• ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Exactly, what it comes down to is that nuclear is the only practical option for getting off fossil fuels right now. It’s a well understood technology and one we can deploy at scale today. China plans to build 150 reactors in the coming decade, and I’m sure they will start exporting their tech globally as well. This is our best hope for getting emissions under control.

    • Kulun@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      apart from the fact that uranium is a very limited resource which will very soon become uneconomic to mine, apart from the social and environmental consequences of mining

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Except that uranium isn’t the only fuel available. The only reason it’s been used traditionally is because it doubles as fuel for nuclear weapons. Thorium is both much safer and more readily available.

        • Kulun@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Except that Thorium reactors are still experimental and will definitely be much too late to replace fossil fuel

          • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            Uranium solves the immediate and pressing problem of moving away from fossil fuels, which are worse in every single way. Thorium addresses the concerns you raise around the cost of uranium becoming uneconomic to mine. So, not sure what the except here is to be honest.