You’re missing the point, which is that we don’t normally measure reserves in centuries. We prospect as needed, and there is no reason to think that we would be unable to locate new deposits as necessary. All this and more is covered in the source you linked.
We don’t know we have centuries worth of stockpile. That’s just an assumption.
In fact, I think it’s a foolish assumption to make since if the world’s nuclear powers haven’t been quietly prospecting the globe for new sources of Uranium since 1945, they sure should have been. But you don’t hear about a lot of new uranium mines opening.
And what if this big stockpile us close to a major waterway? Or under a bunch of people’s homes?
Acting like “we can just look and find more” as if it’s that simple doesn’t make sense to me.
We have centuries worth of Thorium in mine tailings alone.
It’s considered a waste product, but can easily be used for power, China already has a Thorium power plant up and running. The US had a Thorium test reactor in the 60s.
This article from September 5th claims they are planning a power plant and their prototype reached criticality but was not designed to generate electricity.
If it works, great. That’s not a guarantee. Test reactors do not make practical power plants.
The only difference between a test reactor and a live reactor is attaching a turbine.
But that article was talking about one specific type of reactor. The Molten Salt Reactor. Those are good. Completely walk away safe. They also are key for having nuclear power in areas with little water. But they’re not the only type of reactor that uses Thorium.
CANDU reactors can burn thorium. It was part of the design specifications. They can also burn natural uranium. i.e. unenriched.
Are you asking if we did smart things before we began exploiting resources? Because the answer is no, never. Not once.
You’re missing the point, which is that we don’t normally measure reserves in centuries. We prospect as needed, and there is no reason to think that we would be unable to locate new deposits as necessary. All this and more is covered in the source you linked.
Which has never once caused a problem before, am I right?
Love how you ignored their actual point to focus on the one thing they said that didn’t apply to the topic
That’s what we normally do, which is a problem
But for nuclear we have centuries worth of stockpile, so we dont have to do that
We don’t know we have centuries worth of stockpile. That’s just an assumption.
In fact, I think it’s a foolish assumption to make since if the world’s nuclear powers haven’t been quietly prospecting the globe for new sources of Uranium since 1945, they sure should have been. But you don’t hear about a lot of new uranium mines opening.
And what if this big stockpile us close to a major waterway? Or under a bunch of people’s homes?
Acting like “we can just look and find more” as if it’s that simple doesn’t make sense to me.
We have centuries worth of Thorium in mine tailings alone.
It’s considered a waste product, but can easily be used for power, China already has a Thorium power plant up and running. The US had a Thorium test reactor in the 60s.
This article from September 5th claims they are planning a power plant and their prototype reached criticality but was not designed to generate electricity.
If it works, great. That’s not a guarantee. Test reactors do not make practical power plants.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-06/china-building-thorium-nuclear-power-station-gobi/104304468
The only difference between a test reactor and a live reactor is attaching a turbine.
But that article was talking about one specific type of reactor. The Molten Salt Reactor. Those are good. Completely walk away safe. They also are key for having nuclear power in areas with little water. But they’re not the only type of reactor that uses Thorium.
CANDU reactors can burn thorium. It was part of the design specifications. They can also burn natural uranium. i.e. unenriched.
And your explanation for why no country is powering a city with one yet is what?