Re: "Nuclear energy 'not the solution to global warming"
- From: "Paul F. Dietz" <dietz@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 16:45:09 -0500
T. Keating wrote:
They deferred that claim to your link.. http://nuclearinfo.net/Nuclearpower/UraniuamDistribution
which is titled "Uranium Distributions in the Earths Crust"
Note the claim "Earth's Crust".
70% of the earth's surface is underwater and completely out of reach
of current mining techniques. What's left has an average water
table in less than ~100m range, (Mostly out of reach, earth's crust is
30 to 40km ).
Actually, the rock of the oceanic crust has a much lower level of uranium than
the continental crust. Uranium (and, to some extent, thorium) preferentially
go into felsic rocks in preference to mafic rocks. The concentration
of uranium in the continental crust is enriched by orders of magnitude
over the average U content of the Earth because of this.
The water table objection is silly. Mines are often operated below
the water table in an area, using a wonderful technology called a 'pump'
to keep them dry. The first steam engines were designed
to pump water from mines.
Over the very long term, even the deep crust can be mined. Just remove
overburden and allow the area to float up by isostasy. Cool and mine.
Repeat as needed. Granted, this takes many thousands of years, but this
is the very long term we're talking about here.
Paul
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: "Nuclear energy 'not the solution to global warming"
- From: T . Keating
- Re: "Nuclear energy 'not the solution to global warming"
- Prev by Date: Re: "Nuclear energy 'not the solution to global warming"
- Next by Date: Urban Scale Wind Power
- Previous by thread: Re: "Nuclear energy 'not the solution to global warming"
- Next by thread: Re: "Nuclear energy 'not the solution to global warming"
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
