3 ms·
That's only because that chart isn't bookkeeping nuclear as renewable, which is misleading at best.
by bhickey 8mo ago
That's only because that chart isn't bookkeeping nuclear as renewable, which is misleading at best.
- eis 8mo agoWhy would you classify nuclear as renewable? You can say it's clean energy but it's not renewable.
- maxerickson 8mo agoWe've probably increased the amount of fissile material on earth. It's pretty renewable at that rate.
- oskarkk 8mo agoIf you're talking about uranium enrichment, that's like saying we increased the amount of gasoline on earth (by refining crude oil). Natural uranium is ~99% non-fissile, and ~1% fissile, and we're only removing part of the non-fissile isotope to obtain 5% concentration of the fissile isotope. Uranium still needs to be mined, spent fuel can be partially recycled, but you need some new natural uranium input in the end. That said, non-renewability of uranium is a non-issue IMO, compared to the huge amounts of other non-renewable resources we're extracting.
- goldenarm 8mo agoThe definition of renewable is a bit silly, wind and solar come from the sun's nuclear fusion.