Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Uranium Supply Thread pt 4 (merged)

Discussions of conventional and alternative energy production technologies.

Re: Uranium Supply

Unread postby outcast » Sat 20 Dec 2008, 21:12:21

I'm a bit confused


The International Atomic Energy Agency and Nuclear Energy Agency figure there’s enough uranium to power existing plants for 100 years. Granted, there are some supply-side issues. About 40% of current uranium supplies come from stockpiles and old weapons—not from uranium mines—so new sources need to be developed soon to avoid “uranium supply shortfalls,” they say



But didn't someone just say earlier in the thread that the IAEA (or something like that) said we have more than enough uranium?
User avatar
outcast
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 885
Joined: Mon 21 Apr 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Uranium Supply

Unread postby Tanada » Sat 20 Dec 2008, 22:34:45

outcast wrote:I'm a bit confused


The International Atomic Energy Agency and Nuclear Energy Agency figure there’s enough uranium to power existing plants for 100 years. Granted, there are some supply-side issues. About 40% of current uranium supplies come from stockpiles and old weapons—not from uranium mines—so new sources need to be developed soon to avoid “uranium supply shortfalls,” they say



But didn't someone just say earlier in the thread that the IAEA (or something like that) said we have more than enough uranium?


In the eyes of a government bureaucracy like the IAEA a 100 year supply will last longer than anyone working there will be alive so thats more than enough. IMO of course ;)

Realistically the supply is a lot more than 100 years, but thats niether here nor there, the thread covers it in excrutiating repetitious detail.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17050
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: split/off topic/In-n-Out: Nuclear Dumps

Unread postby the48thronin » Sun 21 Dec 2008, 05:01:16

Gazzatrone wrote:Is it to simplistic to ask why Nuclear waste isn't encased in concrete and dumped in a Volcano?



Enriched Uranium will still be half as deadly 5000 years from today, how long will the concrete last in that volcano?
Malthusian Riders Member!

Courtesy and Courage Sincerity and Self-control Honor and Loyalty a Code to Live By!
What do the miners do when the canary dies? EVACUATE THE MINE not argue about the color of it's feathers or buy a parrot instead.

Where is my pitchfork and torch? I need them for a visit to the castle!
User avatar
the48thronin
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 871
Joined: Fri 30 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: On the highway, or the water somewhere!

Re: split/off topic/In-n-Out: Nuclear Dumps

Unread postby Tyler_JC » Sun 21 Dec 2008, 14:25:35

the48thronin wrote:
Gazzatrone wrote:Is it to simplistic to ask why Nuclear waste isn't encased in concrete and dumped in a Volcano?



Enriched Uranium will still be half as deadly 5000 years from today, how long will the concrete last in that volcano?


I think you are missing the point.

We want to melt the uranium in lava.

The point of the concrete is to keep the uranium together while it falls into the lava.
"www.peakoil.com is the Myspace of the Apocalypse."
Tyler_JC
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Sat 25 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Boston, MA

Re: split/off topic/In-n-Out: Nuclear Dumps

Unread postby Tanada » Sun 21 Dec 2008, 17:59:54

Tyler_JC wrote:
the48thronin wrote:
Gazzatrone wrote:Is it to simplistic to ask why Nuclear waste isn't encased in concrete and dumped in a Volcano?
Enriched Uranium will still be half as deadly 5000 years from today, how long will the concrete last in that volcano?
I think you are missing the point. We want to melt the uranium in lava. The point of the concrete is to keep the uranium together while it falls into the lava.
Therby wasting all the effort that went into mining, milling, enriching, fissioning, and storing. I beleive in recycling, why don't you>?
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17050
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Uranium Supply

Unread postby Zero-point » Fri 02 Jan 2009, 10:34:54

Please people learn!

Thorium! Thorium! Thorium!

And there are such things as breeder reactors too. Also thorium reactors breed the uranium necessary to use as "starter" fuel for more thorium reactors so there is no supply problem for nuclear energy.

There is only the problem of a few companies that want "scarcity" to extort profits from an entire industry and world in effect holding the rest of the world hostage.

Don't think that if these companies can't make a profit then who will build these reactors cause that's why we have national governments of, for, and by the people.
User avatar
Zero-point
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Sun 10 Aug 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Uranium Supply

Unread postby TonyPrep » Fri 02 Jan 2009, 16:32:56

Zero-point wrote:Please people learn!

Thorium! Thorium! Thorium!

And there are such things as breeder reactors too. Also thorium reactors breed the uranium necessary to use as "starter" fuel for more thorium reactors so there is no supply problem for nuclear energy.

There is only the problem of a few companies that want "scarcity" to extort profits from an entire industry and world in effect holding the rest of the world hostage.

Don't think that if these companies can't make a profit then who will build these reactors cause that's why we have national governments of, for, and by the people.
Thanks for that. So the answer is a fuel that no reactor uses or is planned to use (apart from some prototypes)? And breeder reactors, of which there are none operating in breeder mode, are the way to solve resource scarcities? But, in any case, none of this matters because a few companies want scarcity anyway?
User avatar
TonyPrep
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Waiuku, New Zealand

Uranium Supply Pt 3

Unread postby outcast » Fri 02 Jan 2009, 21:05:54

And breeder reactors, of which there are none operating in breeder mode, are the way to solve resource scarcities?



The reason why no breeder reactors are operating in breeder mode is because there is no Uranium shortage, so it is not economical for them to do that.
User avatar
outcast
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 885
Joined: Mon 21 Apr 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Uranium Supply

Unread postby TonyPrep » Fri 02 Jan 2009, 23:11:35

outcast wrote:
And breeder reactors, of which there are none operating in breeder mode, are the way to solve resource scarcities?
The reason why no breeder reactors are operating in breeder mode is because there is no Uranium shortage, so it is not economical for them to do that.
That's not what zero point said. He said companies are deliberately keeping supplies scarce.

Lots of room for confusion here.
User avatar
TonyPrep
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Waiuku, New Zealand

Re: Uranium Supply

Unread postby outcast » Fri 02 Jan 2009, 23:21:27

True, considering that Uranium is priced in kilograms instead of tons.
User avatar
outcast
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 885
Joined: Mon 21 Apr 2008, 03:00:00

Re: split/off topic/In-n-Out: Nuclear Dumps

Unread postby the48thronin » Sat 03 Jan 2009, 22:48:37

You also missed the point melted enriched Uranium will still be enriched uranium now liquid and going somewhere..... and the uranium flouride gas will of course flash into a higher volume of gas....HMMMMMMM
Malthusian Riders Member!

Courtesy and Courage Sincerity and Self-control Honor and Loyalty a Code to Live By!
What do the miners do when the canary dies? EVACUATE THE MINE not argue about the color of it's feathers or buy a parrot instead.

Where is my pitchfork and torch? I need them for a visit to the castle!
User avatar
the48thronin
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 871
Joined: Fri 30 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: On the highway, or the water somewhere!

THE European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) Thread

Unread postby Jotapay » Tue 17 Nov 2009, 12:41:56

CERN Physicist Warns About Uranium Shortage
Peak uranium? I've known (and probably you as well) about this for a while, but here is a decent article about it. I love that they broach the "zombie" issue, LOL.
Shortage
"Uranium mines provide us with 40,000 tons of uranium each year. Sounds like that ought to be enough for anyone, but it comes up about 25,000 tons short of what we consume yearly in our nuclear power plants. The difference is made up by stockpiles, reprocessed fuel and re-enriched uranium — which should be completely used up by 2013. And the problem with just opening more uranium mines is that nobody really knows where to go for the next big uranium lode. Dr. Michael Dittmar has been warning us for some time about the coming shortage (PDF) and has recently uploaded a four-part comprehensive report on the future of nuclear energy and how socioeconomic change is exacerbating the effect this coming shortage will have on our power consumption. Although not quite on par with zombie apocalypse, Dr. Dittmar's final conclusions paint a dire picture, stating that options like large-scale commercial fission breeder reactors are not an option by 2013 and 'no matter how far into the future we may look, nuclear fusion as an energy source is even less probable than large-scale breeder reactors, for the accumulated knowledge on this subject is already sufficient to say that commercial fusion power will never become a reality.'"
Jotapay
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3394
Joined: Sat 21 Jun 2008, 03:00:00

Re: CERN Physicist Warns About Uranium Shortage

Unread postby Dr. Ofellati » Tue 17 Nov 2009, 12:44:22

In the end, it's the Montequest principle.

It's not really that we're running out of uranium, it's that there are too many people.
Dr. O
The Mos theorem - Those who do not reach my conclusions after having reviewed the evidence are either deniers, if they reject my conclusion, or conspiracy theorists, if I reject theirs.
User avatar
Dr. Ofellati
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Thu 22 Oct 2009, 12:26:37

Re: CERN Physicist Warns About Uranium Shortage

Unread postby rangerone314 » Tue 17 Nov 2009, 12:56:29

Dr. Ofellati wrote:In the end, it's the Montequest principle. It's not really that we're running out of uranium, it's that there are too many people.
Well if there were only a thousand people on the entire Earth, new petroleum might be created as fast as they used it. What about thorium?
An ideology is by definition not a search for TRUTH-but a search for PROOF that its point of view is right

Equals barter and negotiate-people with power just take

You cant defend freedom by eliminating it-unknown

Our elected reps should wear sponsor patches on their suits so we know who they represent-like Nascar-Roy
User avatar
rangerone314
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4105
Joined: Wed 03 Dec 2008, 04:00:00
Location: Maryland

Re: CERN Physicist Warns About Uranium Shortage

Unread postby Homesteader » Tue 17 Nov 2009, 12:59:47

Jotapay wrote:Peak uranium? I've known (and probably you as well) about this for a while, but here is a decent article about it. I love that they broach the "zombie" issue, LOL.
"'no matter how far into the future we may look, nuclear fusion as an energy source is even less probable than large-scale breeder reactors, for the accumulated knowledge on this subject is already sufficient to say that commercial fusion power will never become a reality.'"
This part was particulary heartwarming. How will the techno-cornucopians answer?
"The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences…"
Sir Winston Churchill

Beliefs are what people fall back on when the facts make them uncomfortable.
User avatar
Homesteader
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1856
Joined: Thu 12 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Economic Nomad

Re: CERN Physicist Warns About Uranium Shortage

Unread postby 35Kas » Tue 17 Nov 2009, 23:02:00

There is only one thing that might have an effect on the climate situation. Well, all the environmental and economic problems really.

If the human population were to be reduced by at least 25% in the next 50 years and energy/material consumption were reduced by another 25-50% per capita.

The easiest, nay, the only possible way to accomplish this would be to intentionally reduce the population size. Use your imagination.
User avatar
35Kas
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon 04 Feb 2008, 04:00:00

Re: CERN Physicist Warns About Uranium Shortage

Unread postby eastbay » Wed 18 Nov 2009, 00:25:36

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf17.html


This will have a significant adverse impact on supply too. 8O
Got Dharma?

Everything is Impermanent. Shakyamuni Buddha
User avatar
eastbay
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7186
Joined: Sat 18 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: One Mile From the Columbia River

Re: CERN Physicist Warns About Uranium Shortage

Unread postby Clouseau2 » Wed 18 Nov 2009, 00:26:11

The population WILL be reduced one way or another. The real question is, how far can we keep growing beyond the current carrying capacity, which in turn will determine how low the NEW carrying capacity will be after the collapse.
User avatar
Clouseau2
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Mon 18 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Location: San Francisco, CA

Re: CERN Physicist Warns About Uranium Shortage

Unread postby Tanada » Wed 18 Nov 2009, 07:17:05

Why do we have to go through this mantra every year or so on PO.com? Technology is not static and the reactors being built today are so much more efficient that their Uranium demand is far lower than it was 40 years ago. Unfortunately people pop off opinions based on that 40 year old technology as if it were the only game in town.

Windmills, Solar panels and yes even fossil fuel power plants have all advanced greatly in the fuel efficiency/cost area's. Fission is no different, it has advanced as much or more as the other options.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17050
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

CERN

Unread postby Carlhole » Wed 25 Nov 2009, 06:11:51

Large Hadron Collider produces first proton collisions in Big Bang mission

Ultimately, the collider aims to create conditions like they were one trillionth to two trillionths of a second after the Big Bang, which scientists think marked the creation of the universe billions of years ago. Physicists also hope the collider will help them see and understand other suspected phenomena, such as dark matter, antimatter and supersymmetry.

Cern's Director General Rolf Heuer said yesterday's collisions were actually the side effect of the quick advances being made by the LHC during its startup phase.

He said that the scientists would be proceeding cautiously, just a driver would with the first production model of a new car.
"We'll never accelerate this the first time with a kick-start to its maximum velocity," he said. "It’s a great achievement to have come this far in so short a time. But we need to keep a sense of perspective – there’s still much to do before we can start the LHC physics programme.”

David Barney, a physicist working at Cern said: "It's quite amazing really, we never expected this to go so quickly. We're incredibly pleased, everything seems to be working excellently. The LHC hasn't actually accelerated particles yet - it hasn't made them go any faster than they were when they came into the tunnel.

"Cern intends to collide them at higher energy next week. It's going incredibly well and we don't really know what to expect next."


I'm trying to think of a good way to compare the Hubble Telescope vs the CERN Large Hadron Collider. Both are peering pretty seriously into the the Big, Mysterious, F---er called the Universe.

Who here actually believes experiments like NIF, Cern, ITER, etc. won't lead to important basic discoveries?
Carlhole
 

PreviousNext

Return to Energy Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 49 guests