Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[aprssig] (OT) Nuclear Energy

Rick Green rtg at aapsc.com
Thu Sep 20 04:09:44 UTC 2007

  Even Nuclear isn't the 'silver bullet'.  Uranium is a finite resource, 
and is subject to production limitations, Peaking, and decline, just as 
any other mineral resource.

   From an article on theoildrum.com today:

" the (current) world uranium reserve will be gone in the time range 
between 2030 and 2040, meaning that we must anticipate developing 
speculative resources. A 7 GWe reactor needs 180 tons of uranium/year. And 
the 371 GWe production from 439 reactors adds up to a need for 67,000 
ton/year. With a 1  2% growth for 20 years, this will lead to a need for 
between 51 and 130,000 tons of uranium. The reserve is thus going to run 
out in less than 50 years."

   ...and that's just running the current reactors, which are producing 
only 15% of the world's current energy needs.  Clearly, if we were to do a 
massive ramp-up of reactor construction, we would run out of minable ore 
even faster, possibly before we could even double the current capacity, 
certainly before we could expand it six-fold!

Read theoildrum.  The economics for biofuels, nuclear, solar, wind, etc, 
all have limits, and no one can possibly supply more than a fraction of 
our energy needs.  So it's clear that the first step is conservation, and 
shifting from growth-based to sustainable steady-state economics.  And 
then develop multiple potential energy sources, in parallel.

Where did this thread start?  Wasn't it something about deprecating the 
use of RELAY???

Rick Green

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
                                   -Benjamin Franklin

More information about the aprssig mailing list