[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 51 KB, 400x300, 1332387827781.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4591615 No.4591615 [Reply] [Original]

Why use nuclear power? I've read that there's only enough uranium to last us about 80 years. Is this true? Is uranium such an unsustainable energy source? Can we use anything else as a substitute?

>> No.4591621

> inb4 thorium

>> No.4591627

We can use everything.

>> No.4591634

>>4591627
How?

>> No.4591639

>>4591634
Convert mass to energy.

>> No.4591642

Scientists can probably figure out a away to reuse depleted uranium as fuel

>> No.4591712

>>4591639
and
>>4591642
Aren't very inspiring answers. Anything more I can get?

>> No.4591742

Radioactive waste emits raditation (i.e. a form of energy). Breeder reactors can turn thorium into uranium. And nuclear fusion (once we finally get it to work in net energy) will be amazing.

Stop being an anti-nuclear dick.

>> No.4591756

>>4591742
Actually, I'm pro nuclear, and I really believe in it, but the issue of sustaining it is what I have a problem with. I don't think it'll be worth converting all our power nuclear if it won't even last us a century.

>> No.4591763

>>4591756
did you miss the part where the guy says thorium and fusion?

the bigger problem is whether governments can be responsible enough to keep the reactors well-maintained and up to date.

>> No.4591761

>>4591615

No.

We have thousands of years worth left in the oceans. It's more expensive to extract, but the Japanese have managed to extract it for 3 times the current market price, and speculate that with today's technology it's possible to do it for 1.8 times. Which is not that grave, when you compare it to, say, oil price increases.

>> No.4591772

>>4591761

Source for those who care:

http://jolisfukyu.tokai-sc.jaea.go.jp/fukyu/mirai-en/2006/4_5.html

>> No.4591774

Nuclear is a non-solution. We would, in transitioning to it, simply be replacing one expensive, difficult-to-obtain, polluting, non-renewable resource with another.

My vote lies with thermosolar, but a wind is fine, too.

>> No.4591782

>I've read that there's only enough uranium to last us about 80 years. Is this true?
No.

>Is uranium such an unsustainable energy source?
No.

>Can we use anything else as a substitute?
Space solar. Deep geothermal. Ocean thermal. Fusion. More uranium, maybe from Mercury or some asteroids.

>> No.4591787
File: 10 KB, 112x126, cerealstahr.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4591787

Don't worry o.p. I got this within the next couple years. I can take energy from gravity. Currently I'm working with the properties of void, so i can make that an engine too.

>> No.4591808
File: 35 KB, 300x226, mahnigga.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4591808

>>4591761

>We have thousands of years worth left in the oceans. It's more expensive to extract, but the Japanese have managed to extract it for 3 times the current market price, and speculate that with today's technology it's possible to do it for 1.8 times. Which is not that grave, when you compare it to, say, oil price increases.

>>4591782

>Deep geothermal. Ocean thermal.

>> No.4591814

Theyre supposedly 50 years from a real fusion power plant. We only need more time to get us there. the worlds power consumption is going to double in te next 40 years.
Nothing else works (lol solar at 8%-30% efficiency , and 6x the cost, dont even get me started on wind) so its all we have.
Solar will get way better, and maybe one day we can beam that shit down from orbit, but until then its thorium and uranium ftw.
Stop being gay hippies( hurr fuckashima and Chernobyl), radiation mild exposure is severely overrated, and the linear no threshold radiation model could very well turn out to be wrong. Either way the juice is well worth the squeeze you fools.

>> No.4592027

>>4591814

The fusion reactor has been 50 years away the last 50 years...

>> No.4592042

>>4592027
Yea, i dont know if we'll ever have functional fusion power production - shits so hard under regular pressures that you need incredibly intricate methods to initiate the reaction, as well as large amounts of energy just to sustain it. Add to that the problem that intricate designs have a high chance of failure...

>> No.4592064

>>4591615
>yfw all the white people around planet america