However, you continue to ignore and neglect the potential for safe nuclear energy to exponentially increase the energy available to human civilization.
This changes the entire potential trajectory of humanity and our impact on our planet.
At the moment we are in a catch 22 scenario because all the activities we need to undertake to assist in healing the planet take energy. Once we properly utilize the clean energy potential of a nuclear powered economy we can engage the full force of human ingenuity on the real problems, without making things worse.
Your continued avoidance of this topic is becoming part of the problem.
Im not avoiding it - many guests (Jean Marc Jancovici, Simon MIchaux, Joris Van der Schoot etc have discussed it), We had full episode on it with nuclear expert James Fleay and I have several upcoming episodes scheduled including w Chris Keefer.
I don't focus on it because a) we're out of time (probably) to scale the thousands of plants that would be required and Im focusing on societal response to whats coming THIS DECADE
In any case re "'potential for safe nuclear energy to exponentially increase the energy available to human civilization" - if you think that is an answer to our problems, you don't understand our situation!
But the topic of nuclear will be well covered in next 20-25 episodes
Nuclear is not even remotely scalable to replace fossils hydrocarbons, let alone the problem of replacing diesel in mining uranium with 40 times lower energy density batteries.
Thanks yes the Russians have two breeders connected to their grid, the only globally, nonetheless you can't build maintain nor supply inputs to breeder reactors with electricity, and hydrocarbon synthesis with electricity is very inefficient.
Hi Nate,
I am always interested in your talks.
However, you continue to ignore and neglect the potential for safe nuclear energy to exponentially increase the energy available to human civilization.
This changes the entire potential trajectory of humanity and our impact on our planet.
At the moment we are in a catch 22 scenario because all the activities we need to undertake to assist in healing the planet take energy. Once we properly utilize the clean energy potential of a nuclear powered economy we can engage the full force of human ingenuity on the real problems, without making things worse.
Your continued avoidance of this topic is becoming part of the problem.
With great respect and admiration.
TC
hi Taran
Im not avoiding it - many guests (Jean Marc Jancovici, Simon MIchaux, Joris Van der Schoot etc have discussed it), We had full episode on it with nuclear expert James Fleay and I have several upcoming episodes scheduled including w Chris Keefer.
I don't focus on it because a) we're out of time (probably) to scale the thousands of plants that would be required and Im focusing on societal response to whats coming THIS DECADE
In any case re "'potential for safe nuclear energy to exponentially increase the energy available to human civilization" - if you think that is an answer to our problems, you don't understand our situation!
But the topic of nuclear will be well covered in next 20-25 episodes
kindly
Nate
Where do you get the uranium from? There's barley enough to run current reactors for a few decades:-
Uranium resources global total in 2021 = 6,078,500 tonnes
Historical uranium production global 1945-2022 = 3,184,812 tonnes
https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/uranium-resources/supply-of-uranium.aspx
Nuclear is 3.5% of global energy. Hydrocarbons ~85%
https://ourworldindata.org/energy-mix
Nuclear is not even remotely scalable to replace fossils hydrocarbons, let alone the problem of replacing diesel in mining uranium with 40 times lower energy density batteries.
Hi Natasha,
The good people at Decoupled have released an episode today addressing exactly this question.
Spoiler; look up ‘breeder reactors’.
https://overcast.fm/+cJqg57Epw
Thanks yes the Russians have two breeders connected to their grid, the only globally, nonetheless you can't build maintain nor supply inputs to breeder reactors with electricity, and hydrocarbon synthesis with electricity is very inefficient.
Wow, how did you manage to listen to and absorb the entire 57min podcast and reply in 5 min?
It is almost as if you had formed your view without absorbing my suggested input….