Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

There's not that much Uranium actually that's economically sensible to extract. The NEA says in their 2024 report on Uranium [1]:

> Considering both the low and high nuclear capacity scenarios to 2050 presented in this edition, and assuming their 2050 capacity is maintained for the rest of the century, the quantities of uranium required by the global fleet – based on the current once-through fuel cycle – would likely surpass the currently identified uranium resource base in the highest cost category before the 2110s.

Their "high" scenario assumes having a bit more than double of today's capacity by 2050; today we have about 4-5% supply from nuclear energy worldwide.

[1] https://www.oecd-nea.org/jcms/pl_103179/uranium-2024-resourc...



Out of curioosity, do they forecast at what point it becomes cheaper to breed than mine?


There are tons of mines which were shut down a long time ago, but could be reopened if there was much of a uranium market again.

The actual efficiency of breeding thorium is so low, it would take a HUGE scarcity to actual make any sense.


Local scarcity, not necessarily global scarcity. Especially during times of conflict. China has no uranium, so this may make sense for them.

Also, currently all transport channels for uranium are oil dependent, which is becoming a scarce resource in the relevant timeline - decades.



It's a bit different. Higher demand will lead to higher price, opening more options to mine. Now uranium is too cheap to open new mines and exploration


And I hate to pollute this thread with more AI fear-mongering, but AI inference is already showing its effects on the energy sector and it is expected to grow very rapidly. Energy demands may likely grow at a stronger rate than initially expected.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: