• deegeese@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Fissionable isotopes are yet another nonrenewable fuel.

    Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe.

    • sunbeam60
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      With reprocessing, which we already do, and new Gen IV power plants, there’s enough energy to last us thousand of years with currently known resources. And that’s before we start scooping it out of the water.

      • Brainsploosh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s assuming a lot of ifs resolve our way, and without power needs increasing. It’s more sustainable than coal/gas/oil for sure, but with current energy development needs it’s barely long term (IIRC about 60-140 years)

        Also, on centuries timescale, we will need to find more fissiles in space. And according to our current understanding of the universe, they should be quite rare, especially compared to hydrogen.

        Basically, figuring out fusion power would solve our needs for the first level on the Kardashev scale, and has the potential to be portable fuel for the rest of the lifespan of the universe.

        • sunbeam60
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          My aim is not to stop research on fusion - just making the point that we know how to do nuclear and it seems to me we are letting perfect be the enemy of good.

            • sunbeam60
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Then we are in remarkable agreement. Nuclear, fusion and TONNES of renewables. The quicker, the better.