undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjws7y ago0 comments

One hand full of uranium is enough for a whole human live inclusive transportation heating and so on. Now compare this to the literal mountain of solar panels that would have to be produced…

1.1 billion hectares of land are farmed to feed the 7.5 billion people. That works out to 2000 square meters per person.

World energy consumption (all sources) runs about 18 terawatts, or 2400 watts per person. That is 58kWhr per day. Using an insolation factor of 3.0 (that is a 1W solar panel averages 3Whrs per day) each person will require 20kW of solar panels to replace ALL sources of energy. That is about 100 square meters of panels per person.

That's a lot, but not unthinkable. You could buy 8 pallets of panels today for $13k and cover a person, and it only takes 5% as much land as the land used to feed that person.

0 comments

nickik7y ago

I never claimed its impossible with solar, its just not very smart. Your calculation also leaves out a lot of issues with solar and intermittency. But even those things could be overcome.

However, how is that better? Uranium mining is tiny and a non issue. Thorium is even more plentiful, literally a waste product. We have enough of that stuff for 1000s of years. We have the technology to use it on mass scale and it has PROVEN track record of replacing fossil fuels at mass scales.

Solar panel waste is further duplicated by the live cycle and the lack of life cycle planning in the global supply.

theK7y ago

Is there a reason other than weapons lobby that blocks humanity from adopting thorium reactors?

nickik7y ago

The weapons lobby has nothing to do with it. The widely talked about claims that Thorium is not usable for weapons is false.

Uranium would most likely be picked for an industrial scale nuclear weapons program for a couple reasons but thorium does not eliminate these problems.

Furthermore many of the benefits people talk about when talking about Thorium is really about the reactor. Many of the same benefits could also be achieved with Uranium.

Thorium really shines for some specific reactor types.

Whats holding reactors back in general is regulation in all parts of the supply chain, from research to operational licenses, and a wide popular anti-nuclear feeling.

ImprovedSilence7y ago

All land doesn't receive the same quality or quantity of sunlight.

jwsOP7y ago

That is the 3.0 insolation I chose. It’s reasonably representative of areas of northern hemisphere cities. The United States average by population is probably between 4 and 5 according to this map, but winter is lower and you have to plan for that.

https://www.nrel.gov/gis/images/eere_pv/national_photovoltai...

Here is a map of the world…

https://globalsolaratlas.info/downloads/world

Northern Europeans are going to want to have some power lines to the south. Chile might be the new aluminum refining capital of the world. Africa would be energy rich.

pfdietz7y ago

I sometimes wonder if some of the resistance to a solar-powered world stems from their discomfort with the implied economic shift of heavy industry to brown-skinned countries.

robocat7y ago

So choose land that is poor for food production and good for electricity production, then find a way to transport the energy (one good advantage of gas/coal/oil is transportability with current infrastructure).

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsjws7y ago0 comments

One hand full of uranium is enough for a whole human live inclusive transportation heating and so on. Now compare this to the literal mountain of solar panels that would have to be produced…

1.1 billion hectares of land are farmed to feed the 7.5 billion people. That works out to 2000 square meters per person.

That's a lot, but not unthinkable. You could buy 8 pallets of panels today for $13k and cover a person, and it only takes 5% as much land as the land used to feed that person.

0 comments

nickik7y ago

I never claimed its impossible with solar, its just not very smart. Your calculation also leaves out a lot of issues with solar and intermittency. But even those things could be overcome.

Solar panel waste is further duplicated by the live cycle and the lack of life cycle planning in the global supply.

theK7y ago

Is there a reason other than weapons lobby that blocks humanity from adopting thorium reactors?

nickik7y ago

The weapons lobby has nothing to do with it. The widely talked about claims that Thorium is not usable for weapons is false.

Uranium would most likely be picked for an industrial scale nuclear weapons program for a couple reasons but thorium does not eliminate these problems.

Furthermore many of the benefits people talk about when talking about Thorium is really about the reactor. Many of the same benefits could also be achieved with Uranium.

Thorium really shines for some specific reactor types.

Whats holding reactors back in general is regulation in all parts of the supply chain, from research to operational licenses, and a wide popular anti-nuclear feeling.

ImprovedSilence7y ago

All land doesn't receive the same quality or quantity of sunlight.

jwsOP7y ago

https://www.nrel.gov/gis/images/eere_pv/national_photovoltai...

Here is a map of the world…

https://globalsolaratlas.info/downloads/world

Northern Europeans are going to want to have some power lines to the south. Chile might be the new aluminum refining capital of the world. Africa would be energy rich.

pfdietz7y ago

I sometimes wonder if some of the resistance to a solar-powered world stems from their discomfort with the implied economic shift of heavy industry to brown-skinned countries.

robocat7y ago

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse