Y’all. This is a known spammer who is picking up momentum. We’re seeing LOTS of accounts using the same name and avatar. But the bio varies from instance to instance. And a minority of them don’t have an avatar, but still use the name.
If you see these accounts, please report them. We’re trying to wipe them out, but we can’t until we know about them.
Thanks for the teamwork! 🤝


Emil Jacobs - Collectifission
Unknown parent • • •Ah yes, the huge waste problem. If only we could recycle any of that.
Oh wait, we can. And we do. Today.
Meanwhile, let's keep ignoring that other waste, shall we?
Emil Jacobs - Collectifission
Unknown parent • • •Sorry, it is hard to not be sarcastic after dealing with the same one-sided question for years.
Nuclear waste is currently recycled through the PUREX process, where spent nuclear fuel rods are cut down in smaller pieces and then chemically treated to keep the uranium and plutonium (read: the fuel) to create new fuel rods with them, which is called MOX fuel (Mixed OXide).
This is possible because spent nuclear fuel, after having been in a reactor core for four or five years, still have up to 96% of the fuel available. It is just too contaminated with fission products to remain high efficiency at that point.
The fission products, which are a wide group of short lived isotopes, are separated via the PUREX procedure and put in glass granulates. This vitrified stuff is chemically inert and highly radioactive for around 300 years. In the Netherlands we store around 1.5 cubic meters of it each year in an above-ground facility called the HABOG building at the COVRA facility (see below picture). I had a tour there last year, which was really fascinating.
The disadvantage of the PUREX route is threefold: 1. It separates out the plutonium, creating a potential proliferation concern; 2. it's somewhat costly, so only few countries do it (the Netherlands does it via France's Orano facility in La Hague); 3. it's not that efficient in burning up all potential fuel.
There is an alternative in the works via pyroprocessing (yes, by high temperatures), which leaves the plutonium mixed with the uranium. This route in combination with another type of reactor, called a fast breeder reactor, can be used to create a better way to gain a 100x efficiency gain in fuel efficiency. This leaves essentially the short lived fission products.
Then there's another development going on via molten salt reactors. This way opens the possibility of isolating specific isotopes from that 'soup' of fission products, which then can be used for a plethora of industrial and healthcare use cases. If we develop this the coming decades, there is a potential to actually more or less completely recycle all of the waste.
Fast breeder reactors and molten salt reactors get online in the coming decade. China already got one online recently. I expect a lot more developments in this regard in the next few decades.
But again, compared to all other energy sources, nuclear energy has by far the lowest waste stream in absolute volume and the best maintained one by regulation. If for example the solar industry was expected to be on the same level of care, it would go bankrupt overnight. The nuclear industry can only maintain this double standard because of the amazing energy density of uranium.
Hope this helps!