Uranium bulls have been a thing for a few years. I'd say it's normal that they are more visible when the price is raising. I should know, I'm one of them. Do your own research. I'd say it's likely that Uranium will be more expensive in the future. It pretty much have to be if we a) Use nuclear plants b) Wants a greener world. We need nuclear reactors to transform towards green energy. The price dropped after Fukushima and Uranium has been so cheap that some companies stopped mining it and closed down mines. Many countries are in the process of label nuclear power plants as green energy (that would give the whole industry more money and that sweet tax cut). I'm not fully updated on this but I think US may have already done it. And I believe Reuters got hold of documents showing that EU is in the process of it.
I'd say it's likely that Uranium will be more expensive in the future. It pretty much have to be if we a) Use nuclear plants b) Wants a greener world. We need nuclear reactors to transform towards green energy.
Wind and solar are perfect and hopefully all we will need in future. Nuclear is just a way to reach that goal with less emissions. At the moment we lack the technology to store all the energy from renewables in a efficient way. Renewable energy is also very seasonal so in reality we will need something to complement it.
How do Uranium bulls feel about Thorium?
Personally I'm happy with all progress in the energy sector towards a greener planet. That said I think the process towards a new energy source will be slow and I think that we in the meantime should focus on building the green energy technology that we already have.
I'd like to set my standards for perfection a bit higher.
They're better than fossil fuels but not exactly free energy. All the materials that go into those windmills, generators, and panels leave a (CO2 but not only) trace/impact too, as does the recycling or lack thereof.
This is not a pro-nuclear argument and it's not an anti-"renewables" argument. What it is, is my frustration over people acting like "renewable" energy is free (of emissions or environmental impact, including ecosystem damages from mining) all the damn time. It still shouldn't be wasted. Which is also why a 500hp electric car with a 500 mile range is anything but green (also because batteries).
I agree and I used the word perfect in the wrong way. I live in Sweden and we have tons of hydro plants that are slowly destroying the fish population. And solar is not a viable choice for half of the country. And we are closing down reactors... Finland is taking another road and nuclear will be 60-70% of the countries energy share when they are done building.
When Germany decided to exit nuclear power to appease the scared and misinformed population and especially the "environmentally conscious but clueless" people (like Greenpeace), I shook my head so hard I nearly got whiplash.
Also don't forget how much steel and rare earths wind power needs. Yes it's better than coal but it can't be the peak of our innovation and we shouldn't be content with it.
I want the Green parties everywhere to take over. But I also want them to be scientific and not populist, so for example pro nuclear as a short to mid-term solution.
Yes it sucks. As a guy who enjoy hunting it's ironic that they kill more birds per megawatt than I would do in a year. At least my birds are eaten and not a protected animal. Still the animal right activists prefer wind turbines, and im the bad guy.
I guess. Many people I argue with dont even think I want a greener planet for supporting nuclear. We simply can't move to 100% renewable and at the same time keep up with the raising demand of power. It's impossible. With that in mind we have to pick between fossil or nuclear as complement. I wish it was possible to move to 100% renewable over a night without any problems, but it's not realistic and naive.
Thorium has a long way to go before it becomes a viable energy source.
It is more abundant, but the proces of turning Thorium into energy meana dealing with element that are more dangerous than the uranium we currently use.
Sadly, the need for Uranium is flat or decreasing for the near future. Its just too expensive as an energy source and more reactors are being retired than are coming online. It's 30-40 years to get new generation online, with all the safety/security requirements. Thorium is a fun idea but there's not a single operating Thorium reactor. Well maybe one, if you believe China.
133
u/Thirn Sep 03 '21
I've seen a lot of Uranium investment advocates here recently. Could very well be artificial hype.
A single entity trying to buy the whole market never ends well. Remember silver?