Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SellTheBridge t1_j5ep0ka wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in 1st small modular nuclear reactor certified for use in US by sunflowerastronaut

By this standard, please explain how any energy source is renewable. Even if steel/aluminum (wind) and silicon (solar) are abundant, they certainly are finite and they each depend on energy storage, which means lithium right now. I fail to see how nuclear is meaningfully different from a resource consumption standpoint.

−2

[deleted] t1_j5f1z02 wrote

Simple. Uranium is fundamentally consumed (changed into another isotope) when you use it in a nuclear power plant. Aluminum / lithium / silicon is not fundamentally consumed in a solar/wind/battery plant. You absolutely can recycle the materials and reuse them. Losses in this process are an engineeriing issue; losses in the nuclear process are physics and fundamental.

1

VerdantCabbage t1_j5fqa4z wrote

But the cost to transport the blades and other pieces in a wind turbine kit (flat-bed truck fueled by Diesel). And I doubt very much you can recycle them also. If they break. They go in the landfill and stay there for a hundred years or so.

1

[deleted] t1_j5fskjs wrote

You can transport those with electric vehicle in principal, burning fuel is not fundamentally required, which is the difference.

Plus, there are a lot of projects underway to recycle wind turbine blades, because as you pointed out that is a real long term concern. Not insurmountable, though.

https://cen.acs.org/environment/recycling/companies-recycle-wind-turbine-blades/100/i27

1

VerdantCabbage t1_j5grthm wrote

True. Anything given enough time, effort and money can be made more efficient. That's why all this money thrown at wind and solar has improved the technology. Money they refuse to throw at nuclear. From what I hear.

1