Each uranium rod has a life of around 6 years before needing replacement, the relative abudance of uranium-235 is about 0.9% compared to uranium 238 which has 98℅
Sure, the decay chain of uranium 235 is long, but the usability of in converting it to nuclear power the uranium rods last 6 years, not billions.
Even if we take all our uranium-235 reserves (which is about 56,304 kilo-tonnes of uranium-235)
1.) It’s unrealistic because we use U-235 for other things
2.) This is a global reserve. Countries haven’t made peace with another yet.
I know niche points, i’ll admit I really dug through the barrel with this one. Nuclear power plants are also quite expensive to maintain and build since these are often built based on the selected site. Also very inefficient as each reaction loses 1.4 neutrons (or else kaboom).
These reasons are why (despite it generating 17℅ of the US electricity with only 92 reactors), countries don’t invest more into nuclear power. Inefficiency + large costs make it unappealing compared to wind which generates 40℅ or even 60℅ (with offshore) of the energy the wind pushes.
Each uranium rod has a life of around 6 years before needing replacement, the relative abudance of uranium-235 is about 0.9% compared to uranium 238 which has 98℅
Sure, the decay chain of uranium 235 is long, but the usability of in converting it to nuclear power the uranium rods last 6 years, not billions.
Even if we take all our uranium-235 reserves (which is about 56,304 kilo-tonnes of uranium-235)
1.) It’s unrealistic because we use U-235 for other things 2.) This is a global reserve. Countries haven’t made peace with another yet.
I know niche points, i’ll admit I really dug through the barrel with this one. Nuclear power plants are also quite expensive to maintain and build since these are often built based on the selected site. Also very inefficient as each reaction loses 1.4 neutrons (or else kaboom).
These reasons are why (despite it generating 17℅ of the US electricity with only 92 reactors), countries don’t invest more into nuclear power. Inefficiency + large costs make it unappealing compared to wind which generates 40℅ or even 60℅ (with offshore) of the energy the wind pushes.