2 ms·
10000 years is long. It's twice the length of the entire recorded history. I don't even know if mankind will survive another 100 years.
by Synaesthesia 1y ago
10000 years is long. It's twice the length of the entire recorded history. I don't even know if mankind will survive another 100 years.
- echelon 1y ago> I don't even know if mankind will survive another 100 years. Then it reasons that we should absolutely use this fuel.
- maxbond 1y agoIf all else is held equal, then yes, that follows. But the debate is more or less that some think it will hasten that timeline (through nuclear warfare and accidents) and some think it will delay it (by reducing pollution/climate change).
- M95D 1y agoUsing nuclear fuel leaves less for weapons and more demand increases cost for weapons too. Accidents happen, but they won't be the end of our species.
- maxbond 1y agoI think we should use more nuclear energy, I think nuclear powered container ships are under explored for instance. But it's not so simple. Nuclear energy programs can become nuclear weapons programs. A larger uranium mining and processing industry lowers the barriers of entry for building a weapons program. We're not going to exhaust our uranium reserves anytime soon. We're not going to be wiped out by a nuclear accidents, but we're heading into a future of stronger storms and more frequent wildfires, and nuclear power has a way of making disasters even worse.
- Synaesthesia 1y agoI've been thinking about nuclear powered container ships for a while. Ships burn the worst fuel, bunker fuel or heavy fuel oil. Nuclear is a lot more clean. And yes there's the risk of greater nuclear proliferation but we already have colossal stockpiles of nuclear weapons that pose a massive threat to mankind. That's been the reality for 70 years.