[fsh]

With nuclear energy, you are dependent on whoever has uranium. This is not a theoretical risk, and already has political and economic consequences for the few countries with a large nuclear energy share [1]. It would be much worse if a significant amount of global energy was produced with nuclear energy.

[1] https://www.lemonde.fr/en/les-decodeurs/article/2023/08/04/h...

[Moldoteck]

nuclear requires least amount of mining and materials per kwh. France already reoriented ore buying from other sources and the price is still dirt cheap. Canada has literally several stalled mines because market prices are too low

[adrianwaj]

It's a salient point.

I think solar panels in space (where it's always sunny and the panels can be paper thin and orders of magnitude more efficient) with wireless transmission to Earth would be ideal. But I'm sure there are technologies out there that are either secret, dangerous-to-know or just suppressed that never get the attention they deserve due to vested interests. I also like the idea of speeding up radioactive decay with lasers or (safely??) shooting radioactive waste into space.

"Nuclear power is a hell of a way to boil water."

But good luck finding a better alternative.

Solar panels require very high heat to manufacture and are difficult/costly to recycle. Channeling or capturing energy from a different dimension would be best. I wonder how the ancients did it... or investigate downed UFOs... or take a trip into the future. But then stay quiet because it's more than just a crisis of energy, it's a crisis of conscience!