• Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    edit-2
    14 hours ago

    Yeah, damn governments holding all the uranium for themselves. It’s just not fair.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        13 hours ago

        That is remains a cool potential technology, but why spend billions of dollars trying to develop a worse technology when solar already exists and for much cheaper? It’s just being sidetracked while letting investors enrich themselves on government research money

        Plus it harkens back to the old adage about base power. No, we don’t need base power when we have large scale grid storage. Thats just coal propaganda

        • arrow74@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          25
          ·
          13 hours ago

          That is remains a cool potential technology, but why spend billions of dollars trying to develop a worse technology when solar already exists and for much cheaper?

          This was the exact same argument made against solar. We should research and improve energy technologies. I doubt Thorium is the solution, but we’ve discovered a lot of our technology by researching something else and then discovering an interesting function or byproduct unrelated to the original goals.

          Plus space exploration will need to be nuclear.

            • arrow74@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              18
              ·
              11 hours ago

              Nuttery?

              Every dollar spent at NASA has returned so much more. They develop things for space travel that have uses far beyond space. We wouldn’t even have satellites and GPS if we didn’t venture into space.

              Space has a lot for us to explore and a ton of resources we can use. Why strip mine the Earth when we could just take it from the asteroid belt?

              You really need to disconnect space exploration from the likes of Musk or Bezos. We’ve been advancing humanity through space exploration before those two assholes were born

            • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              ·
              11 hours ago

              Nuclear power is a very important technology for space vehicles, probes and bases. There’s proven potential for greatly improved propulsion systems as well.

              You can’t just hear the word space and declare it “nuttery”, that’s just ignoring whole industries and areas of active research and engineering.

              • HugeNerd@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 hours ago

                Space Nuttery is thinking it’s somehow important or relevant for humanity going forward.

                A power source for a floating camera to go take pictures of dead rocks and frozen chemicals is a niche interest. No one has a RTG powered city.

                “You can’t just hear the word space and declare it “nuttery”,”

                You can’t just hear “Space Nuttery” and talk about space. Space is a mostly empty sucking vacuum hostile to all life and a radiation-blasted hell.

                Space Nuttery is living in a fantasy world where we’ll just somehow go space mining and colonizing Mars with water from Saturn’s rings like it’s just a question of a longer trip to Home Depot.

                It’s an intellectual dead end.

                • nforminvasion@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  4 hours ago

                  Calling yourself a nerd while you limit yours and others’ inquisitiveness, passion, and imagination. Pretty pathetic to be honest.

                  Oh and the best argument is not responding. Which I know, ironic. But let’s see you ignore this and not give some trite, trolling response. Chances of that are pretty low.

                • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 hours ago

                  Let’s move to Mars! Let’s mine the Moon or an asteroid! Let’s give Musk another $100 billion!

                  • arrow74@lemmy.zip
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 hours ago

                    We were doing worthwhile exploration well before Musk was born. It has and can be done in a way that doesn’t need to be tied to him.

                    Also wouldn’t mining a moon or asteroid belt be preferable to mining the Earth? Like we can keep our water and environment cleaner and still get the resources we need

          • AA5B@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            12 hours ago

            I seriously doubt there’s any useful overlap between nuclear for space and for terrestrial power generation. Even if there were, we’ve spent close to a century proving that nuclear is expensive and time consuming to run and thorium’s theoretical advantages re mostly only in comparison to existing nuclear technology. Research is always good, but that really looks like a dead end, especially in comparison to something that is cheap and ubiquitous, and entirely ready, just needs scale out. Even that is already happening

            • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              ·
              edit-2
              10 hours ago

              especially in comparison to something that is cheap and ubiquitous

              In some countries nuclear is cheap and ubiquitous. The key is simple standardization.

              In France for instance, nuclear accounts for about 70% of their power. They operate 57 nuclear reactors, all of which are one of 4 reactor designs. By having standardized designs these reactors are cheaper to maintain, parts and equipment are more available. The engineers that run the facilities are more familiar with every aspect of the plant, operating procedures are better understood. It’s easier to find qualified engineers and technicians. Accidents are uncommon (I believe they’ve never had any kind of major accident).

              The price French households pay for power is comparable to what we pay in the US and they generate significantly less CO2 per capita. They also have less reliance on oil states.

              We could have that too if we were motivated to make it happen.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 hours ago

        I think thorium reactors are more complicated though. You have to achieve very high pressure or they don’t work. They just hasn’t really been an impetus to develop the technology.