3 ms·

Can't reply on the other one (max depth?) so replying here. Nobody in the west is currently using "more than their fair share" in terms of uranium or lithium,

Can't reply on the other one (max depth?) so replying here. Nobody in the west is currently using "more than their fair share" in terms of uranium or lithium, except maybe EV owners :D Uranium is completely underused because of the irrational fearmongering since the 70s, which is the reason we have the global warming problem to begin with. If we'd gone all-in on nuclear, we'd be practically carbon zero now. So your claim that the poor aren't getting their fair share of stuff/energy because the rich are using too much is just plainly false.

Schroedingersat 4y ago
You have to wait a bit to reply on long threads. > Nobody in the west is currently using "more than their fair share" in terms of uranium or lithium, except maybe EV owners :D The rest are just using 100x their share of the sustainable GHG emissions budget, and the wealthiest 1% or so in the west are using so much energy that just the waste heat from thermal generation is enough to provide an unsustainable amount of thermal forcing were everyone to use the same amount. > Uranium is completely underused because of the irrational fearmongering since the 70s, which is the reason we have the global warming problem to begin with. If we'd gone all-in on nuclear, we'd be practically carbon zero now. Is this some kind of bad take olympics? The current existing and planned reactor fleet will use all of the economically accessible uranium in a generation or two and will ravage vast areas of kazakhstan, namibia, and australia in doing so. And that's to make a couple % of final energy. There's not even a single fuel load to fully replace fossil fuels for 6 years.