3 ms·
Those are _identified_ reserves. The same was said about peak oil until much larger deposits were found and/or new extraction methods discovered. Not saying it
by insane_dreamer 2y ago
Those are _identified_ reserves. The same was said about peak oil until much larger deposits were found and/or new extraction methods discovered.
Not saying it's unlimited, but at current consumption rates we're much more likely to run out of petroleum than uranium[0]. But of course we've been saying we have "50 years left" of petroleum for decades, so who knows.
And that doesn't account for alternative fuel sources such as thorium[1]
[0] https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=38&t=6 https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=38&t=6
[1] https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/thoriums-long-term-potential-in-nuclear-energy-new-iaea-analysis https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/thoriums-long-term-pote...
- natmaka 2y ago> until much larger deposits were found When it comes to uranium this is a mere wish (low and decaying probability), as exploration is very efficient because major investments were made during the 1950's, in order to obtain stuff needed for atomic weapons: we are pretty good at finding uranium (much more than for petroleum), and forecasting proved efficient at predicting such events. The uranium bubble (around 2007), for example, triggered a massive investments raise, but subsequent campaigns had very insufficient results (identified reserves grow by ~15%) and campaigns winded down. The most promising game-changing new uranium extraction method (from seawater) lags since the 1980's. Nothing industrial here. Same for thorium (and all Gen4 reactors): there is not a single ready-to-deploy industrial reactor. It is about a "Long-Term Potential in Nuclear Energy" (title of the document you refer to), nobody takes it as a significant part of our incoming electrical system.