Rate of decay for a specific isotope is constant, so its abundance decays exponentially. Of course a species can transmute in a new radionuclide so the process in total will not be exactly exponential, but pretty close. Seen on a log scale it’s awfully close to a straight line

Funny how everyone is immediately concerned with a few thousands of cubic meters of solid waste that literally loses its harm exponentially quickly and we can store underground while all the billions of tons of toxic liquid and gaseous waste coming from a sleuth of industrial applications (including renewables production) constantly being pumped in the biosphere never get a mention

Well you know how that goes.

I don’t, please elaborate.

Land use and energy storage requirements beg to differ

The VP has to be confirmed by congress so the vacancy could be a long one.

Sure

You got the point exactly. Thing is, hydro and geothermal power are not scalable. Thinking one can decarbonize Germany or the US with renewables alone is a pipe dream unfounded in reality.

Give me an example of an industrialized country which runs on wind and solar without gas or coal backup plants.

Amazing, somebody should tell Germany about it.

Does not compute. Why should depleted uranium have any effect on grain production. Its strong radioactive components are, as the name says, depleted. The only worry is inhalation immediately following impact.

I think there’s way too much misinformation about this and way too many people talking without a clue

Let me know when renewables reach the stage where they don’t have to be backed up by coal and gas plants.

Gotta love anti nuclear activists getting more and more desperate. You’re being decarbonised. Please do not resist.

That’s a great plan to never actually decarbonize

I don’t think you should have your license if you don’t know that steering with the back wheels gives you much finer control in you maneuver…

Boi you’re the proverbial pigeon shitting on a chessboard.

Cope