this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2023
277 points (94.8% liked)

World News

39000 readers
3146 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] schroedingershat@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Mines take a lot longer than 10 years, as do power-plants (the whole thing starting at permit submission and ending at last reactor coming online). 2045 is optimistic.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, 10 years was a best case scenario, where you basically already have the plans drawn up and are ready to build. Not sure what your point about mines is, I'm assuming they'd be importing uranium?

[–] schroedingershat@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Still requires expanding uranium production somewhere, and likely also buying from Russia.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah, the Russia issue is kind of hilarious. You're trying to reduce fossil fuel use so you're not dependent on Russia for energy, so instead you're going to use nuclear, which uses fuel rods almost exclusively refined by Russia.

Not sure if new mining would be needed, but I guess that depends on what happens in Niger.

[–] visnae@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sweden has uranium reserves and produced it's own uranium in the 60-s. Though I think laws currently prevent mining.

[–] schroedingershat@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm sure they'll take just as much care for indigenous reindeer herders when choosing where to poison thousands of km^2 of land as they did when using them for hostage shield politics to sabotage the wind rollout.

Or is an entire country supposed to run indefinitely on the single year worth of reserves already known?