4427
Comments (463)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
3
Yaemz123 3 points ago +4 / -1

Nuclear power is clean and efficient, but the fuel is too scarce to be a major part of the world's power supply indefinitely. Given known and estimated supplies, and trends in increasing efficiency of use, at current levels (11% of current world electrical production), the world's primary supplies of uranium will last about 90 years. After that, further supplies could only be gotten by extraction from granite and similar rocks, or extraction from seawater, both of which would be enormously inefficient and expensive.

Realistically, the only fuel source currently viable indefinitely is wood, although future technologies may alter that reality.

7
T-Bear 7 points ago +7 / -0

Big money is going into the fusion reactor technology race. Hydrogen (split from water) is far more plentiful than wood.

We are finding natural gas and oil are being made through an abiotic process deep down in the earth.

We have plenty of fuel for the next several centuries, if needed.

The only problem we have with it are people dead set on making millions die over the years, needlessly, by denying these fuel sources to power our grid.

Get rid of the unnecessary red tape and useless regs...let's power our grids right.

6
traveravis 6 points ago +6 / -0

Yeah, and we ran out of oil 3 decades ago

2
themightykekfish 2 points ago +2 / -0

How quaint. We are in an icarus moment