[Dragon]

Note, when uranium will start getting scarce, I'm sure breeders will be built. I think they're somewhat less efficient and more expensive than normal reactors.

[TwentyPercentCooler]

Note, when uranium will start getting scarce, I'm sure breeders will be built. I think they're somewhat less efficient and more expensive than normal reactors.

Correct. That's why they aren't commercialized already. But it's a mirror of the fossil fuel problem: the right time to invest in them and start building is now, not when uranium prices skyrocket. Hence, people in power are idiots. 

[Dragon]

Note, uranium is consumed slower, so price growth will be slower, and there'll be plenty of time. I wouldn't worry about that.

[Beskargam]

this a bit late, but is response to any "but we're finding more oil"

Citations for images needed.

Data does not appear to include non-conventional shale gas reserves located in Canada (though the portion in the north-central US does appear to be listed) nor a complete representation of the bitumen located in the non-surface mined portions of the Athabascan oil sands to be recovered with SAGD, CSS, and future extraction methods to be devised.

Data also fails to account for the following:  oil price goes up - technology improves - previously uneconomical deposits become economical.  There are several millions of barrels of conventional oil stuck in Alberta alone (Turner Valley) which remain unextractable because they were not properly drilled when they were first exploited decades ago.  The trick isn't that there isn't enough oil/natural gas or even finding it, it's getting it out of the ground.

Anyone who says we're running out of petroleum in the next several decades is selling something.  Not to say we shouldn't be working toward alternative energy sources, just that the situation is nowhere near as dire as some source would have you believe.

Ben Brabson, Indiana University Physics department. I don't think we are running out of oil. I agree that it is a matter of being cost effective enough to get the oil out of the ground. note that the extraction rate still continues into 2100. will respond to rest/more later when I have time

[TwentyPercentCooler]

Note, uranium is consumed slower, so price growth will be slower, and there'll be plenty of time. I wouldn't worry about that.

This is true, but there's also the bonus of the thorium fuel cycle being much more resistant to nuclear proliferation. Given the current resistance to one particular nation even having an operational nuclear reactor, it's a valid point.

Sometimes, I wonder if it's the only way the large and powerful countries will freely allow nuclear power to trickle down to the smaller and poorer countries, so to speak.

[Herra Tohtori]

Note, uranium is consumed slower, so price growth will be slower, and there'll be plenty of time. I wouldn't worry about that.

I would. Things that you postpone because the deadline is so far ahead have a habit of not getting done at all until it is too late. They also tend to pile up and then you don't have the time to do any of them.

Stagnation because of "good enough for now" attitude is how we have ended up totally reliant on fossil fuels. If people had considered this earlier, maybe we would not have this awful situation where everything runs on fossil fuels and disruption in them will make everything stop. Yes, everything, because even if nuclear power produces a fair bit of the electricity in most industrial countries, the bulk is still produced by fossil fuels, especially in third world countries. Additionally, even in industrialized countries, the control power to manage peaks in energy demand is provided - usually - by coal combustion power plants. If coal runs out, the peaks cannot be balanced and the stress could at worst bring the power grid down completely.

Additionally, what do you think is used to mine and transport uranium? Fossil fuel powered vehicles are an integral part of that process.

Instead of thinking that since uranium will last for such a long time we don't need to invest in alternative nuclear power plants, we should do so as much as we can. We should research alternative power production as much as we can, and alternative nuclear power is no exception. However, unlike windmills and solar panels that the misguided environmental enthusiasts like so much, breeder reactors would provide an actually plausible solution for mass production of energy for the needs of industrial processes and needs of the general populace.

Wind mills and solar panels will most likely remain a curiosity on the energy business due to the extremely high volume needed to produce meaningful quantities of power.

Breeder reactors would be imperative in bridging the gap between fission powerplants and first/second generation fusion power plants.



If I were the dictator of the world, I would order a massive increase in fusion research, and while that problem was being properly solved instead of fiddling about with pitiful budget, I would order construction of new, high-power, high safety fission reactors (including breeder reactors) and for every megawatt of production, I would order the same amount of coal burning power plants to be shut down.

For reducing CO₂ emissions, this would have the biggest effects of all the possible moves you could make. Close second would be starting to convert automotive industry from fossil fuel reliant reciprocating engines to either turbine powered hybrids, hydrogen cell powered electric cars. Engines capable of using carbon neutral fuels (such as plant oils or alcohols) could still remain in use.


I'm going to be running for the office of World Dictator in about 2025. Who's gonna vote me?

[perihelion]

Hell, I'm in.  You can hardly be worse than any of the criminals we have in charge right now.

[TwentyPercentCooler]

No one will vote for you, Herra. You make too much sense.

Anyway, yeah, that's basically what I was trying to say, just a whole lot more loquacious. Being reactive instead of proactive has cost us too much already. Sure, we have plenty of uranium available, but fertile thorium is four times more abundant.

Like Herra said, clean and safe fission power is something we can do NOW. The technology already exists. The rainbow-farting, unicorn-chasing people who want the whole world to run on wind and solar power are depending too much on magical technology that always seems to be 5/10/20 years away from viability. I believe that solar power that a good supplement to large-scale generation. If every home had a solar panel to power air conditioners or water heaters or whatever, imagine the load that would take off of the power grid, even in areas that aren't necessarily the best places to generate solar power. But for commercial-level power generation, we need fission, and we need it now, not later.

A large revival of the nuclear industry and an influx of funding would mean more research into fusion power, which I believe is the be-all, end-all of power generation technology. If it's good enough for, oh, y'know, all the stars in the universe, I think it's good enough for Spaceship Earth.

[redsniper]

Yes but, even the sun has to run down eventually...

[IronBeer]

I'm going to be running for the office of World Dictator in about 2025. Who's gonna vote me?

Herra 2025!

[Herra Tohtori]

Yes but, even the sun has to run down eventually...

But! If we have fusion power, we can sustain our dwarf fortresses in the cooling Earth's crust practically indefinitely; in fact, there will be a temperature gradient between surface and core, and that alone would be enough to drive the pumps needed for our fortress to function. We will also be able to use fusion reactors for high-yield energy production for the massive ion thrusters built on the surface. These will be used to maneuver Earth around the void of cosmos, and our voyage to the Universe will finally properly start, never to end.


Seriously, though, most models seem to suggest that the Earth will be pushed outward in Solar system and will not be consumed by the expanding Sun. The Earth as a planetary body will also likely survive the nova that ends the Sun's life as a main sequence star, and it will give us a gentle push into some direction on the ecliptic. By building subterranean infrastructure, large caverns deep enough to stay intact unless something really major happens, but not so deep that they'll be cooked by the geothermal heat... you could build truly veritable networks of caverns, habitation modules, industrial facilities and power plants. It's totally feasible as a very long scale megaengineering project to build self-sustaining underground colonies. As a bonus you would have 1 g of gravity, even.

The biggest problem is storage of large enough quantities of water. The surface water will be evaporated by the increasing output of the Sun; before that happens, we must stockpile on a sufficient amount of water to sustain the planned population of humans and animals, and also to provide sufficient irrigation for the biomass of plants used for food production.

I am envisioning large, underground tanks with high-powered lights on the walls and algae inside. The algae would be the main source of oxygen, which would be directed to the ventilation systems. As long as you have energy, you can provide light for your plants, and as long as they have other nutrients they will thrive. The amount of population that the cavern system could sustain is largely dependant on these factors: energy, amount of water you have (which determines how much algae you can have producing oxygen), and the efficiency of the circulation of elements in the biosystem.


Of course, this is just my back-up plan in case all attempts at human exodus into space with colony ships fail, or if we don't manage to figure out how to go faster than light.

A planetary dwarf fortress would be sort of disappointment compared to spaceships and ****. But it would still be worth doing if it means you could salvage the original birthplace of humanity and maybe some day guide it on orbit around another star, and then re-terraform it, recover the ecosystem from gene pools and underground ecosystem, and re-establish human settlements.


See, this is the problem with current politicians. Their long term thinking is sorely lacking.

[Nuke]

i would, except i plan to nuke everything in 2023.

[watsisname]

In the year 9595
I'm kinda wondering if man is gonna be alive
He's taken everything this old earth can give
And he ain't put back nothing

Now it's been 10,000 years
Man has cried a billion tears
For what he never knew
Now man's reign is through
But through the eternal night
The twinkling of starlight
So very far away
Maybe it's only yesterday

[redsniper]

subterranean infrastructure... networks of caverns, habitation modules, industrial facilities and power plants... self-sustaining underground colonies.

[Nuke]

In the year 9595
I'm kinda wondering if man is gonna be alive
He's taken everything this old earth can give
And he ain't put back nothing

Now it's been 10,000 years
Man has cried a billion tears
For what he never knew
Now man's reign is through
But through the eternal night
The twinkling of starlight
So very far away
Maybe it's only yesterday

i prefer march or die but i guess it all works.

[Mongoose]

Yes but, even the sun has to run down eventually...

Honestly I'm much more concerned with keeping humanity going for the next century or two, not worrying about what life will be like for our hyperintelligent shade of blue offspring in a billion years.

[redsniper]

So am I. I'm just saying fusion won't be the "end-all, be-all of power generation."

[Nuke]

fusion will hold us off till we get our mater-antimatter reactors working.

[SpardaSon21]

I'm pretty sure now HerraTohtori will come charging in to say matter-antimatter is hugely inefficient and say why that is in a multi-paragraph demonstration of his superior physics skills.

[IronBeer]

fusion will hold us off till we get our mater-antimatter reactors working.

Anything beyond fusion for primary generation is going to require some seriously exotic physics. Maybe something involving black holes, splitting of photons, or potentially stealing zero-point energy (note: nobody really has even half a clue how to do any of that).

Anti-matter is great for fuel and munitions, however.