It's kind of bizarre how nuclear had achieved a sort of counterculture renaissance. It has many, many drawbacks too numerous to go into here that are technical and sociological in nature.
And anyway, you tried to be too clever. I said "non-renewable" and not "carbon free" just to avoid this conversation. Unless you can start synthesizing utility grade quantities of well-behaved fissile material at a net energy surplus then it's not renewable even if we have decades/centuries of supply.
> Unless you can start synthesizing utility grade quantities of well-behaved fissile material at a net energy surplus then it's not renewable even if we have decades/centuries of supply.
Someday, even the Sun will run out of fuel. In the long run, we are all dead - unless someone figures out how to reverse entropy.
We don't need billions of years though, "hundreds of years" of fuel is hopefully long enough for us to figure out the tech that will get us through the next couple hundred years after that. And nuclear is fine for that. We're not talking kicking the can down the road by 20 years, we're talking hundreds or perhaps thousands of years of fuel.
Humans are plenty smart and the people of tomorrow will be better equipped to solve tomorrow's problems.
It's not even a matter of "ripping off a band aid" and paneling up the planet - solar panels aren't going to last hundreds of years either, we will be lucky to get 30 years out of them. Can we make more, sure, but we could also do nuclear and then make solar panels in 500 years when we're running out of fuel.
The biggest problems are that we need to come up with the political will to reprocess waste (extracting additional usable fuel and compacting the amount of true waste that needs to be disposed of) and then dispose of it in a proper repository rather than just letting it sit around on-site indefinitely Fukushima-style.
If you listen very hard, you can hear my eyes rolling through your computer. But I enjoyed reading the story and begrudgingly admire your pedantry on the matter!
Some animes have theorized a different method for reversing entropy. Like nuclear fission, we may be able to release a tremendous amount of energy by smashing the dreams of young girls and harnessing the power of their tears.
It's not renewable, but it is closer to carbon-neutral than fossil fuels. Advocates generally push it as a stopgap measure for climate change, after we transition away from baseload coal and before we transition to baseload renewables.
And anyway, you tried to be too clever. I said "non-renewable" and not "carbon free" just to avoid this conversation. Unless you can start synthesizing utility grade quantities of well-behaved fissile material at a net energy surplus then it's not renewable even if we have decades/centuries of supply.