The Energy Source of the Future is NOT what You Think !
Vložit
- čas přidán 25. 03. 2024
- 🔴 YOU WANT TO SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL? 🔴
🤗 Join our Patreon community: / ultrafuture
🤗 One-Time Donation?
- PayPal: paypal.me/JS2TheFuture
- Bitcoin: bc1qv4lsfsplvfecrrgvmfclhga28we7mvh9563xdj
🔗 Share the video with anyone who might be interested (it helps a ton!)
Music:
"John Tasoulas - Odyssey" is under a Creative Commons (CC-BY 3.0) license
/ johntasoulas
Music promoted by BreakingCopyright: htt ps://bit.ly/bc-odyssey-song
Neon Renegade · StreamBeats by Harris Heller
• Neon Renegade
📬 Contact us: ultra.future.video@gmail.com
#UltraFuture - Věda a technologie
🤗 Join our Patreon community: www.patreon.com/UltraFuture
The stigma connected to nuclear energy is pushed by shows like HBO's "Chernobyl" and Netflix's "Meltdown: Three Mile Island", so reversing that stigma is proving to be very difficult.
The future of energy is all forms of carbon-free power. Where I live, coal dies by the end of Summer officially when the last plant is converted to natural gas which is the only baseload power we have at the moment. However renewables are about 33% of the mix as of this year heading to about 50% in the next 24 months. Deals are also being signed to replace our existing NG plants with both SMR and conventional nuclear reactors since they have operated across Canada without error for 50+ years and is the second most used source after hydro. Plus our PM and Premiers have pledged to triple our nation's nuclear output as well... All good signs... Your move, 'Murica!
Interesting points about fission (and has me thinking about nuclear rocket engines). One think I will say about fusion, though, because people keep on using the 'twenty years away' quote out of context: The article from the 1970s that the claim is taken from said something closer to 'if we spend Apollo Program levels of money on it over the whole period, fusion power could be twenty years away.' Note that this doesn't mean 'as much money as the Apollo Program, but spread over a longer period.' The total amount would have been *much more* than Apollo, but the amount per year would be about equivalent to what was spent on Apollo each year, adjusting for inflation. Instead, a relative trickle has been spent, with small increases over time, and marketable fusion power is still between ten and fifty years away, depending on how much we spend on the research.
CANDU reactors can also use Thorium and/or used nuclear fuels and they've been operating for 50+ years...
Funny enough, I first heard of thorium reactors (and how their inability to generate material for nukes screwed them over) in a science fiction story.
That said, there's quite the government push for new nuclear plants here in Italy... But the Chernobyl scare is still strong.
5:43 that explains a lot about Homer😂
I keep forgetting this is you and then i start the video and I'm like: OH! lolololol
Heeeey it's Maiorianus. Nobody anunciates words like you.
Huh. I thought this is a successor channel to "2 The Future" which had a guy who sounds like this teamed with a Chinese lady (his wife, IIRC). She decided to stop participating in the original channel. But now that you mention Maiorianus, I'm wondering if I should expect a video along the lines of "Could there be a new Roman Empire in the future?" 😂
I'm not reassured by the description of the self-stabilising nuclear reactor (sorry, I already forgot which sort of reactor it is.) The Chernobyl explosion was not caused by a fault in the nuclear reactor. All the safety systems worked. The safety systems were deliberately over-ridden by saboteurs.
I learned that from a lecture on the disaster given in Edinburgh by a member of the International Atomic Energy Authority.
Left to itself, the Chernobyl reactor would have continued operating normally. One or two saboteurs entered the control cabin during a night shift and deliberately caused the reactor to malfunction. Then they over-rode the safety systems which were trying to shut the reactor down. Forcing the reactor to continue running without coolant, they caused a powerful explosion and radioactive pollution that could be detected by equipment all across Europe.
When judging the safety of a nuclear reactor, whatever its type, you must take into account the danger of deliberate sabotage or other criminal interference. It has happened in the past and it might happen to the friendly local reactor near you.
For myself, I would leave wind and solar power to wear out and rust. It has not worked. I would resume mining British coal. There is plenty of British coal in the ground, and the mines were only shut down en masse because Thatcher wanted to destroy the National Union of Mineworkers. I would re-purpose the old gas works as factories producing synthetic natural gas, and I would generate electricity in those clean, efficient British coal fired power stations.
Germany has it right: nuclear equals death, coal equals life and energy in abundance. Ask the people of Chernobyl, Fukushima, Three Mile Island and Windscale if you don't believe me.
From Eastern Europe, I really don't get the nuclear energy fear. Nuclear is amazing! A single plant and a quarter of my country gets energy. How many fossil fuel based plants would need to be built to equal that?
I saw a Documentary about 15 years ago. in the states one nuke power plant was leaking water. SOOOOOO many protestors. Funniest thing was when a guy came, pro nuclear, but he didn't say so. He shows up and hands out bananas to everyone in the crowd. Eventually he gets up to speak. "Do you all know how much radiation is leaking out of that plant?" less in a year, than was produced by the bananas in the last 30 minutes...... They were not impressed lololol
The depressing tradegy of beeing a futurist but living in... 2024 Germany.
Australia will be voting on nuclear next election , I was anti nuclear until I educated myself about it = now I a fan of nuclear
I just hope it's a real policy and not a delay tactic so Murdoch and Rinehart can keep their gas and coal going a few decades longer...
I'm also worried that it would take 15 years to build them, as all government funded projects take forever in this country!
If it takes too long to bring them online, they will be outpaced by other tach and be embarrassingly expensive to run comparatively. :(
I'd like a SMR for backup power, but I suspect that investing in batteries is better....
Private equity wants batteries not nuclear, because they'll make more money that way, that's why the government wants to build these rectors, private equity won't touch them.
I just hope we get MUCH more info about this policy before it's time to vote!!
4:10 that’s what very same people said when they thought “the Titanic will never Sink”, but it did.
bester spruch🤣: meine fresse echt warnsinn, abo ist raus
What I hate are anti-renewable/pro-nuclear videos. Solar, wind and battery storage technology complements nuclear and does not replace it! Please don't be THAT channel!