The post you are reporting:
Colin, I am guessing that the figure of 30 years is the average life expectancy, but this is the figure generally bandied about and I am happy to be corrected. I wonder how old Dungeness was before being decommissioned? But even at the ripe old age of 47, that is an incy wincy percentage of the life span of the toxic waste material. And we are not talking about slag heaps here. We are talking about a product that interferes with the atomic structure of your body. Cancers, boils, ulcers - death by exposure is not quick, unlike those caught in an atomic explosion.
I am sure the Government will put some spin on it, but the truth of the matter is that this stuff is deadly and it will never go away in the lifetime of humankind. It will remain as a toxic legacy for all our ancestors, that'll be something to be proud of, huh? And where do you think the waste from the decommissioned plants has been put? I don't know, but I do know that the Government spends millions on nuclear waste. It has to be secure, it has to be guarded and this costs money. So, spread those costs over the future of humanity for the next few thousand years and you can see why nuclear is considered a turd for future generation. It is hardly cost effective, as some argue.