Comments by "Hardtack \x26 Beans" (@hardtackbeans9790) on "Kyle Hill" channel.

  1. As much as I would love to agree with you Kyle, I see one fatal flaw in Nuclear as a panacea for our power needs. I'm a nuclear proponent as well but according to Scientific America (March 2009) they say we are running out of nuclear fuel. They consulted the NEA & found that we have enough nuclear fuel for 200 years at current (2009) usage. Sounds like a long time doesn't it? Except that the US produces less than 20% of our power with nuclear. World wide the figures are around 10%. Using the more optimistic US figure, we would have to increase nuke power plants by 5 fold & only get 40 years of use out of them. The world would have to build many more for less time used. Plus the rest of the world probably has less nuclear reserves to draw from than the US. Could new reserves of Uranium be found like new reserves of oil? Of course they will find some. But it is VERY likely our power needs will have gone up by then too. Remember, we haven't brought electric cars online in any significant numbers yet. This is going to be a huge drain on the power grid when this becomes reality. I would love to say you are absolutely right on this one & let's 'rack em & stack em' to nuclear power plants. I believe there is a far better ways to build nukes more simply, safely, & cheaply. But I can't say I believe we should do that for maybe . . . 20 years of use before they can't be fueled? I do agree that safe storage is already within our grasp. Even our 'over the top' safeguards for storage now should leave the most radical Chicken Little environmentalist satisfied. Nuclear does have it's place. But I have to disagree (as much as I hate to) that nuclear is our way out of the fossil fuels trap.
    2
  2.  @Crispr_CAS9  One can hope. But I would still like to see some papers on it. I will look into what you have listed. EDIT: Thorium looks interesting. I will have to dig into it further. PNNL extraction was a quick read. Maybe it will work . . . Maybe no. Thanks for the extra info.
    2