You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

DanielLC comments on Climate change: existential risk? - Less Wrong Discussion

6 Post author: katydee 06 May 2011 06:19AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (25)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: DanielLC 08 May 2011 06:32:07PM 7 points [-]

At $130/kg, there's enough for 80 years at current consumption (about 10 years if we use it for all our electricity), but if we're willing to use ore with a tenth as much uranium, there's 300 times as much. Also, there's ways of using uranium 238, which is about 140 times as abundant. It's still a temporary patch, in the sense that we can't just keep using it until the sun goes out, but it will last long enough for fusion power to become economically feasible.

Comment author: BenAlbahari 08 May 2011 11:15:36PM 5 points [-]

Also, there's ways of using uranium 238

And thorium.