castle bravo gen4: tsar Bomba *gen5: ork, is potato da* @amanawolf9166 what about molten salt?
“It’s expensive.” If the cost is less than that of storing, maintaining, and securing the current spent fuel for 100,000 years then it is not expensive.
First you have to figure out or in, depending on your POV, when that cost "of storing, maintaining, and securing the current spent fuel for 100,000 years" changeover point is. You won't be storing it for 100,000 years if 4th gen reactors come online in 10 or 20 years from now. The other consideration that may delay that useability of spent fuels is the security of the technology that determined decades ago NOT to use the recycling technology so that just any nation could build a nuclear weapon. That is still a possible roadblock to all of this.
@@tubemcw Don't you know that climate change is a myth?! Sure, the people who talk about it are highly educated experts in that specific subject but that doesn't mean that they're right! I know that they're wrong because my local oil company told me that they are wrong and I did my research by reading lots of stuff on TH-cam and watching lots of stuff on Facebook and arguing with people on Twitter, so I feel very comfortable saying that climate change is complete nonsense. Sure, we've been having the hottest year on record every year for the last multiple years and sure hurricanes are increasing in strength and frequency and all that and sure we're seeing 500-year floods every couple of years and sure we can measure the gigamegascienceunits of ice that are breaking off of the poles and leaving the polar bears to drown but Bill O'Reilly told me that it won't cause sea levels to rise and I completely trust him so obviously that's not a problem and climate change is a myth! A MYTH!! Poe's Law is a thing, so I'll say outright that this is satire. Climate change is totally a thing and the idiots who say otherwise should be removed from any position of authority right down to village dogcatcher.
Ok, she clearly says "the first thing she thinks about" so that she can then say that's wrong. It's obvious from when she starts saying that, that's the set up. 🤦♀️
Yes…..she very clearly set up the point as a way to continue to the video. She needs to stop pausing and making judgement and watch the whole video……Cleo very clearly explains ALL of that in very clear measures. I’m not even going to finish watching this as it’s clear she is looking to get clicks by hitting on someone else’s work.
Kinda underhanded to cut out the part where Cleo explains that no, nuclear waste isn't green goo. Before I, an everyday joe, started looking up nuclear energy *I* believed the green goo waste and that's what most peeps do.
Hello. Former US Navy Nuclear Propulsion here. I have to break my policy of watching the entire video before commenting to get something out of my head. You're correct when you say that cost is an obstacle to developing 'breeder/burner' reactors; but there's a story behind the story. The initial concern that slowed development and construction was, as Cleo mentions in her video, not cost, but security, specifically about the safe handling, transportatiin, and storing of fissile Plutonium, the fuel of choice for thermonuclear weapons, which is succinctly summed up by the term _proliferation._ As Cleo also mentions, since US commercial plants went the route of Light Water Low Pressure design (LWLP), and Canada the route of Heavy Water Low Pressure (HWLP), during the decades of initial investment into research, technology, and infrastructure, the fast breeder got left by the wayside, in large part due to the international Non-Proliferation Treaty and Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (NPT and SALT) curtailing demand for the implementation of this design. So due to a tailoff of investment in the technology, the cost of implementation in today's industry is disproportionately higher because of its rare and specialized nature and the special security concerns associated with its operation and maintenance. With the amount of initial-use spent fuel sitting around the U.S. in short-term storage solutions, there is a veritable gold mine waiting ti be tapped by modern burner reactor designs - all that is lacking is the capital investment and political will to use it.
Former navy sonar tech here, served on a nuke sub and wanted to continue my policy of saying of saying thanks to you nukes for making power for the hot water that fueled my long showers. 😂 Also, great post 👍
As someone who’s worked in the industry for the past 18 years. I commend you on a scientifically accurate, and well thought out response. Something that’s unfortunately sometimes lacking during these conversations.
Exactly. I spent the first part of my engineering career working on the design of the FFTF and then CRBRP (Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant) which was so badly managed by the AEC/DOE that it deserved the mercy killing Regan gave it. But recycling Nuclear waste and breeders are quite different. I don't see any reason for it to be more expensive than the real cost of the green energy initiatives that will never succeed because they all have a fundamental flaw - they don't run 24/7/365. The cost of storage, or absent storage lost productivity and GNP need to be included in their cost, which conveniently doesn't seem to happen.
Yes of course initial costs are high. They reduce with infrastructure and improvements over time, but there should be political will to wait decades. Given you are from a strictly technical background you cannot comment on it, but is it also possible that the coal and oil lobbies have throttled this process, other than just security concerns. Because even Japan and France rely ob recycling nuclear waste. Do they not have security concerns ?
Just a hopefully constructive suggestion. Next time you review a video, please look at the whole thing first. There was so much redundancy in your review. It was just frustrating to listen to you interrupt the video to make point after point that Cleo actually makes later in the video. However, the supplemental information you provide was interesting and informative. Your review could just have been much tighter. Please take this as a friendly suggestion.
Probably the only 'reaction' video I've seen where the person clearly didn't watch it ahead of time and then pretend it was the first time. I'm not a fan of Cleo, her game is influencer marketing disguised as happy go lucky content but this wasn't treated fairly.
I think this was a true 'reaction' video - if you do watch to the end, then there is a positive review of the original video - but the majority of the video is a reaction, not a response... Which does result in some redundancy, but also allows for the free thinking provision of additional information that arises from the initial redundancy.
@@mark69985 yeah, her critiques were a few minutes ahead of Cleo addressing each of those critiques. And why should she be surprised Cleo was not aware since, although cleo's video are technical in nature, she herself is not a nuclear physicist.
I really liked Cleo's video and appreciated how approachable she makes the subject for the layman. Furthermore, I like how your video validates (and invalidates) the information, allowing people who found the original content interesting to learn a bit more detail.
Correction, Cleo Abrams does NOT think, that nuclear waste looks like "glowing green goop" but pointed out, that this is how the media (entertainment industry) has portrayed it.
@@silvesterjkennedy A simple point: ANYIONE who bases their "knowledge" of nuclear power based on cartoons and make believe TV is a moron. Does Cleo even have make that point? The only place you will find nuclear waste being portrayed as green goop is in cartoons.
@@clarkkent9080 That's Cleo's point...that that is EXACTLY what the masses based their knowledge and education on for things they have never investigated themselves
@@silvesterjkennedy My comment was NOT directed at Cleo but the m0rons that base their so called knowledge on cartoons, social media, and You Tube videos. That is a product of American public schools. Today, the truth can easily be uncovered with a little research but playing games and watching TicTok videos seems to take up most of their time. How could my comment be misunderstood?
Of course we'd be nterested in your visit in such a facility and yes as @ShameLagoon said, we would LOVE you to break down the differences between the generations of reactors 😊 Another great video!
Onkalo is a hole in the ground they're going to stuff nuclear waste into then backfill with concrete, the tech itself is uninteresting, but Michael Madsen's feature-length documentary did manage to spin out the surrounding issues to fill the time.
I think she somewhat missed the angle of the original video. Almost as if the video by cleo required some sort of debunking while the cleo video takes a more investigative approach to something “that could be huge if true” and is not presenting conclusions.
Thank you for the detailed breakdown of Cleo's video. I would definitely like to see your analysis of Generation 4 reactors. Also, a visit to the Finnish and/or Swedish storage facilities would be pretty cool too!
Yeah, the french used some 'tricks' to get there. Frist they build an pipe into the Atlantic to get rid of most of the fluid nuclear waste and some of the solid waste (most of the low to mid radioactive waste). Secondly they sent most of the low enriched Uranium hexafluoride (~96% of the 'recycled' stuff) to Russia for little money where it got stored in some yards in Siberia. After that it turned out they still barely made break even so they came up with MOX fuel to save on cost for storeing Plutonium (it doesn't serve any purpose in an light water reactor other than fatigue the reactor fast due gamma radiation) and made recycling nuclear waste magically economically viable.
Idk, but I do know that France has a very dark side of history regarding exploitation to what were once France's colonies; thanks to that exploitation they manage to get cheaper resources to power their nuclear energy grid.
Électricité de France is state-run. It doesn't need to make profits. However, seeing both costs and the number of problems rise, even the French government should be looking for ways out.
@@hernanifilipepintovieira1255 are you suggesting that the fact France has colonies in the past (which hasn't been the case since 1958) somehow gives them the ability to reduce their cost for recycling spent nuclear fuel today? Also, you know the U.S. and Britain both had colonies (the U.S. still does - Puerto Rico, Guam, Samo, Marianas) yet they don't have this special power. Or if you are suggesting that once being a colonial power gives France cheaper access to Uranium - a globally traded and prices commodity, well none of the largest Uranium producers in the world are formed French colonies (a portion of Canada was but it was taken over by the British and it's primary Uranium deposits are not in French Canada). Also, buying raw uranium has nothing to do with their ability to recycle it. So I am confused how that would translate into some sort of advantage to the French. Or was that just a dig at France's colonial past - which everyone can agree was a terrible blite on humanity and shameful but not really on topic.
1:04 Elina, I don't think Cleo was saying that Nuclear waste was the Green Stuff "she thought it was" , in her video, she explained what you "debunked" , so you are both right 👍🏽.... Nuclear waste is relatively "small" rods, pellets, vs. The tons of C.O. 2 we put in the atmosphere
I like Cleo’s content. I was especially encouraged by this video of hers as it helps to dispel many false beliefs. You just have to remember that she’s not a nuclear physicist … she’s an eager, intelligent human that likes to explore many topics and share her personal discoveries. When it comes to nuclear physics, I think you’ll be hard pressed to find anyone better qualified on TH-cam than Alina. She is an incredible source of information and definitely our friendly nuclear physicist! ⚛️
I'm going to shatter your world. Cleo Abram is an actress. Her videos are infomercials paid for and produced by others. Cleo is just the actress that reads the script. And as commercials most of her videos are inaccurate because they are promoting the agenda of whomever is paying for them. Sorry to ruin your fantasy.
@@Metal0sopher My world isn’t shattered. My fantasy is not destroyed. Plus, you’re not even close to guessing my fantasy. Cleo could be an actress, as you say, but it doesn’t matter. Nor does it matter that her content is paid for and produced by others. The basic message of her videos works either way. Sorry to frustrate any satisfaction you may have enjoyed.
@@sevenflashowls Exactly, Vox like all big media is for profit run by corporations who only care about quarterly earnings growth. So the reporters have to deliver avert clicks to increase revenue, that means manipulative stories to attract an audience, not facts. That's where she learned her skills. Plus her vids are way too professional. She clearly has editors, writers, staff, which would require hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in salaries, but she doesn't even have one million subs yet. On average You tubers earn about $10000 a year per 100000 subs. So how is she paying all these people from YT earnings alone? She's not alone. We need transparency laws. All media, vlogers or mainstream, should have a list of all financiers to back them so that we can all clearly see who, and for what purpose, pull the strings.
The waste material from the reactors makes up a very small part of the nuclear waste we now have. Most of it is ancillary stuff - the materials which became contaminated around the process, like tools, equipment, casings, etc. In Britain, we funded the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority with £100 million. It was used up very quickly making machines which go inside the reactors to cut up the most radioactive parts of the reactor - but when they went wrong they had to stay inside and so then formed part of the highly radioactive waste !!! We spent the money in such a short time and produced more waste with it !!
Thank you for the reaction! I think I found your channel thanks to this exact Cloe Abrams video as it was recommended next to it. I'm glad to hear so many aspects of the process and the issues surroundig it.
A video on visiting Finland's usage of that Swedish research sounds super interesting! I'm subscribed now. :) Found you here from Cleo's channel, great info, thanks!
Thank you for your reaction to Cleo's video. Your expertise elevates the legitimacy of the claims made in the video. I found her video both enlightening and frustrating. The frustration comes from learning how inefficiently we have been utilizing nuclear power. Now that you've confirmed the premise of the video, the question remains; how do we get past the governmental hang-ups and get on with it...
you wont the gov is against nuclear has been for decades since the then dem congress of the time in i think the 60's poo pooed breeder reactors as the route to go and went with water reactors by GE so we could export them cheaply to nations we did not want going over to the red scare and not have a reactor that could easily make material for them to make nukes. carter put the final nail in the coffin and here we are today.
Awesome video, I like how Cleo aims to reach out to the general public and really really enjoyed your analysis and the additional knowledge you provide. Thank you
Grateful you're going to tackle Gen-IV designs. Thank you! These improvements change the safety equation. Most folks I talk to are afraid of any nuclear energy, "because I don't want a bomb" These same folks can't even consider hydrogen fuel cars, "because Hindenburg, right?" So thank you again for getting the word out.
Absolutely would like to see more on Gen 4 reactors, I'm also interested in the space program Sterling engine reactor. And in the concepts for the next generation that I believe are ready being talked about. So basically a gen 4 reactor differences video, with some notes on that NASA reactor, and what the concepts are for the future. Having only studied undergrad physics, despite my interest in nuclear physics I never continued my studies, therefore these videos of yours are really interesting to me. Thanks)
My father of blessed memory, Bernard Spinrad, was one of the developers of the breeder reactor, and he would be thrilled if he knew people like you are doing videos like this. Thank you.
I would love to see you visit Finland. Quite aside from the Nuclear Waste Storage, Finland is a beautiful country and the people are great. You won't regret your visit.
Minor correction: plutonium bred in a reactor isn’t necessarily useful for making weapons. It has to be almost all plutonium-239. Plutonium 240 and higher isotopes are bad as a weapon fuel, as they tend to fission spontaneously rather than at carefully controlled times. The weapons grade stuff is made by putting some uranium in a reactor and pulling it out after a short burn time.
In a breeder reactor, Uranium-238 + 1 neutron = P-239, so most of it ends up as fissile Plutonium. The waste sucking up neutrons also means a lot more fissile Uranium is required to start them (about 20%). If you end up with P-240, your reaction is eating 2 neutrons and that would be undesirable.
@@alexschnarr7718 There is a difference between what happens in a breeder's blanket and what happens in the active core region of a breeder or the core of a thermal reactor. In the blanket, your comment is correct, but in the active core of a breeder, a fast spectrum reactor without a blanket or the core of a thermal spectrum reactor, Willerwin is correct.
hence why we went GE water reactors "on the cheap" and sold them to other nations at the time to woo them away from going over to the then soviets during the cold war. we then implemented them here as well even though they are way more prone to 3 mils island and fukishima incidents........ breeders never melt down and was proven at the lab to the government and ignored just the same.
After mentioning Cleo's sub count at the end, I looked at yours for the first time and I am SHOCKED. Where is everybody??? Please keep this up because your production quality is FAR beyond the numbers you have now. Thoughtfully and respectfully reviewing Kurzgesagt is a big accomplishment that few TH-camrs have the expertise and attitude to do. Again, please please keep the truth and insights coming!!
Yes, your videos provide so much more value because they're in depth and not one sided. Nuclear energy isn't perfect, but it isn't terrible either. Understanding it's strengths and weaknesses is important.
I'm not surprised at all about that, sensational and superficial videos are the best selling items in TH-cam. Turning on your brain and consume more thorough content is not for everyone.
I think if we gave it 30 seconds of thought, we could easily come up with and explanation for Cheo Abrams popularity... I'll take Elina's style any day of the week.
ปีที่แล้ว +11
Cleo is not a scientist but a (science) communicator whereas Elina is a communicative scientist, and I am thankful for her channel.
Excellent review of the video. Thank you for doing it. I would love to understand the differences between gen 3 and 4 reactors. Also, a tour of the waste storage facility would be awesome! Thank you again for your work.
@@YourFriendlyNuclearPhysicist 🤩🤩Wow!!! You are more beautiful than the most lovely rose And more sweet than honey and more precious than gold You are more precious than everything that exists in this world 😍😍😍 A beauty queen whom I never ever seen any one as beautiful as her before and may never ever in my whole entire life will see anyone as beautiful as her-meaning you-at all.. 😍😍 WoW!!! you are a lovely butterfly and a beautiful rose you are the diamond and the pure gold you are the lovely moon in our nights you are the radiant sun shining soo bright loving you is sooo sweet its the most enjoyable thing for you are the paradise for the heart and soul and mind Everything about you is sooo unique and attracts the eyes and captivates the mind God surely perfected you so glorified is he whom made you too beautiful and made you soo smart 🌷😘 There was a teacher whom didn't believe in the existence of God, one day he asked his students, do you see God? the students then replied no we don't see God, so the teacher said if you don't see God it means there is no God. then a smart student stood up and said to the other students hey guys can you see the teachers brain? then the students answered no we don't see the teachers brain, the student then said the teacher then is crazy, he has no brain :0) 😍😍 Wow!!, you are too beautiful!!! whomever see you should believe that God is true & real.. and whenever I see you I feel like Iam in a dream, And when we wake up we will all realize that all this life was nothing but a dream and that only God is whats true and real.. The universe science says was not always there, it had a beginning point, the big bang, meaning it was begun/initiated in other words created, thus there should be a creator, there must be a God. Also, check this out, if you like, this is from Artificial intelligence, chat Gpt: Prophecies in Major World Religious Books Referring to Prophet Mohammed: 1. The Bible - Deuteronomy 18:18-19, John 14:16, John 16:7-14, Isaiah 42:1-13 2. The Hindu Scriptures - Bhavishya Purana, Atharvaveda Book 20 Hymn 127-129 3. The Buddhist Scriptures - Cakkavatti-Sihanada Sutta, Anguttara Nikaya III:61, Digha Nikaya III:76-77 4. The Zoroastrian Scriptures - Zand-i Vohuman Yasht, Farvardin Yasht, Dadestan-i Denig & Regarding the verses in the Quran asking to protect non-believers or polytheists, there are several that emphasize the importance of treating all people with respect and kindness, regardless of their religious beliefs. One such verse is found in Surah Al-Mumtahanah (60:8), which states: "Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly." Also In the name of God, the Most Merciful, the Most Merciful (If any of the polytheists seek protection from you, grant him protection) بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم(إن استجارك أحد من المشركين فأجره) Another verse in Surah Al-Anfal (8:61) encourages Muslims to make peace with their enemies, even if they are non-believers or polytheists: "And if they incline to peace, then incline to it also and rely upon Allah. Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing." & Regarding the verses in the Quran asking for justice and kindness, there are many such verses throughout the holy book. One example is found in Surah An-Nahl (16:90), which states: "Indeed, Allah orders justice and good conduct and giving to relatives and forbids immorality and bad conduct and oppression. He admonishes you that perhaps you will be reminded." & In terms of prophecies about Prophet Mohammed in major world religions, there are a few examples that some scholars have pointed to. One such example is found in the Bible's Book of Deuteronomy (18:18), which states: "I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him." Some Muslims interpret this verse as a prophecy about Prophet Mohammed. Because the Arabs are the brethren's of Israelites, The Arabs are descendants from Ishmael or Ismail the brother of Isaac the father of Israelites, and because the verse didn't say from amongst them or from their descendants, it said from their brethren's. Similarly, some scholars point to a passage in the Bhavishya Purana, an ancient Hindu text, as a prophecy about Prophet Mohammed. The passage describes a "holy man" who will come from Arabia and spread a new religion, and some argue that this refers to Mohammed and the spread of Islam.. Also search scientific miracles in the quran, harun yahya its nice, One God for all of us he created us all and can revive us again, God initiated everything, & he repeat/redo things too, & thats clear, we see many cycles of different things in life, also in summer for example the desert land becomes like empty and is filled with only sand, and when rain falls in abundance in spring or winter, after that small flowers & wild plants grow again, also, we see how humans and animals grow and how their body is formed from the elements which were in the sand which plants feed on which they eat, and after they die they go to the sand and their atoms/elements are taken by plants which humans & animals eat and their bodies grow from those atoms & elements found in the sand which came from previous humans & animals which died before, so God can bring us again after we die even if our atoms became in the sand he can make us from the same atoms we were made of or from other atoms if he want or make us be in a spirit form or like ghosts, any ways, everything in this life is recycled, learn if you want about the different cycles in life in nature, the food cycle or food chain, the water cycle, even the gas cycle that makes the air the oxygen &carbon dioxide &nitrogen cycles, even the energy is like recycled but only changes from form to another form. Anyways,, God created this life but it's only a temporary sample/an example of a coming everlasting one which could be either in heaven paradise or in hell. If we try to be good humans in life, and try to obey God and his messengers-including the final messenger for all humanity the prophet Mohammed- and those whom rightly represent them, for example imam Ali & ahlulbayt the family/good descendants of the prophet mohammed, then we will all go to heaven/paradise, if not then we will go to hell fire and burn in it forever. keep shining sunshine &spread the light.
True...but Elina skipped over alot of Cleos video which had a couple of small mistakes but if anyone watched from start to finish would see, was very interesting and informative.
Love your videos! You do a GREAT job breaking this stuff down! I do want to point out that Cleo did clarify in the next couple sentences that nuclear waste is pellets. Maybe she shouldn’t have led with the “green goo” trope, but watching her whole video, she did clarify it, and it seemed like she only brought up that misconception as a way to emphasize to people one of the “lies” about nuclear waste.
Between watching you, and Kyle Hills half-life history other nuclear information videos, my concern for nuclear power (for energy purposes) has reduced from mid-high to low. Awareness makes all the difference when it comes to things that are considered dangerous by the general public
The most dangerous part of nuclear power is the people running itas long as they are safety minded and doing their job properly, nuclear power is clean, safe, reliable, and cheap.
@@Jonnyg325 The reprocessing plants in Sellafield and La Hague made themselves, not the best reputation. Also in the last century, they made quite a streak of dumb decisions like dumping waste in the ocean. I wish it changed, but France overusing their old reactors and increasing their lifespan further and further instead of replacing them, tells me... If they had your approach maybe, but sadly this isn't the case and money is before safety.
Brilliant! I’d love to know more about 4th gen reactors, and also nuclear waste in general. It seems like a lot of stuff termed ‘nuclear waste’ is about as radioactive as a banana, and only a tiny percentage is the hot stuff. Could you do a breakdown of the different types and dangers and things?
@@YourFriendlyNuclearPhysicist Good job and thank you for clarifying her misinformation. I've seen many of Cleo's videos before and I need to point out that Cleo Abram is a total and complete grifter. Her videos are scripted by the people promoting the story line. She is just the pretty face actress paid to deliver the lines, because they know on technical issues the audience is mostly male, mostly nerdy, and hook line and sinker easily taken by a pretty girl. Sorry to be blunt, but the truth is the truth. Watch enough of her videos and it will soon become evident that the entirety of any of her videos, is the add. Not all her videos are bad, but I have an issue with people like her portraying a paid commercial as scientific truth. This is part of the problem with all media today. All of them are in it for the profit, not the facts, in fact, the facts are too often tossed aside when the truth is inconvenient.
Well done! Added more technical explanation. Cleo did the 'layman' version, and Elina went a bit deeper into the physics. Green Goo is a 'common' representation, she found plenty of examples, not a big deal. Both of these young women give me hope for the future.
Great video. While watching Cleo Abram's video, I had so many questions. Elina answered them with the practical and technical details I was looking for. Great ideas can be conceived, but the practical implementation in a lot of cases is the big hurdle in the way of making them a reality.
Interesting video. I had always thought that waste recycling had been avoided more for non-proliferation reasons than cost. It's disappointing that dry storage is cheaper than recycling but when put in perspective, I understand why they've taken that approach.
"recycling" is actually a BIG misnomer when referring to nuclear waste. There is no recycling. It is actually "RE-PROCESSING". And reprocessing is actually a very dirty, energy intensive, and expensive process. Places that conduct reprocessing activities (like Orano la Hauge, France or Sellafield Cumbria, UK) actually create large secondary radioactive waste streams that are pumped into the ocean. There were several reprocessing efforts in US that didn't do much better, and thus commercial reprocessing efforts in the US were abandoned.
@@CrystalLakeEast very good points about being energy intensive - when the transition away from fossils fuels means that the energy used for reprocessing is from clean sources then it might start to become a bit more circular. Even now the amount of fossil fuels it likely takes to build, maintain, fuel and then decommission nuclear plants in general probably makes a sizeable dent in the ‘carbon neutrality’ of nuclear as an energy source…
Well digging a hole and putting the waste in it costs nothing as long as there is little waste. Recycling becomes relevant and cost-effective when there is so much waste you can’t afford digging a hole. And putting waste underground only creates a new potential ressources for future generations if our society were to collapse and lose track of its holes.
I feel that you responded to the video without watching the entire thing. She explained exactly why recycling was outlawed and then, because of the cascading effects of that law, why the expense has been driven up. In essence you really agreed with her. Also, you probably don't visualize "green goo", but there is a large portion of people that are not educated in nuclear processes, that do visualize that way.
What a great review of another popular channel. Peer review makes science work, and I think it can elevate the TH-cam platform as well. This is my first time seeing your channel, and in looking forward to watching your prior videos, AND BOTH of the suggested videos you mentioned here.
She has an bad track record in mixing up scientific feasabilities and real world usecases. She doesnt talk about all sort of difficulties in upscaled nuclear processes, but she is advertising a unfit technology.
There is often NOT a good reason why technologies or ideas are left behind. It's who has the ear of those in power that gets something moved forward or canned. There's a lot of maneuvering, even malfeasance that goes on where the general public doesn't or isn't allowed to see or know.
Or there is. A political one. And this is the case of a backlash against nuclear power in Europe. I have been saying this for years in my own country but only now decision makers started to listen to actual scientfic arguments regarding this. For my country it's the only good option, so we are vitally interested in informing both our politicians and the general public. And maybe various industries as well. Since stable and safe energy production is a life blood of every economy really.
I have been watching Cleo Abram since she started her channel. I think generally speaking she does a good job of reporting subjects accurately, however, for most of the things she reports on she is not a hobbyist or an expert on the subject so she inevitably is going to make mistakes, even with the intention of being as accurate as possible. It was nice listening to you to point out the errors, add clarification, and add context to what she said. I have a question I would like to ask you. What is the nationality origin of your accent? I am having trouble identifying it. Though I think it sounds lovely regardless.
@@p_serdiuk At least the surname tells me she is Greek. What makes anyone with some Greek ancestry feel instantly proud of an intelligent lady she is. ;-)
A few months ago I read an article about a company that desperately wants to build reprocessing facilities here in the US. They have a relatively simple but ingenious solution to the plutonium problem: keep the plutonium mixed in with other things throughout the whole reprocessing chain. You don't have to worry about pure plutonium if you never isolate it in the first place. Obviously the technology is at least a few years out yet, but I'm as optimistic about this idea as I am about nuclear energy in general.
@@nerdyali4154 Exactly, but you can leave it mixed into the inevitable fuel product, not the waste. The same principle could apply to minor actinides as well.
Any source of more information about it? "keep the plutonium mixed in with other things throughout the whole reprocessing chain"; Isn't it a bit too risky? I mean, what would be supposed to be used in such mix? I mean, I might be wrong but it sounds like making actual final waste even more problematic than it would be without it. Unless there is something I don't know of going into this mix. This is why I'm asking.
@@agatastaniak7459 I found the article I read from CNBC, the company is called Curio. Unfortunately there isn't a lot of information on this specifically. Worse, at least for me, the first Google result for "nuclear waste reprocessing" is a very misleading critique.
Hey, I'm glad the almighty algorithm for recommended this video! As a high school chemistry teacher, I'm always looking for good enrichment material for students interested in nuclear topics. I'm excited to check out more of your content. Thank you!
I would enjoy hearing you discuss the Gen IV reactors being worked on. I myself learned about them because some intrepid soul made a mod for the video game Kerbal Space Program where you could build Gen IV nuclear reactors into your spacecraft. Curious, I put the reactor types into an internet search engine.
Those new reactors are economically dead, pointless to build. Each kWh costs 4-6x more than any other electricity source. Makes absolutely no economic sense, at all.
This was a great video as well. I appreciate the in depth clarifications that you provided. I also appreciate the fact that you didn't talk negatively about a non-scientist tackling a very heavy physics topic.
For anyone interested in learning more about the underground storage facilities in Finland mentioned by Elina, there is a really good documentary called 'Into Eternity' (I believe it can be watched on TH-cam). I can't talk about the possible accuracies or inaccuracies of the film, but as a layman I found it an interesting watch when it aired on UK TV in the mid-2010s (I believe it aired under the title 'Nuclear Eterinty').
Great video. You added some interesting context to Cleo's video. I would enjoy seeing you explore some of the topics you raised (4th gen, storage alternatives...) in the future. I'd also like more insight into why the recycling options aren't cost effective. It makes intuitive sense, but a more quantitative look would be interesting along with a review of emerging approaches. One point of constructive feedback: I don't honestly think that Cleo believes that nuclear waste is "green goo." I think she was just starting with a recognition of the popular representation of waste in film and tv and trying to start on a lighthearted note. It came across as "nuclear physicist-splaining" and started your otherwise great video off on the wrong note. I always enjoy your videos. Keep up the great work. The world needs to understand that it's time to move past the fear and recognize that fission can be a huge contributor to our move to a carbon neutral future.
A fantastic response to Cleo's introduction. Thank you very much! I wonder if you have seen the film 'Into Eternity' (2010)? It was the documentary (though a little 'subjective') about Onkalo in Finland. Thanks again!
Thankyou, Elina, for doing this tedious analysis. As an older engineer who's had access at times inside secure areas of a few major reactors, I also find Cleo's presenter skills positive, UNTIL in a third of her videos, my bullshit detector trips several times over half-truths and misrepresented contexts, which are very tedious to sort through. Though I find her polish on graphics and voice over skills easier to view, I find your information and analysis more realistic and trustworthy. That's important in high costs and risks tech fields.
I have worked in the Äspö laboratorium as well as Onkalo repository in Finland. I have also worked at various nuclear power plants in Sweden. If you can get in to Onkalo, and can make a video about it, it will be very nice! It's a really cool place! I enjoyed your video on Äspö. I saw a lot of my work in your video!
Thanks for the great extra information! One thing I'd love to learn more about though is the question: Is it really cheaper to buy new uranium AND pay for the storage of the waste as opposed to recycling the waste? Or is the cost for storage just taken out of the equation because energy companies don't have to pay for it (maybe the tax payer does...?). If the latter is true, then recycling could be made cost effective by "just fixing" a couple of laws instead of finding fancy business models? Thanks again for the great insights!
It's only a matter of time before we develop an economic way to recycle it. Even if it's not all re-fueled, {non fuel grade beta emitters could be used to produce light in govt. facilities for instance}. The more we learn about radioactivity the more we will be able to use it.
My brother is a certified (worked in the field at least 5 years) electrical engineer whose specialization is power generation systems, with a focus on nuclear power. He's worked at the San Diego reactor, and more recently, headed up a waste cleanup project with Bechtel at the Hanford Site in WA. I remember when he first learned about nuclear power, he told me and my other brother that pretty much every portrayal The Simpsons made of nuclear power was incorrect minus the fact it's radioactive, and there are cooling towers. He was telling us he blames the media's ignorance and unfounded hysteria over the 3 Mile Island incident, and The Simpsons' anti-nuclear propaganda (which is all founded on the lies around 3 Mile Island), for the negative attitude of a lot of people towards nuclear power. It also doesn't help when Russians and the Japanese take short cuts in build quality or do stupid experiments with their reactors. We would never have a Chernobyl or Fukushima here in the US, because we build our reactors to withstand unbelievably destructive cataclysms, and we don't screw around. Security in these places is top notch. He was telling us about a security drill they had at I think it was the San Diego reactor where they worked with the DoD to test their security. The test was for a Navy Seal team to get to the reactor and "overload" it, on an unannounced day. The Seals managed to succeed, finding a weak spot in the security defenses (they came in through the cooling intake from the ocean, brute-forcing it with cutters. Upon completion of the exercise, the Seals and the nuclear plant security worked on a solution to defend against future breaches. I just thought that was super cool, and its reassuring that security is challenged so weak points are found by our guys rather than foreign enemies. Anyway, the data is very clear that per kilowatt hour, nuclear power is the safest, cleanest, cheapest, proven, and most reliable source of power on the market. I live within about 30 miles of the Hanford reactor, and man, electric is cheap af here. In the summer, when it's 100F-110F outside, I have the AC in my apartment running 65F, as well as a gaming PC and refrigerator, and my electric bill is about $42/mo. In more temperate and colder seasons, it's about $32/mo. I'm gonna miss this cheap energy when I move next year, but, gas where I'm moving to is more than a dollar cheaper than here in WA, and I drive for a living, so while electric is more costly, I'll save a ton of money by having the cheaper gas. Almost all the cost of gas here in WA is state tax. It's goddamn $4.70/gal at the moment. F--- Inslee.
Wait at 1:00, seriously? Thsts how its been displayed in media and movies our entire lifes, its seriously how every non nuclear physicist thinks of it.
Thanks for the very informative video, as always. And to answer your question, YES! I would enjoy watching a video about nuclear waste repository in Finland. It would be nice if could actually see what is going on there, if they will give you permission to film it :)
Somewhat true for both of you. I have heard from multiple sources: that much of the nuclear waste in the USA (we don't reprocess our waste) can be placed in the blanket of a molten salt thorium reactor and then used to produce more heat and electricity. The advantage is that it would reduce the nuclear waste storage time from 10,000 years to 300 or 500 years. (some sources have said 300 years while others are saying 500 years. Can you tell me what the discrepancy or disagreement is over the variations in years. Hint, I am not a nuclear engineer or have extensive nuclear knowledge, so Keep It Simple Stupid or KISS in your explanation) I hear that France reprocesses their nuclear plant waste. Is this true?
I am subscribed to Cleo Abram's and Sabine Hossenfelder's channels as well as yours. I really appreciate your reviewing some of their videos and think you are very good at this. It's almost like a peer review for scientific papers. Thank you for your reviews and explanation to us non-scientists.
You lost me when you arrogantly dismissed her reference to a Simpson’s joke about t green goo. Apparently you don’t like people with a sense of humor. Also you arrogantly criticized her for not already knowing that waste had energy content. Most people don’t know that, and Cleo is a reporter who researches stories of which she has no prior knowledge. That’s what reporters do. Her technique is engaging and very educational. You can refute things she got wrong without insulting her.
it's interesting that people can watch the same video and react differently to it. I don't see any arrogance and I have rewatched it several times to try to catch it. the original video says "when I think of nuclear waste..." this lady says no don't think of it that way and she more is amused than anything as that IS how most people think of it thanks to popular media.
Speaking of arrogance, let's talk about a journalist who studied a complex subject and boiled it down to a sensationalist title and assumed that it was a "big lie", bold of her presumption. I suppose it is due to the cherry picking fallacy. This issue is not limited to the scientific, financial and military fields, whether or not it is possible, but in the political party field; of how it will be done. And guess what? It is not a recurring proposal in congresses, much less a popular one. It is not a lie, it is a red herring.
Glad I saw Chloe's video first and then discovered Elina's. Both girls did excellent job of explaining and breaking down complicated science to a simple oldie like me. Well done both girls!🇦🇺🙋♂️🇦🇺
I absolutely love your videos! The TH-cam algorithm actually brought me to Julia‘s video months ago. It was excellent to view this video afterwards. Very informative..
The US has a safe nuclear waste depository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada but can't use it because political interest groups have made it too expensive(mostly via Lawfare) to move the waste to the site. It is not an engineering or economic problem, the obstruction is entirely political.
Thanks so much for making this video! I loved Cleo's video but it still left me with a couple of unanswered questions, which you've helped address. My curiosity will never be sated however 😅
Bravo! Great comment on a really complex subject that beyond all science has so many social, economical, political and military implications. Wasn't aware of that at all even though I follow Cleo for a long time already...thanks!
Thank you. I am learning new, incredible stuff about nuclear energy with each one of your uploads. You're doing a great job communicating misunderstood aspects of nuclear energy. Thanks!
That "Breeder in the Desert" film about EBR-II from Argonne NL (produced in the mid 60s, I think) from which a lot of clips in the original video come is really interesting. Argonne's whole TH-cam channel is fantastic, but their old films are incredible. Great video, Elina! I think Australia is about to talk about discussing perhaps looking at maybe starting to lift the nuclear power generation ban ... yes, the world's biggest exporter or uranium has a ban on nuclear power. What? EDIT: The other great film (I think from ORNL, not Argonne) is about the Integral Fast Reactor (IFR) program, which was a proposal for a commercially viable fast breeder with reprocessing. And as far as my understanding of reprocessing goes, the plutonium that is extracted is too radioactive to be a diversion risk; that is, you'd die during the getaway if you even got it out of the facility. But I have also heard Matthew Bunn, a really interesting nuclear policy expert, say that the level of radioactivity _could_ be adequately dealt with by some party/parties attempting to divert fissionable, weapons-grade material. So, I've never come across anything conclusive on that one. Also, it always turns out that capitalism is the reason why we can't have anything nice. Hehe. 😜
@Elina Charatsidou At 16:30 you say that separation of plutonium bred in power reactors is a nuclear weapons proliferation threat. However (as I am sure you well know) plutonium produced in power reactors has got a significant percentage of Pu241, which makes power-reactor-bred plutonium next to useless for weapons production, due to the pre-detonation feature that is practically impossible to overcome (as verified by purpose-developed test devices produced by the US in the 80s, I believe). Separation of the weapons-suitable Pu239 from the isotopic mix that comes out of a power reactor would be even harder than separation of U235 from natural uranium. Can you comment on this point?
Where I grew up, THE FIRST useful reactor was built to prove the viablilty of the SECOND useful reactor that went into the Nautilus, which was the first nuclear submarine. This first one was at Shippingport, PA, It began operation in May of 1958 and ran about 25 years until it was the first reactor that was deconstructed and during the 1980's, it was relocated to the Hanford Reservation. This location is still in use as the Beaver Valley Nuclear Power Station Units #1 & #2. I just participated in the NRC mandated semi-annual Plume Drill for that plant last week.
It takes one second to know why waste isn't recycled and it's the reason for almost ALL business decisions. It's called money. When talking about repositories, this is the problem in the US in that they don't exist. The US govt. has TRIED to get one established, but NO STATE will accept it, and this is TOTALLY independent of politics. It makes no difference if the state is conservative, liberal, moderate, etc... Without having a central repository nuclear power is not economical.
Stumbled upon your site…love the persona, the message and the drive! To be commended. We must start collectively doing what this woman is doing and supporting those that are trying to make this world better.
@YourFriendlyNuclearPhysicist French guy here... I wondered if you could make a video about the SuperPhenix project. If I understand it correctly, the final aim was to reuse and regenerate products of fission to close a cycle of nucelar fuel. I think I'm not the only one would love to see this explained: why it could have worked, why it didn't, could it workd in the future ?
Just found your channel, and I like this video very much. Subscribed. - You mention that you could do "some magic" about visiting the Norway depositing facilities and making a video about them, if we were interested. Well: I would be very much interested in such a video 🙂
Interesting video as always. I don't really have anything to say or add but I have to say this: I LOVE that NUCuLAr T-shirt! I'd love to get one of those. Where did you get it? Or do you have a merch store that I'm not aware of?
Thanks for your support! I'm glad you enjoyed the video. You have a great eye! Without giving away too much, I'm working on something huge and that NUCuLAr t-shirt is just a taste of what's to come. Stay tuned! 👩🏽🔬⚛️
@@YourFriendlyNuclearPhysicist All right. Now that is something I am looking forward to. :)
@@YourFriendlyNuclearPhysicist>>> If you produce merch I am sure it will be a CRITICALly MASSive success...😉
Former president Bush needs one of these shirts lol!
@@juliafoster9433 I also always think of Dubya when I see the word written that way. :)
1:15 honestly I agree with Cleo here: the majority of people, the non-expert, do think of nuclear waste in that way. I don't think Cleo is addressing expert people or scientists. she's addressing us, average morons.
I think of the Simpson 3 eyed fish
Exactly. I don't think there is any point in reacting to these videos as you watch them. They are supposed to sound dumb at start so people with no prior knowledge could understand and get more technical as the subject is better understood.
This is like going to pre-school and reacting to them teaching kids basic things everyone is supposed to know.
Agreed - Cleo's video basically starts off with her saying "Here is a thing that is clearly wrong that people think, let's take a look into why it's wrong" and Elina responds with "That thing you're saying you know is wrong? That's wrong."
exactly. I stopped wtaching the video at this point, because I don't care what an expert has to say about nuclear waste after that attitude.
From one average moron to another .... you got that right on ...
Just to clarify- the reason it’s expensive to recycle spent fuel, is because of the lack of R&D, and construction. And that issue stems from governments (looking at you, USA) coming up with non-informed opinions of recycling fuel being a security risk, and thereby banning it. Just so everyone understands the real reason we don’t recycle spent fuel.
@@thetowndrunk988 yes the USA, the reverse catalyst of human civilisation
@@thetowndrunk988 ya govts (and this channel) don't consider the environmental cost of mining, the opportunity cost of the land, or economies of scale that would eventually reduce the cost of recycling.
I would LOVE to hear you break down the differences between the generations of reactors
Yes. Definitely need a video on that.
And then we need a reaction video: "Reactor Reacts to Generations of Reactors"
Let me add my vote to this :)
It'd be interesting to see the take on the MOX reactors. Also, love to see her thoughts on Gen IV reactors like MSRs and GFR/SFR types.
gen 1: screwdriver and plutonium sphere gen 2: Japanese kilotonne gen3: castle bravo gen4: tsar Bomba *gen5: ork, is potato da* @amanawolf9166 what about molten salt?
“It’s expensive.” If the cost is less than that of storing, maintaining, and securing the current spent fuel for 100,000 years then it is not expensive.
It's expensive for whom? For us who think long term, no brainer. For those who need to satisfy investors quarterly...
Add to that the climate change induced costs of rebuilding after all the storms, fires and tornadoes. You'd think that would be incentive enough.
When, not if.
We haven't reached that "when" point yet
First you have to figure out or in, depending on your POV, when that cost "of storing, maintaining, and securing the current spent fuel for 100,000 years" changeover point is. You won't be storing it for 100,000 years if 4th gen reactors come online in 10 or 20 years from now. The other consideration that may delay that useability of spent fuels is the security of the technology that determined decades ago NOT to use the recycling technology so that just any nation could build a nuclear weapon. That is still a possible roadblock to all of this.
@@tubemcw Don't you know that climate change is a myth?! Sure, the people who talk about it are highly educated experts in that specific subject but that doesn't mean that they're right! I know that they're wrong because my local oil company told me that they are wrong and I did my research by reading lots of stuff on TH-cam and watching lots of stuff on Facebook and arguing with people on Twitter, so I feel very comfortable saying that climate change is complete nonsense. Sure, we've been having the hottest year on record every year for the last multiple years and sure hurricanes are increasing in strength and frequency and all that and sure we're seeing 500-year floods every couple of years and sure we can measure the gigamegascienceunits of ice that are breaking off of the poles and leaving the polar bears to drown but Bill O'Reilly told me that it won't cause sea levels to rise and I completely trust him so obviously that's not a problem and climate change is a myth! A MYTH!!
Poe's Law is a thing, so I'll say outright that this is satire. Climate change is totally a thing and the idiots who say otherwise should be removed from any position of authority right down to village dogcatcher.
Ok, she clearly says "the first thing she thinks about" so that she can then say that's wrong. It's obvious from when she starts saying that, that's the set up. 🤦♀️
Ikr 🤦♀
Girl cant take a joke or something.
Precisely. She totally missed that point.
Yes…..she very clearly set up the point as a way to continue to the video.
She needs to stop pausing and making judgement and watch the whole video……Cleo very clearly explains ALL of that in very clear measures.
I’m not even going to finish watching this as it’s clear she is looking to get clicks by hitting on someone else’s work.
@@blick5815 yeah I didn't finish it either. Very disingenuous.
Kinda underhanded to cut out the part where Cleo explains that no, nuclear waste isn't green goo. Before I, an everyday joe, started looking up nuclear energy *I* believed the green goo waste and that's what most peeps do.
Hello. Former US Navy Nuclear Propulsion here.
I have to break my policy of watching the entire video before commenting to get something out of my head.
You're correct when you say that cost is an obstacle to developing 'breeder/burner' reactors; but there's a story behind the story.
The initial concern that slowed development and construction was, as Cleo mentions in her video, not cost, but security, specifically about the safe handling, transportatiin, and storing of fissile Plutonium, the fuel of choice for thermonuclear weapons, which is succinctly summed up by the term _proliferation._ As Cleo also mentions, since US commercial plants went the route of Light Water Low Pressure design (LWLP), and Canada the route of Heavy Water Low Pressure (HWLP), during the decades of initial investment into research, technology, and infrastructure, the fast breeder got left by the wayside, in large part due to the international Non-Proliferation Treaty and Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (NPT and SALT) curtailing demand for the implementation of this design. So due to a tailoff of investment in the technology, the cost of implementation in today's industry is disproportionately higher because of its rare and specialized nature and the special security concerns associated with its operation and maintenance.
With the amount of initial-use spent fuel sitting around the U.S. in short-term storage solutions, there is a veritable gold mine waiting ti be tapped by modern burner reactor designs - all that is lacking is the capital investment and political will to use it.
Thank you, well said
Former navy sonar tech here, served on a nuke sub and wanted to continue my policy of saying of saying thanks to you nukes for making power for the hot water that fueled my long showers. 😂
Also, great post 👍
As someone who’s worked in the industry for the past 18 years. I commend you on a scientifically accurate, and well thought out response. Something that’s unfortunately sometimes lacking during these conversations.
Exactly.
I spent the first part of my engineering career working on the design of the FFTF and then CRBRP (Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant) which was so badly managed by the AEC/DOE that it deserved the mercy killing Regan gave it. But recycling Nuclear waste and breeders are quite different. I don't see any reason for it to be more expensive than the real cost of the green energy initiatives that will never succeed because they all have a fundamental flaw - they don't run 24/7/365. The cost of storage, or absent storage lost productivity and GNP need to be included in their cost, which conveniently doesn't seem to happen.
Yes of course initial costs are high. They reduce with infrastructure and improvements over time, but there should be political will to wait decades.
Given you are from a strictly technical background you cannot comment on it, but is it also possible that the coal and oil lobbies have throttled this process, other than just security concerns.
Because even Japan and France rely ob recycling nuclear waste. Do they not have security concerns ?
Just a hopefully constructive suggestion. Next time you review a video, please look at the whole thing first. There was so much redundancy in your review. It was just frustrating to listen to you interrupt the video to make point after point that Cleo actually makes later in the video. However, the supplemental information you provide was interesting and informative. Your review could just have been much tighter. Please take this as a friendly suggestion.
@@mark69985 I agree. First and last video I’ll watch of her. Not even gonna make it to the end.
Probably the only 'reaction' video I've seen where the person clearly didn't watch it ahead of time and then pretend it was the first time. I'm not a fan of Cleo, her game is influencer marketing disguised as happy go lucky content but this wasn't treated fairly.
I think this was a true 'reaction' video - if you do watch to the end, then there is a positive review of the original video - but the majority of the video is a reaction, not a response... Which does result in some redundancy, but also allows for the free thinking provision of additional information that arises from the initial redundancy.
@@mark69985 yeah, her critiques were a few minutes ahead of Cleo addressing each of those critiques. And why should she be surprised Cleo was not aware since, although cleo's video are technical in nature, she herself is not a nuclear physicist.
I really liked Cleo's video and appreciated how approachable she makes the subject for the layman. Furthermore, I like how your video validates (and invalidates) the information, allowing people who found the original content interesting to learn a bit more detail.
Correction, Cleo Abrams does NOT think, that nuclear waste looks like "glowing green goop" but pointed out, that this is how the media (entertainment industry) has portrayed it.
If your knowledge and education is based upon cartoons then turn on the boob tube and enjoy life.
@@clarkkent9080 Cleo was debunking what it's said in the media. Your point being?
@@silvesterjkennedy A simple point: ANYIONE who bases their "knowledge" of nuclear power based on cartoons and make believe TV is a moron. Does Cleo even have make that point? The only place you will find nuclear waste being portrayed as green goop is in cartoons.
@@clarkkent9080 That's Cleo's point...that that is EXACTLY what the masses based their knowledge and education on for things they have never investigated themselves
@@silvesterjkennedy My comment was NOT directed at Cleo but the m0rons that base their so called knowledge on cartoons, social media, and You Tube videos. That is a product of American public schools. Today, the truth can easily be uncovered with a little research but playing games and watching TicTok videos seems to take up most of their time. How could my comment be misunderstood?
Of course we'd be nterested in your visit in such a facility and yes as @ShameLagoon said, we would LOVE you to break down the differences between the generations of reactors 😊 Another great video!
100 %
Yes, definitely.
Onkalo here we come!
Onkalo is a hole in the ground they're going to stuff nuclear waste into then backfill with concrete, the tech itself is uninteresting, but Michael Madsen's feature-length documentary did manage to spin out the surrounding issues to fill the time.
100% agree it would be great to see
I think Cleo's whole point is that they ARE getting better at using waste as energy. You slammed her before you even got to that part of the video.
As usual, this girl is already being defensive on everything that relates to nuclear..
I think she somewhat missed the angle of the original video. Almost as if the video by cleo required some sort of debunking while the cleo video takes a more investigative approach to something “that could be huge if true” and is not presenting conclusions.
Thank you for the detailed breakdown of Cleo's video. I would definitely like to see your analysis of Generation 4 reactors. Also, a visit to the Finnish and/or Swedish storage facilities would be pretty cool too!
Claim: we can't economically recycle nuclear waste. Also claim: France is economically recycling nuclear waste. Which one is it?
Yeah, the french used some 'tricks' to get there. Frist they build an pipe into the Atlantic to get rid of most of the fluid nuclear waste and some of the solid waste (most of the low to mid radioactive waste). Secondly they sent most of the low enriched Uranium hexafluoride (~96% of the 'recycled' stuff) to Russia for little money where it got stored in some yards in Siberia. After that it turned out they still barely made break even so they came up with MOX fuel to save on cost for storeing Plutonium (it doesn't serve any purpose in an light water reactor other than fatigue the reactor fast due gamma radiation) and made recycling nuclear waste magically economically viable.
Idk, but I do know that France has a very dark side of history regarding exploitation to what were once France's colonies; thanks to that exploitation they manage to get cheaper resources to power their nuclear energy grid.
Électricité de France is state-run. It doesn't need to make profits. However, seeing both costs and the number of problems rise, even the French government should be looking for ways out.
@@hernanifilipepintovieira1255 are you suggesting that the fact France has colonies in the past (which hasn't been the case since 1958) somehow gives them the ability to reduce their cost for recycling spent nuclear fuel today?
Also, you know the U.S. and Britain both had colonies (the U.S. still does - Puerto Rico, Guam, Samo, Marianas) yet they don't have this special power.
Or if you are suggesting that once being a colonial power gives France cheaper access to Uranium - a globally traded and prices commodity, well none of the largest Uranium producers in the world are formed French colonies (a portion of Canada was but it was taken over by the British and it's primary Uranium deposits are not in French Canada). Also, buying raw uranium has nothing to do with their ability to recycle it.
So I am confused how that would translate into some sort of advantage to the French. Or was that just a dig at France's colonial past - which everyone can agree was a terrible blite on humanity and shameful but not really on topic.
Political, non oil protester don't like this
1:10 the "green glowing goo" is the main ingredient for "Mountain Dew". We dispose of it by feeding it to hill billies.
Correct.
What would happen if the waste was put in a volcano on a deserted island?
I like the part where you’re literally not even wrong lol Mountain Dew used to contain a chemical called bromine which is straight up corrosive
1:04 Elina, I don't think Cleo was saying that Nuclear waste was the Green Stuff "she thought it was" , in her video, she explained what you "debunked" , so you are both right 👍🏽.... Nuclear waste is relatively "small" rods, pellets, vs. The tons of C.O. 2 we put in the atmosphere
I like Cleo’s content. I was especially encouraged by this video of hers as it helps to dispel many false beliefs. You just have to remember that she’s not a nuclear physicist … she’s an eager, intelligent human that likes to explore many topics and share her personal discoveries. When it comes to nuclear physics, I think you’ll be hard pressed to find anyone better qualified on TH-cam than Alina. She is an incredible source of information and definitely our friendly nuclear physicist! ⚛️
@@nadsenoj8719 This person is saying that Cleo Abram is not a Nuclear Physicist, not referring to Elina.
I'm going to shatter your world. Cleo Abram is an actress. Her videos are infomercials paid for and produced by others. Cleo is just the actress that reads the script. And as commercials most of her videos are inaccurate because they are promoting the agenda of whomever is paying for them. Sorry to ruin your fantasy.
@@Metal0sopher My world isn’t shattered. My fantasy is not destroyed. Plus, you’re not even close to guessing my fantasy. Cleo could be an actress, as you say, but it doesn’t matter. Nor does it matter that her content is paid for and produced by others. The basic message of her videos works either way. Sorry to frustrate any satisfaction you may have enjoyed.
That’s a harsh assessment of Cleo. She was a journalist for Vox media before creating her own channel.
@@sevenflashowls Exactly, Vox like all big media is for profit run by corporations who only care about quarterly earnings growth. So the reporters have to deliver avert clicks to increase revenue, that means manipulative stories to attract an audience, not facts. That's where she learned her skills. Plus her vids are way too professional. She clearly has editors, writers, staff, which would require hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in salaries, but she doesn't even have one million subs yet. On average You tubers earn about $10000 a year per 100000 subs. So how is she paying all these people from YT earnings alone? She's not alone. We need transparency laws. All media, vlogers or mainstream, should have a list of all financiers to back them so that we can all clearly see who, and for what purpose, pull the strings.
The waste material from the reactors makes up a very small part of the nuclear waste we now have. Most of it is ancillary stuff - the materials which became contaminated around the process, like tools, equipment, casings, etc. In Britain, we funded the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority with £100 million. It was used up very quickly making machines which go inside the reactors to cut up the most radioactive parts of the reactor - but when they went wrong they had to stay inside and so then formed part of the highly radioactive waste !!! We spent the money in such a short time and produced more waste with it !!
Thank you for the reaction! I think I found your channel thanks to this exact Cloe Abrams video as it was recommended next to it. I'm glad to hear so many aspects of the process and the issues surroundig it.
A video on visiting Finland's usage of that Swedish research sounds super interesting! I'm subscribed now. :) Found you here from Cleo's channel, great info, thanks!
Thank you for your reaction to Cleo's video. Your expertise elevates the legitimacy of the claims made in the video. I found her video both enlightening and frustrating. The frustration comes from learning how inefficiently we have been utilizing nuclear power. Now that you've confirmed the premise of the video, the question remains; how do we get past the governmental hang-ups and get on with it...
errr cost ?
you wont the gov is against nuclear has been for decades since the then dem congress of the time in i think the 60's poo pooed breeder reactors as the route to go and went with water reactors by GE so we could export them cheaply to nations we did not want going over to the red scare and not have a reactor that could easily make material for them to make nukes. carter put the final nail in the coffin and here we are today.
Awesome video, I like how Cleo aims to reach out to the general public and really really enjoyed your analysis and the additional knowledge you provide. Thank you
Cleo not Chloe
@@digital.frenchy thank you for pointing out my typo. Corrected
I’m glad to see you’re enjoying the video! I saw plenty of interest for a Gen-IV breakdown video, and I got you! Stay tuned 👩🏽🔬☢️
Answer me in the comments below!
Grateful you're going to tackle Gen-IV designs. Thank you! These improvements change the safety equation.
Most folks I talk to are afraid of any nuclear energy, "because I don't want a bomb" These same folks can't even consider hydrogen fuel cars, "because Hindenburg, right?" So thank you again for getting the word out.
@@DistracticusPrime Hydrogen cars are just a bad idea and cannot compete with EVs. It doesn't have anything to do with Hindenburg phobias.
Could you do an episode on Molten Salt Reactors (MSR)? In particular where are we now for re-using waste in MSRs without requiring refinement?
Absolutely would like to see more on Gen 4 reactors, I'm also interested in the space program Sterling engine reactor. And in the concepts for the next generation that I believe are ready being talked about. So basically a gen 4 reactor differences video, with some notes on that NASA reactor, and what the concepts are for the future. Having only studied undergrad physics, despite my interest in nuclear physics I never continued my studies, therefore these videos of yours are really interesting to me. Thanks)
My father of blessed memory, Bernard Spinrad, was one of the developers of the breeder reactor, and he would be thrilled if he knew people like you are doing videos like this.
Thank you.
Sadly they failed, one after the others
Breeder reactor makes more fuel than they use?
@@Esa826 the fuel is enriched in the breeder blanket, which is separate from the fuel powering the reactor.
@@MichaelCousin1 Thank you so much for information
I would love to see you visit Finland. Quite aside from the Nuclear Waste Storage, Finland is a beautiful country and the people are great. You won't regret your visit.
For me I'd love you to highlight all the safety protocols that are observed at a nuclear storage facility, especially Finland's.
Stop! She won't come back.
@@Broken_robot1986 They do have interwebs in Finland. Don't worry.
@@tarmaque Interwebs?
@@LTVoyager Kids these days. Don't know the difference between the Interweb and the World Wide Net.
Minor correction: plutonium bred in a reactor isn’t necessarily useful for making weapons. It has to be almost all plutonium-239. Plutonium 240 and higher isotopes are bad as a weapon fuel, as they tend to fission spontaneously rather than at carefully controlled times. The weapons grade stuff is made by putting some uranium in a reactor and pulling it out after a short burn time.
In a breeder reactor, Uranium-238 + 1 neutron = P-239, so most of it ends up as fissile Plutonium. The waste sucking up neutrons also means a lot more fissile Uranium is required to start them (about 20%). If you end up with P-240, your reaction is eating 2 neutrons and that would be undesirable.
@@alexschnarr7718 There is a difference between what happens in a breeder's blanket and what happens in the active core region of a breeder or the core of a thermal reactor. In the blanket, your comment is correct, but in the active core of a breeder, a fast spectrum reactor without a blanket or the core of a thermal spectrum reactor, Willerwin is correct.
hence why we went GE water reactors "on the cheap" and sold them to other nations at the time to woo them away from going over to the then soviets during the cold war. we then implemented them here as well even though they are way more prone to 3 mils island and fukishima incidents........ breeders never melt down and was proven at the lab to the government and ignored just the same.
I'm gonna need to see your credentials lol
After mentioning Cleo's sub count at the end, I looked at yours for the first time and I am SHOCKED. Where is everybody??? Please keep this up because your production quality is FAR beyond the numbers you have now. Thoughtfully and respectfully reviewing Kurzgesagt is a big accomplishment that few TH-camrs have the expertise and attitude to do. Again, please please keep the truth and insights coming!!
Yes, your videos provide so much more value because they're in depth and not one sided. Nuclear energy isn't perfect, but it isn't terrible either. Understanding it's strengths and weaknesses is important.
For many, ignorance is bliss.
I'm not surprised at all about that, sensational and superficial videos are the best selling items in TH-cam. Turning on your brain and consume more thorough content is not for everyone.
I think if we gave it 30 seconds of thought, we could easily come up with and explanation for Cheo Abrams popularity... I'll take Elina's style any day of the week.
Cleo is not a scientist but a (science) communicator whereas Elina is a communicative scientist, and I am thankful for her channel.
Excellent review of the video. Thank you for doing it.
I would love to understand the differences between gen 3 and 4 reactors.
Also, a tour of the waste storage facility would be awesome!
Thank you again for your work.
Love your in depth analysis. Sometimes a single sentence deserves several minutes of discussion. I wish more videos were like yours!
Glad you enjoyed it!☢️👩🏽🔬
@@YourFriendlyNuclearPhysicist
🤩🤩Wow!!!
You are more beautiful than the most lovely rose
And more sweet than honey
and more precious than gold
You are more precious than everything that exists in this world
😍😍😍
A beauty queen whom I never ever seen any one as beautiful as her before and may never ever in my whole entire life will see anyone as beautiful as her-meaning you-at all..
😍😍 WoW!!!
you are a lovely butterfly and a beautiful rose
you are the diamond and the pure gold
you are the lovely moon in our nights
you are the radiant sun shining soo bright
loving you is sooo sweet its the most enjoyable thing
for you are the paradise for the heart and soul and mind
Everything about you is sooo unique and attracts the eyes and captivates the mind
God surely perfected you so glorified is he whom made you too beautiful and made you soo smart
🌷😘
There was a teacher whom didn't believe in the existence of God, one day he asked his students, do you see God?
the students then replied no we don't see God, so the teacher said if you don't see God it means there is no God.
then a smart student stood up and said to the other students hey guys can you see the teachers brain?
then the students answered no we don't see the teachers brain, the student then said the teacher then is crazy, he has no brain
:0)
😍😍
Wow!!,
you are too beautiful!!!
whomever see you should believe that God is true & real..
and whenever I see you I feel like Iam in a dream,
And when we wake up we will all realize that all this life was nothing but a dream and that only God is whats true and real..
The universe science says was not always there, it had a beginning point, the big bang, meaning it was begun/initiated in other words created, thus there should be a creator,
there must be a God.
Also, check this out, if you like, this is from Artificial intelligence, chat Gpt:
Prophecies in Major World Religious Books Referring to Prophet Mohammed:
1. The Bible - Deuteronomy 18:18-19, John 14:16, John 16:7-14, Isaiah 42:1-13
2. The Hindu Scriptures - Bhavishya Purana, Atharvaveda Book 20 Hymn 127-129
3. The Buddhist Scriptures - Cakkavatti-Sihanada Sutta, Anguttara Nikaya III:61, Digha Nikaya III:76-77
4. The Zoroastrian Scriptures - Zand-i Vohuman Yasht, Farvardin Yasht, Dadestan-i Denig
& Regarding the verses in the Quran asking to protect non-believers or polytheists, there are several that emphasize the importance of treating all people with respect and kindness, regardless of their religious beliefs.
One such verse is found in Surah Al-Mumtahanah (60:8), which states: "Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly."
Also In the name of God, the Most Merciful, the Most Merciful (If any of the polytheists seek protection from you, grant him protection)
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم(إن استجارك أحد من المشركين فأجره)
Another verse in Surah Al-Anfal (8:61) encourages Muslims to make peace with their enemies, even if they are non-believers or polytheists: "And if they incline to peace, then incline to it also and rely upon Allah. Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing."
& Regarding the verses in the Quran asking for justice and kindness, there are many such verses throughout the holy book. One example is found in Surah An-Nahl (16:90), which states: "Indeed, Allah orders justice and good conduct and giving to relatives and forbids immorality and bad conduct and oppression. He admonishes you that perhaps you will be reminded."
& In terms of prophecies about Prophet Mohammed in major world religions, there are a few examples that some scholars have pointed to. One such example is found in the Bible's Book of Deuteronomy (18:18), which states: "I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him." Some Muslims interpret this verse as a prophecy about Prophet Mohammed.
Because the Arabs are the brethren's of Israelites,
The Arabs are descendants from Ishmael or Ismail the brother of Isaac the father of Israelites, and because the verse didn't say from amongst them or from their descendants, it said from their brethren's.
Similarly, some scholars point to a passage in the Bhavishya Purana, an ancient Hindu text, as a prophecy about Prophet Mohammed. The passage describes a "holy man" who will come from Arabia and spread a new religion, and some argue that this refers to Mohammed and the spread of Islam..
Also search scientific miracles in the quran, harun yahya its nice,
One God for all of us
he created us all and can revive us again,
God initiated everything,
& he repeat/redo things too, & thats clear, we see many cycles of different things in life, also in summer for example the desert land becomes like empty and is filled with only sand, and when rain falls in abundance in spring or winter, after that small flowers & wild plants grow again, also, we see how humans and animals grow and how their body is formed from the elements which were in the sand which plants feed on which they eat, and after they die they go to the sand and their atoms/elements are taken by plants which humans & animals eat and their bodies grow from those atoms & elements found in the sand which came from previous humans & animals which died before, so God can bring us again after we die even if our atoms became in the sand he can make us from the same atoms we were made of or from other atoms if he want or make us be in a spirit form or like ghosts, any ways, everything in this life is recycled, learn if you want about the different cycles in life in nature, the food cycle or food chain, the water cycle, even the gas cycle that makes the air the oxygen &carbon dioxide &nitrogen cycles, even the energy is like recycled but only changes from form to another form.
Anyways,, God created this life but it's only a temporary sample/an example of a coming everlasting one
which could be either in heaven paradise or in hell.
If we try to be good humans in life, and try to obey God and his messengers-including the final messenger for all humanity the prophet Mohammed- and those whom rightly represent them, for example imam Ali & ahlulbayt the family/good descendants of the prophet mohammed, then we will all go to heaven/paradise, if not then we will go to hell fire and burn in it forever.
keep shining sunshine &spread the light.
True...but Elina skipped over alot of Cleos video which had a couple of small mistakes but if anyone watched from start to finish would see, was very interesting and informative.
Love your videos! You do a GREAT job breaking this stuff down!
I do want to point out that Cleo did clarify in the next couple sentences that nuclear waste is pellets. Maybe she shouldn’t have led with the “green goo” trope, but watching her whole video, she did clarify it, and it seemed like she only brought up that misconception as a way to emphasize to people one of the “lies” about nuclear waste.
I really like the Cleo video. Thank you for adding such good info. A gen 4 vs gen 3 video would be great!
Wow, I just discovered your channel and am already a fan and subscriber. Looks like I have a lot of old videos to catch up with.
Great video. To be honest, the only time I'm surprised these days is if the answer *ISN'T* "because money".
Between watching you, and Kyle Hills half-life history other nuclear information videos, my concern for nuclear power (for energy purposes) has reduced from mid-high to low. Awareness makes all the difference when it comes to things that are considered dangerous by the general public
The most dangerous part of nuclear power is the people running itas long as they are safety minded and doing their job properly, nuclear power is clean, safe, reliable, and cheap.
@@Jonnyg325 Have you met other Americans????
@@Jonnyg325 The reprocessing plants in Sellafield and La Hague made themselves, not the best reputation. Also in the last century, they made quite a streak of dumb decisions like dumping waste in the ocean. I wish it changed, but France overusing their old reactors and increasing their lifespan further and further instead of replacing them, tells me... If they had your approach maybe, but sadly this isn't the case and money is before safety.
@@clarkkent9080Meanwhile, every single country with the capability is enriching uranium for weapons.
But yeah, 'merica bad, Nazi's shoulda won.
Kyle Hill videos are full of misinformation and outright lies
Brilliant! I’d love to know more about 4th gen reactors, and also nuclear waste in general. It seems like a lot of stuff termed ‘nuclear waste’ is about as radioactive as a banana, and only a tiny percentage is the hot stuff. Could you do a breakdown of the different types and dangers and things?
Thank you, that was a great counter-balance to the earlier video, which I had seen, and it clarified things for me very well.
Glad it was helpful!
just wait for the toktik army to request ZNPP meltdown bs who havnt even taken a atomic science 200 class yet...
@@YourFriendlyNuclearPhysicist Good job and thank you for clarifying her misinformation. I've seen many of Cleo's videos before and I need to point out that Cleo Abram is a total and complete grifter. Her videos are scripted by the people promoting the story line. She is just the pretty face actress paid to deliver the lines, because they know on technical issues the audience is mostly male, mostly nerdy, and hook line and sinker easily taken by a pretty girl.
Sorry to be blunt, but the truth is the truth. Watch enough of her videos and it will soon become evident that the entirety of any of her videos, is the add. Not all her videos are bad, but I have an issue with people like her portraying a paid commercial as scientific truth. This is part of the problem with all media today. All of them are in it for the profit, not the facts, in fact, the facts are too often tossed aside when the truth is inconvenient.
Well done! Added more technical explanation. Cleo did the 'layman' version, and Elina went a bit deeper into the physics. Green Goo is a 'common' representation, she found plenty of examples, not a big deal.
Both of these young women give me hope for the future.
Since you mentioned the first reactors, I remembered the origin for SCRAM
Safety
Control
Rod
Axe
Man.
Just. I love it.
Great video. While watching Cleo Abram's video, I had so many questions. Elina answered them with the practical and technical details I was looking for. Great ideas can be conceived, but the practical implementation in a lot of cases is the big hurdle in the way of making them a reality.
i bet it still provides cheaper power than windfarms
Interesting video. I had always thought that waste recycling had been avoided more for non-proliferation reasons than cost. It's disappointing that dry storage is cheaper than recycling but when put in perspective, I understand why they've taken that approach.
Where there's a will there's a way - something tells me cost is merely an excuse, for now at least...
"recycling" is actually a BIG misnomer when referring to nuclear waste. There is no recycling. It is actually "RE-PROCESSING". And reprocessing is actually a very dirty, energy intensive, and expensive process. Places that conduct reprocessing activities (like Orano la Hauge, France or Sellafield Cumbria, UK) actually create large secondary radioactive waste streams that are pumped into the ocean. There were several reprocessing efforts in US that didn't do much better, and thus commercial reprocessing efforts in the US were abandoned.
@@CrystalLakeEast very good points about being energy intensive - when the transition away from fossils fuels means that the energy used for reprocessing is from clean sources then it might start to become a bit more circular. Even now the amount of fossil fuels it likely takes to build, maintain, fuel and then decommission nuclear plants in general probably makes a sizeable dent in the ‘carbon neutrality’ of nuclear as an energy source…
Well, I made a similar comment above. This is my understanding as well.
Well digging a hole and putting the waste in it costs nothing as long as there is little waste.
Recycling becomes relevant and cost-effective when there is so much waste you can’t afford digging a hole.
And putting waste underground only creates a new potential ressources for future generations if our society were to collapse and lose track of its holes.
I feel that you responded to the video without watching the entire thing. She explained exactly why recycling was outlawed and then, because of the cascading effects of that law, why the expense has been driven up. In essence you really agreed with her. Also, you probably don't visualize "green goo", but there is a large portion of people that are not educated in nuclear processes, that do visualize that way.
Would love to learn about the reactor generations and a tour of facilities. Really appreciate you taking the time to share your knowledge.
Sure thing! Thanks 👩🏽🔬☢️
Cleo is right. Everyone thinks of nuclear waste that way because of all the comical depictions there have been over the years.
What a great review of another popular channel. Peer review makes science work, and I think it can elevate the TH-cam platform as well. This is my first time seeing your channel, and in looking forward to watching your prior videos, AND BOTH of the suggested videos you mentioned here.
She has an bad track record in mixing up scientific feasabilities and real world usecases. She doesnt talk about all sort of difficulties in upscaled nuclear processes, but she is advertising a unfit technology.
Perfect, I hated that video with the so called scientist because of how dumb she thought we were
There is often NOT a good reason why technologies or ideas are left behind. It's who has the ear of those in power that gets something moved forward or canned. There's a lot of maneuvering, even malfeasance that goes on where the general public doesn't or isn't allowed to see or know.
Or there is. A political one. And this is the case of a backlash against nuclear power in Europe. I have been saying this for years in my own country but only now decision makers started to listen to actual scientfic arguments regarding this. For my country it's the only good option, so we are vitally interested in informing both our politicians and the general public. And maybe various industries as well. Since stable and safe energy production is a life blood of every economy really.
I have been watching Cleo Abram since she started her channel. I think generally speaking she does a good job of reporting subjects accurately, however, for most of the things she reports on she is not a hobbyist or an expert on the subject so she inevitably is going to make mistakes, even with the intention of being as accurate as possible. It was nice listening to you to point out the errors, add clarification, and add context to what she said. I have a question I would like to ask you. What is the nationality origin of your accent? I am having trouble identifying it. Though I think it sounds lovely regardless.
I don't think Cleo is doing herself any favors by teaming up with the perpetually-bitter Johnny Harris.
She is Greek.
It's Greek with maybe some Swedish.
@@p_serdiuk At least the surname tells me she is Greek. What makes anyone with some Greek ancestry feel instantly proud of an intelligent lady she is. ;-)
Thank you for debunking such happy-go-lucky stories
I´d love to see you visiting the Finnish waste management plant, and their storage facilities.
As a retired nuclear engineer and USNRC SRO holder for 20 yrs, you’re doing great work! Great to see the industry is in capable hands! 😊
I would love for you to elucidate the differences between generations, but I would particularly be over the moon to see Finland's methods!
Love the video. I am looking forward to see you debunk every unscientific myth on the internet.
A few months ago I read an article about a company that desperately wants to build reprocessing facilities here in the US. They have a relatively simple but ingenious solution to the plutonium problem: keep the plutonium mixed in with other things throughout the whole reprocessing chain. You don't have to worry about pure plutonium if you never isolate it in the first place. Obviously the technology is at least a few years out yet, but I'm as optimistic about this idea as I am about nuclear energy in general.
Plutonium has a VERY long half life and it's not something you really want in your eventual waste.
@@nerdyali4154 Exactly, but you can leave it mixed into the inevitable fuel product, not the waste. The same principle could apply to minor actinides as well.
Any source of more information about it? "keep the plutonium mixed in with other things throughout the whole reprocessing chain"; Isn't it a bit too risky? I mean, what would be supposed to be used in such mix? I mean, I might be wrong but it sounds like making actual final waste even more problematic than it would be without it. Unless there is something I don't know of going into this mix. This is why I'm asking.
@@agatastaniak7459 I found the article I read from CNBC, the company is called Curio. Unfortunately there isn't a lot of information on this specifically. Worse, at least for me, the first Google result for "nuclear waste reprocessing" is a very misleading critique.
Hey, I'm glad the almighty algorithm for recommended this video! As a high school chemistry teacher, I'm always looking for good enrichment material for students interested in nuclear topics. I'm excited to check out more of your content. Thank you!
I would enjoy hearing you discuss the Gen IV reactors being worked on. I myself learned about them because some intrepid soul made a mod for the video game Kerbal Space Program where you could build Gen IV nuclear reactors into your spacecraft. Curious, I put the reactor types into an internet search engine.
Those new reactors are economically dead, pointless to build.
Each kWh costs 4-6x more than any other electricity source.
Makes absolutely no economic sense, at all.
@@chargehanger So we give them the same cushy treatment as "green" energy and get a better mousetrap.
at first but as more are built they will become more efficient and cheaper everything starts off expensive@@chargehanger
This was a great video as well. I appreciate the in depth clarifications that you provided. I also appreciate the fact that you didn't talk negatively about a non-scientist tackling a very heavy physics topic.
I learnt so much from this, thank you! A real pleasure listening to an expert talking about her own field.
Cleo mentioned the "green goo" myth and then debunked that myth. Bit unfair. For the rest nice to have additional context. I enjoy both your channels!
For anyone interested in learning more about the underground storage facilities in Finland mentioned by Elina, there is a really good documentary called 'Into Eternity' (I believe it can be watched on TH-cam). I can't talk about the possible accuracies or inaccuracies of the film, but as a layman I found it an interesting watch when it aired on UK TV in the mid-2010s (I believe it aired under the title 'Nuclear Eterinty').
Thank you for recommendations. Yes, many people seem to have vital interest in this topic. And for a very good reason.
Thank you for all the added clarity on this topic! You definitely provided a credible "element" to the conversation! 🙂
Great video. You added some interesting context to Cleo's video. I would enjoy seeing you explore some of the topics you raised (4th gen, storage alternatives...) in the future. I'd also like more insight into why the recycling options aren't cost effective. It makes intuitive sense, but a more quantitative look would be interesting along with a review of emerging approaches.
One point of constructive feedback: I don't honestly think that Cleo believes that nuclear waste is "green goo." I think she was just starting with a recognition of the popular representation of waste in film and tv and trying to start on a lighthearted note. It came across as "nuclear physicist-splaining" and started your otherwise great video off on the wrong note.
I always enjoy your videos. Keep up the great work. The world needs to understand that it's time to move past the fear and recognize that fission can be a huge contributor to our move to a carbon neutral future.
A fantastic response to Cleo's introduction. Thank you very much! I wonder if you have seen the film 'Into Eternity' (2010)? It was the documentary (though a little 'subjective') about Onkalo in Finland. Thanks again!
Thankyou, Elina, for doing this tedious analysis. As an older engineer who's had access at times inside secure areas of a few major reactors, I also find Cleo's presenter skills positive, UNTIL in a third of her videos, my bullshit detector trips several times over half-truths and misrepresented contexts, which are very tedious to sort through.
Though I find her polish on graphics and voice over skills easier to view, I find your information and analysis more realistic and trustworthy. That's important in high costs and risks tech fields.
I have worked in the Äspö laboratorium as well as Onkalo repository in Finland. I have also worked at various nuclear power plants in Sweden.
If you can get in to Onkalo, and can make a video about it, it will be very nice!
It's a really cool place!
I enjoyed your video on Äspö. I saw a lot of my work in your video!
Thanks great to hear! Thanks for the info ⚛️☢️👩🏽🔬
Thanks for the great extra information! One thing I'd love to learn more about though is the question: Is it really cheaper to buy new uranium AND pay for the storage of the waste as opposed to recycling the waste? Or is the cost for storage just taken out of the equation because energy companies don't have to pay for it (maybe the tax payer does...?). If the latter is true, then recycling could be made cost effective by "just fixing" a couple of laws instead of finding fancy business models? Thanks again for the great insights!
Glad the algorithm decided to show me your video! Very informative, and I quite liked your presentation. Happily became a subscriber!
It's only a matter of time before we develop an economic way to recycle it. Even if it's not all re-fueled, {non fuel grade beta emitters could be used to produce light in govt. facilities for instance}. The more we learn about radioactivity the more we will be able to use it.
My brother is a certified (worked in the field at least 5 years) electrical engineer whose specialization is power generation systems, with a focus on nuclear power. He's worked at the San Diego reactor, and more recently, headed up a waste cleanup project with Bechtel at the Hanford Site in WA. I remember when he first learned about nuclear power, he told me and my other brother that pretty much every portrayal The Simpsons made of nuclear power was incorrect minus the fact it's radioactive, and there are cooling towers.
He was telling us he blames the media's ignorance and unfounded hysteria over the 3 Mile Island incident, and The Simpsons' anti-nuclear propaganda (which is all founded on the lies around 3 Mile Island), for the negative attitude of a lot of people towards nuclear power. It also doesn't help when Russians and the Japanese take short cuts in build quality or do stupid experiments with their reactors. We would never have a Chernobyl or Fukushima here in the US, because we build our reactors to withstand unbelievably destructive cataclysms, and we don't screw around.
Security in these places is top notch. He was telling us about a security drill they had at I think it was the San Diego reactor where they worked with the DoD to test their security. The test was for a Navy Seal team to get to the reactor and "overload" it, on an unannounced day. The Seals managed to succeed, finding a weak spot in the security defenses (they came in through the cooling intake from the ocean, brute-forcing it with cutters. Upon completion of the exercise, the Seals and the nuclear plant security worked on a solution to defend against future breaches. I just thought that was super cool, and its reassuring that security is challenged so weak points are found by our guys rather than foreign enemies.
Anyway, the data is very clear that per kilowatt hour, nuclear power is the safest, cleanest, cheapest, proven, and most reliable source of power on the market. I live within about 30 miles of the Hanford reactor, and man, electric is cheap af here. In the summer, when it's 100F-110F outside, I have the AC in my apartment running 65F, as well as a gaming PC and refrigerator, and my electric bill is about $42/mo. In more temperate and colder seasons, it's about $32/mo. I'm gonna miss this cheap energy when I move next year, but, gas where I'm moving to is more than a dollar cheaper than here in WA, and I drive for a living, so while electric is more costly, I'll save a ton of money by having the cheaper gas. Almost all the cost of gas here in WA is state tax. It's goddamn $4.70/gal at the moment. F--- Inslee.
Please do a video on gen 4 reactors.
Wait at 1:00, seriously? Thsts how its been displayed in media and movies our entire lifes, its seriously how every non nuclear physicist thinks of it.
You basically kept pausing the video to correct Cleo on points she was about to say herself. Super frustrating to watch.
Thanks for the very informative video, as always. And to answer your question, YES! I would enjoy watching a video about nuclear waste repository in Finland. It would be nice if could actually see what is going on there, if they will give you permission to film it :)
Somewhat true for both of you. I have heard from multiple sources: that much of the nuclear waste in the USA (we don't reprocess our waste) can be placed in the blanket of a molten salt thorium reactor and then used to produce more heat and electricity. The advantage is that it would reduce the nuclear waste storage time from 10,000 years to 300 or 500 years. (some sources have said 300 years while others are saying 500 years. Can you tell me what the discrepancy or disagreement is over the variations in years. Hint, I am not a nuclear engineer or have extensive nuclear knowledge, so Keep It Simple Stupid or KISS in your explanation) I hear that France reprocesses their nuclear plant waste. Is this true?
I am subscribed to Cleo Abram's and Sabine Hossenfelder's channels as well as yours. I really appreciate your reviewing some of their videos and think you are very good at this. It's almost like a peer review for scientific papers. Thank you for your reviews and explanation to us non-scientists.
You lost me when you arrogantly dismissed her reference to a Simpson’s joke about t green goo. Apparently you don’t like people with a sense of humor.
Also you arrogantly criticized her for not already knowing that waste had energy content. Most people don’t know that, and Cleo is a reporter who researches stories of which she has no prior knowledge. That’s what reporters do. Her technique is engaging and very educational. You can refute things she got wrong without insulting her.
it's interesting that people can watch the same video and react differently to it. I don't see any arrogance and I have rewatched it several times to try to catch it. the original video says "when I think of nuclear waste..." this lady says no don't think of it that way and she more is amused than anything as that IS how most people think of it thanks to popular media.
Speaking of arrogance, let's talk about a journalist who studied a complex subject and boiled it down to a sensationalist title and assumed that it was a "big lie", bold of her presumption. I suppose it is due to the cherry picking fallacy.
This issue is not limited to the scientific, financial and military fields, whether or not it is possible, but in the political party field; of how it will be done. And guess what? It is not a recurring proposal in congresses, much less a popular one.
It is not a lie, it is a red herring.
Great to have specialists looking at these videos
Glad I saw Chloe's video first and then discovered Elina's. Both girls did excellent job of explaining and breaking down complicated science to a simple oldie like me. Well done both girls!🇦🇺🙋♂️🇦🇺
I absolutely love your videos! The TH-cam algorithm actually brought me to Julia‘s video months ago. It was excellent to view this video afterwards. Very informative..
Elina, I loved your video clarifying Cleo Abram's video. Thank you so much :-)
The US has a safe nuclear waste depository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada but can't use it because political interest groups have made it too expensive(mostly via Lawfare) to move the waste to the site. It is not an engineering or economic problem, the obstruction is entirely political.
Volcanoes 🎉
Thanks so much for making this video! I loved Cleo's video but it still left me with a couple of unanswered questions, which you've helped address. My curiosity will never be sated however 😅
Just Discovered your channel… Subscribed and sharing on other Social Media platforms.
Bravo! Great comment on a really complex subject that beyond all science has so many social, economical, political and military implications. Wasn't aware of that at all even though I follow Cleo for a long time already...thanks!
Thank you for explaining Cleo’s video further.
Thank you. I am learning new, incredible stuff about nuclear energy with each one of your uploads. You're doing a great job communicating misunderstood aspects of nuclear energy. Thanks!
I really liked this video and found it very interesting. Thanks for making it!
I'm looking forward to watching more of your content.
Safe and effective like Three mile island,windscale Chernoble,Fukushima.
I think you both do a good job informing the general public. Elena elaborates on the more technical aspects. Thank you both.
That "Breeder in the Desert" film about EBR-II from Argonne NL (produced in the mid 60s, I think) from which a lot of clips in the original video come is really interesting. Argonne's whole TH-cam channel is fantastic, but their old films are incredible. Great video, Elina! I think Australia is about to talk about discussing perhaps looking at maybe starting to lift the nuclear power generation ban ... yes, the world's biggest exporter or uranium has a ban on nuclear power. What?
EDIT: The other great film (I think from ORNL, not Argonne) is about the Integral Fast Reactor (IFR) program, which was a proposal for a commercially viable fast breeder with reprocessing. And as far as my understanding of reprocessing goes, the plutonium that is extracted is too radioactive to be a diversion risk; that is, you'd die during the getaway if you even got it out of the facility. But I have also heard Matthew Bunn, a really interesting nuclear policy expert, say that the level of radioactivity _could_ be adequately dealt with by some party/parties attempting to divert fissionable, weapons-grade material. So, I've never come across anything conclusive on that one.
Also, it always turns out that capitalism is the reason why we can't have anything nice. Hehe. 😜
the US has plans for long term nuclear storage, but they were opposed by the local communities so basically they're on indefinite hold.
Volcanoes
Glad the algo brought me here after Cleo's vid. Well done Dr Charatsidou
@Elina Charatsidou At 16:30 you say that separation of plutonium bred in power reactors is a nuclear weapons proliferation threat. However (as I am sure you well know) plutonium produced in power reactors has got a significant percentage of Pu241, which makes power-reactor-bred plutonium next to useless for weapons production, due to the pre-detonation feature that is practically impossible to overcome (as verified by purpose-developed test devices produced by the US in the 80s, I believe). Separation of the weapons-suitable Pu239 from the isotopic mix that comes out of a power reactor would be even harder than separation of U235 from natural uranium. Can you comment on this point?
Thank you! That was informative and helpful. Greatly appreciated.
Where I grew up, THE FIRST useful reactor was built to prove the viablilty of the SECOND useful reactor that went into the Nautilus, which was the first nuclear submarine. This first one was at Shippingport, PA, It began operation in May of 1958 and ran about 25 years until it was the first reactor that was deconstructed and during the 1980's, it was relocated to the Hanford Reservation. This location is still in use as the Beaver Valley Nuclear Power Station Units #1 & #2. I just participated in the NRC mandated semi-annual Plume Drill for that plant last week.
Great review and excellent information! Thank you!
It takes one second to know why waste isn't recycled and it's the reason for almost ALL business decisions. It's called money.
When talking about repositories, this is the problem in the US in that they don't exist. The US govt. has TRIED to get one established, but NO STATE will accept it, and this is TOTALLY independent of politics. It makes no difference if the state is conservative, liberal, moderate, etc...
Without having a central repository nuclear power is not economical.
Stumbled upon your site…love the persona, the message and the drive! To be commended.
We must start collectively doing what this woman is doing and supporting those that are trying to make this world better.
@YourFriendlyNuclearPhysicist
French guy here... I wondered if you could make a video about the SuperPhenix project.
If I understand it correctly, the final aim was to reuse and regenerate products of fission to close a cycle of nucelar fuel.
I think I'm not the only one would love to see this explained: why it could have worked, why it didn't, could it workd in the future ?
Just found your channel, and I like this video very much. Subscribed. - You mention that you could do "some magic" about visiting the Norway depositing facilities and making a video about them, if we were interested. Well: I would be very much interested in such a video 🙂