Unraveling the Truth About Nuclear Waste in the U.S.
For nearly 80 years, the United States has been storing nuclear waste in what are termed “temporary” sites, leaving millions of pounds of hazardous material stranded with no permanent resting place. The video titled “You’re Being Lied To About Nuclear Waste” dives deep into this pressing issue, going beyond the surface-level understanding of one of our country’s most contentious energy sources.
Nuclear waste management has long been an unresolved dilemma, often overshadowed by the promise of nuclear energy itself. The video begins by elucidating what nuclear waste actually entails, shedding light on its complexities and the sheer volume created since the inception of nuclear power. To date, there are over 90 commercial nuclear reactors in operation across the U.S., each generating highly radioactive byproducts that need careful handling and disposal.
One glaring issue discussed is how temporary storage facilities operate. While these sites are crucial for immediate containment, they do not provide the long-term solution needed for waste disposal. The video outlines the risks associated with these temporary facilities, emphasizing the threat they pose to both public safety and the environment. Historical examples, such as the San Onofre Nuclear Power Plant and the catastrophic events at Fukushima, illustrate the potential dangers lurking in poorly managed nuclear storage.
Among the proposed solutions to this complex problem are deep geological repositories like Finland’s Onkalo, designed to safely isolate hazardous materials thousands of feet underground. However, the U.S. has yet to establish a comparable facility, with the Yucca Mountain project serving as a controversial case study in bureaucratic delay and public dissent. As the video points out, Americans are financing nuclear waste management through their electricity bills, yet no tangible solutions have materialized.
Another critical aspect explored in the video is the concept of nuclear waste recycling. While this innovative approach could reduce the volume of nuclear waste significantly, it also raises concerns about nuclear weapons proliferation, prompting a debate about whether the benefits outweigh the risks. The discourse on advanced nuclear technologies further complicates the narrative, suggesting that a more sustainable approach to nuclear energy could evolve, albeit with significant inherent challenges.
In juxtaposing nuclear waste with other energy sources, the video encourages viewers to reconsider their perspectives. The complexities and risks are not exclusive to nuclear energy; rather, they are a crucial part of the broader conversation about energy sustainability and safety.
As you watch “You’re Being Lied To About Nuclear Waste,” it becomes clear that the issue is not merely about managing waste—it’s about navigating the intersecting layers of policy, technology, and societal responsibility. The video serves as an eye-opener, urging us to confront uncomfortable truths about our energy choices and the long-term implications they bring.
Watch the video by Business Insider
Video “You're Being Lied To About Nuclear Waste” was uploaded on 10/10/2025 to Youtube Channel Business Insider
Until we get fusion worked out, nuclear fission reactors are our best bet to stop pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Having said that, all the people freaking out over nuclear waste when there are so many ways to deal with it (including some not mentioned in this video like FAST reactors) are going to lead to more environmental damage than if we just went nuclear.
Also, good job on presenting the facts and different viewpoints on this topic pretty fairly. It doesn't happen as often as it should, so I like to acknowledge when it does.
Just put some money in a jar every year for future generations to shoot it into space with their technology.
8:55 but what about the ones that I got from Walmart 8:55
Zero carbon emissions from a finished reactor? Sure – just ignore the CO2 from mining uranium.
The scientists and engineers at Fukushima and Chernobyl also said everything was safe — right up until it wasn’t.
100 bilion investment is nothing for almost free energy for 100 years for the entire US.. only a bilion a year
Credit to @xkcd_whatif at 4:50
But if reprocessing spent fuel brings down it's years of being dangerous to store afterwards… You'd want that right? Yes it might be expensive, but maybe that's the cost of survival… And more important than keeping the war industry as well fed as it is
nuclear waste are only solid pellets eh?? clearly you're the one lying.
France doesn't have the biggest nuclear waste processing capacity. Russia does.
The light emmission of Uranium processed materials is UV neongreen. Such was the colouring from, that was used over hundreds of years, mostly for laquering. Brilliant Blue was the last one that held parts of it and was prohibited. It is back as children sweets since about 15 years. The EU got invaded.
Finland has!
the political fallout concerning the nuclear industries are quite justified imho. it is unfortunate that the ukrainian power stations are conspicuously absent in this documentary, if it is to be construed as balanced journalism. the idea of placing all the high level waste on one football pitch graphically illustrates both the size of the problem and the critical ineptitude of this report to signal why this would be a catastrophic idea… Indeed, humans are simultaneously AT risk from radioactive waste AND YET they themselves are the highest risk factor in this story: a geiger counter will warn you whilst it would appear that politicians exploit impending doom as leverage in order to fuel their racketeering… from Karen Silkwood coverups to Donbass war tactics. I feel this report is incomplete and therefore unhelpful with its unclear goals and incomplete assessments. Propaganda is as tricky as radiation when mishandled.
THE 'OLD, PASSING RACE ' EPITOMIZED BY IL TRUMPO AT 4:50PM ON 10:10:25 AND THE TRUMPO CRYPTO GAINS THEREOF.
🤡📣🌐💨
KEY FING IN USA; HEALTH COVERAGE. 🤒🤕😷
Why don't just launch into space
THE CRYPTED CRYPTOIDS RESULTANT OF IL TRUMPO'S 4:50PM POST, ARE PROOF PUDDING OF WHY THERE ISN'T YET A NUKO 🌐🌑💫
It's the question of live by this coal power plant and shorten your life by 3–5 years, while having a higher risk of pulmonary and cardiovascular illnesses vs live by this nuclear power plant that won't effect your life at all unless something goes horribly wrong.
Feels like weird propaganda against renewables. Uranium mining poses significant damage to nature and humanity. Uranium is a limited resource as well. So why is this considered great again!?
We don't need centralized energy but decentralized and more efficient usage and production…
7:00 I aint trying to hear from some crazy lookin cat lady that is just a professor at British Columbia. Thats like being a fisherman on a space station.
Terrorist attack ? Really , thats the main concern you US people have 🤣👍
Why dont you say : maybe a hurricane or earthquake might hit !!
Read "The Hanford Site is America's most contaminated nuclear location. See photos of its long, toxic past": https://trib.al/nJe5pMW