4 ms·
I agree but Uranium has 1.000.000x the energy density of oil and 1.000.000.000x that of batteries. If we are to stand any chance of avoiding the tail end of a
by bullen 5y ago
I agree but Uranium has 1.000.000x the energy density of oil and 1.000.000.000x that of batteries.
If we are to stand any chance of avoiding the tail end of a net hubbert curve we need nuclear.
Fusion, thorium and 4th gen fission (France has cancelled both the super-phenix project and the modern revival of that initiative) are nowhere near realistic and/or deterministic dates, so we have to go with the 100 years of Uranium we have left.
This is the only descision where I'm against, but for, at the same time. There is no alternative except permanent crisis until civilization returns to the stone age.
Coming down from the massive bubble created by stored sunlight (coal, oil and gas) is not going to be a smooth ride any way we turn it.
- erentz 5y ago> 100 years of Uranium we have left FWIW it's really not clear that there's such a limit on the uranium supply. Could be 4 billion years with seawater harvesting and reprocessing, etc. https://whatisnuclear.com/blog/2020-10-28-nuclear-energy-is-longterm-sustainable.html https://whatisnuclear.com/blog/2020-10-28-nuclear-energy-is-...
- q1w2 5y agoEven the limit oft cited of "100 years" only refers to current proven mines. It does not include any estimated reserves and the results of additional prospecting. There are large swaths of nations that have never even been prospected for Uranium deposits. Sea water extraction is not needed.
- cinntaile 5y agoNo mention of cost for doing water extraction though, they kind of handwave that part in the criticism section.
- photochemsyn 5y agoEnergy density doesn't seem all that relevant as long as you have a decent area collection system. Indeed, high energy density can create more problems than it solves (major problems with confining D-T fusion comes to mind). I also have no doubts about running human civilization on sunlight and wind as long as you have robust electrical storage / chemical conversion / distribution systems. By conversion I mean using sunlight to reduce H2O to H2, then CO2 to CH4 or longer hydrocarbons. Notably this also works for fertilizer production, i.e. nitrogen + hydrogen -> NH3 etc.
- q1w2 5y agoBuilding millions of solar panels is an ecological disaster waiting to happen. ...not only for the destruction of natural habitats, but the CO2 emitted in manufacturing and replacing all those panels, and the garbage disaster of disposing of them.
- photochemsyn 5y agoThe solar breeder factory was proposed in 1978. A solar manufacturing facility powered by, yes, solar panels. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1978pvse.conf..825L/abstract https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1978pvse.conf..825L/abstra...
- q1w2 5y agoThis does not include the energy needed to mine and manufacture the raw materials needed to build the solar panels. Most of those rare-earth elements in photovoltaics comes from vast mining operations in China.