Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by fsh 1641 days ago
They calculate 130 years of supply at current consumption rates. Nuclear power supplies something like 5% of the global primary energy, so scaling this to 100% would deplete the estimated reserves in a few years.

Breeders would help, but have so far not been very successful. For example, the German Thorium breeder THTR-300 is considered one of the greatest technological failures in postwar history.

2 comments

Scaling nuclear power supplies to 100% of global primary energy would change the economics of extraction, do you claim you can predict these things? BTW, scaling it to 100 % is not necessary.

AFAIK, THTR-300 is only one of the different breeder models, CEFR from China <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Experimental_Fast_Reacto...> seems to be working, as a new model <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFR-600> is being built since 2020, sure, recycling uranium is not needed at the moment, so you could argue this is not demonstrating the interest of breeding though it seems to be working to a certain extent.

This supply is assuming we exclusively use terrestrially mines uranium, as well as no reprocessing. Seawater extraction can provide an effectively unlimited supply: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2016/07/01/uranium-s...