Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

lambda_x_lambda_y_y t1_j3pbhmb wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in Earth’s ozone layer on course to be healed within decades, UN report finds | Most of atmospheric layer that protects planet from ultraviolet radiation likely to be fully recovered for most of world by 2040. by SetMau92

Well actually we know what that single simple step is: the single sector responsible for the majority (~60%) of anthropogenic GHG emissions (measured in CO2eq over 100 years) is energy production (i.e. electricity and thermal energy production).

Fossil fuels were (and still are) too convenient and pervasive to take action, though. But theoretically we had the technology to decarbonise electricity and thermal energy production even 50 years ago (with nuclear energy).

1

projectkennedymonkey t1_j3q970k wrote

I read somewhere that nuclear is not actually the answer because there isn't enough nuclear material to replace all the fossil fuel generation needed. I haven't done any follow up research or anything but wonder if it's true...

1

lambda_x_lambda_y_y t1_j3qf4bd wrote

Well, it would have last for a century or so seeking only the currently economically profitable mineral uranium resources at market value (which aren't the totality of the mineral uranium resources).

Theoretically, seawater uranium can last millennia (but the extraction makes it cost more than the uranium market value, although that bottleneck is decreasing fast lately).

However, the fast nuclear reactor technology solves the limitations issue of the economically profitable uranium as well as the highly radioactive wast problem (which in reality is more of a social conundrum than a problem).

1