Caithness Map :: Links to Site Map Paying too much for broadband? Move to PlusNet broadband and save£££s. Free setup now available - terms apply. PlusNet broadband.  
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: The Future of Nuclear Energy?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Caithness
    Posts
    12,924

    Default The Future of Nuclear Energy?

    It looks pretty bleak according to a recently released peer-reviewed study. Uranium reserves are going to deplete so quickly over the next couple of decades that prices will increase rapidly. According to the uranium production graphs in the study it looks all over by the middle of this century.

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...48969713004579
    God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
    Courage to change the things I can,
    And wisdom to know the difference.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,244

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rheghead View Post
    Uranium reserves are going to deplete
    I get that!



    $41.95? It's the end of cheap books!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Sherbets
    Posts
    2,768

    Default

    Plenty money to be made cleaning up after it.
    Working On Behalf Of The Community!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    8,200

    Default

    Bring back Dounreay, thought it was a fast breeder reactor. bred its own fuel or something better?
    Once the original Grumpy Owld Man but alas no more

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Wick
    Posts
    3,849

    Default

    Well, if it is over by then for nuke energy we're gonna be goosed. Oil will have pretty much gone too so we'll be back to mining for coal.
    I suspect there are a few megacorps landbanking under the guise of renewables in the short term.


  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Wick, Caithness
    Posts
    1,702

    Default

    Interesting point and I am not competitent to give an answer. One thought on Peak Uraniaum as with Peak Oil that the demand may create more exploration and finds of uranium may go up to alleviate the problem. As with oil the higher price wil lead to more exploration. If you were cynical ( who could possibly be on energy matters) then you might think that some company somehwere already knows where it is likely to be and are prepared to go and get it when the price is right.

    Supply and demand curve comes to mind and as the price goes up then more effort wil go into finding this finite resource. Also other interventions in the energy equation will perhaps intervene if only for a few decades. For example the rush in USA to get gas from fracking and reduce their energy costs is sparking a world-wide hunt for shale gas and might see for a while at least reductions in energy costs and hence less need for uranium at least. Perhaps too simplistic as it is is not an easy thing to get to grips with as there are so many variables and not helped by the bias often used by those on either side of the "green" "wind" "panic - don't panic" "energy companies" "anti-pro" arguments that appear endlessly.

    and now to switch something off to salve my conscience.......

    A few links for more thoughts -
    http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Nu.../#.UdO8n2L2Yto
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_uranium
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-long-will-global-uranium-deposits-last












  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Central Caithness
    Posts
    286

    Default

    As uranium prices rise alternative reserves may become viable. There are enormous reserves in seawater but currently too expensive to recover. However I understand that the Japanese are working on commercial U extraction from the sea. Don't give up on fission just yet. Interested to read yesterday that Eon are withdrawing from the Pelamis wave power project, citing the immaturity of the technology as a show stopper for them. Wee Eck's Saudia Arabia of the North may be some distance over the horizon. Nuclear fusion, long touted as the great salvation, also seems to have made little progress in recent decades.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Caithness
    Posts
    12,924

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oldchemist View Post
    As uranium prices rise alternative reserves may become viable. There are enormous reserves in seawater but currently too expensive to recover. However I understand that the Japanese are working on commercial U extraction from the sea. Don't give up on fission just yet. Interested to read yesterday that Eon are withdrawing from the Pelamis wave power project, citing the immaturity of the technology as a show stopper for them. Wee Eck's Saudia Arabia of the North may be some distance over the horizon. Nuclear fusion, long touted as the great salvation, also seems to have made little progress in recent decades.
    I agree that rising uranium fuel prices will lead to alternative resources being exploited, that is sheer commonsense.

    BUT, at what cost to the environment and cost to the consumer? If uranium deposits get profitable in lower concentrations then it doesn't take an Einstein to realise that you will need to dig a bigger and bigger hole to get at the uranium. It is ultimately self-defeating not just in cost to the consumer but because you eventually get to the point when it takes more energy to dig the hole that what you can get from the uranium in the hole.

    On the Japanese thing, yes they were experimenting with sea extraction but Fukushima got in the way and I'd be very surprised if they are still on with that. And furthermore, the area of the extraction interface that is in contact with the sea is far greater than the area of what a solar panel occupies to produce the same energy. It sort of defeats the notion of the energy density of uranium far exceeds any other energy source.
    Last edited by Rheghead; 03-Jul-13 at 20:38.
    God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
    Courage to change the things I can,
    And wisdom to know the difference.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,651

    Default

    Plenty of Uranium in the Solar System. I'm looking for a partner to go into the mineral extraction of the Asteroid Belt business with. Phill....Phill?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Caithness
    Posts
    270

    Default

    No need to worry about uranium stocks for the next century and beyond ...

    The price of a mineral commodity also directly determines the amount of known resources which are economically extractable. On the basis of analogies with other metal minerals, a doubling of price from present levels could be expected to create about a tenfold increase in measured economic resources, over time, due both to increased exploration and the reclassification of resources regarding what is economically recoverable.
    This is in fact suggested in the IAEA-NEA figures if those covering estimates of all conventional resources (U as main product or major by-product) are considered - another 7.6 million tonnes (beyond the 5.3 Mt known economic resources), which takes us to 190 years' supply at today's rate of consumption. This still ignores the technological factor mentioned below. It also omits unconventional resources (U recoverable as minor by-product) such as phosphate/ phosphorite deposits (up to 22 Mt U), black shales (schists) and lignite (0.7 Mt U), and even seawater (up to 4000 Mt), which would be uneconomic to extract in the foreseeable future, although Japanese trials using a polymer braid have suggested costs a bit over $250/kgU

    And then they could just change to thorium, in fact Chile and Indonesia are both well advanced to having thorium reactors running within the next 3 years, one to supply a city and one to power a water desalination plant.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Wick
    Posts
    3,849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ducati View Post
    Plenty of Uranium in the Solar System. I'm looking for a partner to go into the mineral extraction of the Asteroid Belt business with. Phill....Phill?
    Way ahead of you Duke! Just picked up a cheap space rocket from Kazakhstan, only been used once, some minor cosmetic damage but Vlad the fence reckons it'll polish out.


  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phill View Post
    Way ahead of you Duke! Just picked up a cheap space rocket from Kazakhstan, only been used once, some minor cosmetic damage but Vlad the fence reckons it'll polish out.
    Oh no! I bought an ex demo parachute from Vlad once....that didn't go so well.

  13. #13

    Default

    No need to worry about nuclear power in Scotland. So long as there is a SNP government no new nuclear power stations will be built. Doing our bit to conserve uranium.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gerry4 View Post
    No need to worry about nuclear power in Scotland. So long as there is a SNP government no new nuclear power stations will be built. Doing our bit to conserve uranium.
    By the time we find out we need it the bliddy English will have snaffled it all.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,244

    Default

    Nobody remember the plan to quarry uranium in Orkney?

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Caithness
    Posts
    12,924

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by captain chaos View Post
    No need to worry about uranium stocks for the next century and beyond ...

    The price of a mineral commodity also directly determines the amount of known resources which are economically extractable. On the basis of analogies with other metal minerals, a doubling of price from present levels could be expected to create about a tenfold increase in measured economic resources, over time, due both to increased exploration and the reclassification of resources regarding what is economically recoverable.
    This is in fact suggested in the IAEA-NEA figures if those covering estimates of all conventional resources (U as main product or major by-product) are considered - another 7.6 million tonnes (beyond the 5.3 Mt known economic resources), which takes us to 190 years' supply at today's rate of consumption. This still ignores the technological factor mentioned below. It also omits unconventional resources (U recoverable as minor by-product) such as phosphate/ phosphorite deposits (up to 22 Mt U), black shales (schists) and lignite (0.7 Mt U), and even seawater (up to 4000 Mt), which would be uneconomic to extract in the foreseeable future, although Japanese trials using a polymer braid have suggested costs a bit over $250/kgU

    And then they could just change to thorium, in fact Chile and Indonesia are both well advanced to having thorium reactors running within the next 3 years, one to supply a city and one to power a water desalination plant.
    And that is the problem not the solution.

    Bigger prices means bigger holes and bigger environmental damage.
    God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
    Courage to change the things I can,
    And wisdom to know the difference.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Caithness
    Posts
    270

    Default Bigger prices means bigger holes and bigger environmental damage.

    So its okay to drive a hybrid that has Li/ion batteries which are open cast mined of which the chemicals cause horrendous environmental and human damage, but not to mine uranium.

    Great thing progress, with electric hybrids forget how polluting and damaging mining and manufacturing the batteries are, then claim the vehicles are environmentally friendly, Not

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Caithness
    Posts
    12,924

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by captain chaos View Post
    So its okay to drive a hybrid that has Li/ion batteries which are open cast mined of which the chemicals cause horrendous environmental and human damage, but not to mine uranium.

    Great thing progress, with electric hybrids forget how polluting and damaging mining and manufacturing the batteries are, then claim the vehicles are environmentally friendly, Not
    How many times can that lithium deliver a charge? A 1000 charges before it needs recycling into another lithium battery I reckon. Uranium is once through or 60 times via fastbreeding. No comparison on the environmental damage.
    God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
    Courage to change the things I can,
    And wisdom to know the difference.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,760

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rheghead View Post
    How many times can that lithium deliver a charge? A 1000 charges before it needs recycling into another lithium battery I reckon. Uranium is once through or 60 times via fastbreeding. No comparison on the environmental damage.
    & how much lithium is needed to provide the same amount of power as uranium?
    & how much environmental damage is caused producing the power to recharge your lithium batteries?
    “We're trapped in the belly of this horrible machine....
    And the machine is bleeding to death."


  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Wick bay
    Posts
    1,484

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sids View Post
    Nobody remember the plan to quarry uranium in Orkney?
    Yes sids I remember plans to quarry uranium in Orkney, Caithness was also mentioned, that was in the late 50s/early 60s, but the demand for it dropped. One of the operational mines in Queensland Australia (Mary Kathleen) had to shut down. I don't know if it ever reopened.
    However, Dounreay from its "fast breeders" produced a considerable amount of Plutonium and I'm sure if need arose more Fast Breeders could be built.
    Live the Dream, don't dream the life

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •