this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2023
1337 points (97.1% liked)

Memes

45729 readers
851 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Sonotsugipaa@lemmy.dbzer0.com -4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Nuclear power is good and all, but there's only so much Uranium on this planet to satisfy the energy demand of ~8000000000 people...

[–] ssboomman@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You should look up how much energy we can generate with nuclear. There’s more than enough.

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You should look again how much can be generated with non-recycled and non-breeded uranium.

If we keep insist only proven designs can be produced, we are for in for a short lived transition that won't last even for the normal lifetime of a reactor. If we stop insisting on proven designs, we are in for discovering some weird new failure mode here and there.

It will still probably be much safer than coal, but nuclear is either extremely limited or way more dangerous than the number indicate.

[–] ssboomman@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

Lmao yeah man. Nuclear isn’t sustainable when you remove and ignore one of the most important aspects of it. If we account for breeder reactors we can power humanity for billions of years

https://whatisnuclear.com/nuclear-sustainability.html#:~:text=Some%20will%20last%20us%20about,and%20are%20thus%20not%20sustainable.&text=Breeder%20reactors%20can%20power%20all,breeder%20reactors%20are%20indeed%20renewable.

[–] don@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

Thorium-based nuclear power is in the rise.