How do you define Socialism?
Capitalism sucks for those that suck at achieving to be a capitalist.
“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.”
It is my view that you are presenting Capitalism as Unrestrained Capitalism.
I believe that it's possible that you believe that
If each person ate 1 chocolate every day, they would be able to survive for 10 days. Thats planned economy.Now lets apply capitalist market to this example.Because capitalists are competing with each other to sell to customers, and some customers want 2 or 3 chocolates a day, it follows that chocolates are depleted much faster due to customer's and capitalist's greed.
The capitalist tries to make more chocolate so people can have as much chocolate as they want (with the profit motive as incentive to work hard enough to produce chocolate).
You cannot "make" more fuel out of nothing, and when resources such as fuel are finite and you cannot make more of them, using more of them means you will run out of them faster.
As much as I'm aware of Socialism stealing people's rights, acting inefficiently, stagnating societies, and sacrificing portions of the population
There is nuclear energy which the free market is developing.
But we got 80 years of gas left (so 80 years to get electric cars and nuclear energy); we will be fine.
Its mass use would be dangerous, since any accident means the area cant be used for decades.
Plus, military, modern military, runs on oil, not nuclear energy.
I don't think that's true. Aircraft carriers use nuclear energy
Nuclear accidents are pretty much ancient history; they are regulated enough to where that's not plausible
But airplanes and tanks and missiles and transport vehicles dont, nor they can.
It happened in Japan few decades ago. Any time where there is an earthquake, a flood or hurricane, you risk disaster.
But nuclear energy isnt infinite either
They can be electric, which would in turn be nuclear powered if every vehicle is electric
This is not Japan; this is America.
The supply of nuclear energy materials is millions of years from what I read. It's as good as forever.
There is no way to make use of a tank which has to charge for 10 hours so that it can drive 2 hours
In fact, nuclear energy right now is in insignificant amount in electricity production.
Some sources say 200 years under current consumption.
Future technology might disagree with this
I don't know what your alternative is to expanding nuclear energy.
Chat GPT is giving me tens of thousands of years.
Tank uses 100 times more fuel than a car, and jet plane uses even more during flight.
The batteries needed to power them would take days to charge, and would have to be much larger than the ones currently used in cars. Their range would be much shorter than the ones which run on fuel. So a military electric plane would fly for few hours and then charge for 2 days
Current supplies of useful uranium will run out in 200 years under current consumption, but if everyone switched to nuclear, they would run out in 20 to 40 years. Now, there are some theories about converting useless type of uranium to useful, but those are just theories. Most theories which sound too good to be true usually are false.
If nuclear power were used to meet 100% of the world's energy needs, the available supply would depend on several factors, including the quantity of uranium and thorium resources, technological advancements, and the efficiency of nuclear power plants.Uranium and Thorium Resources
- Uranium: Current estimates indicate that there are about 6.1 million tonnes of identified recoverable uranium resources. Additionally, unconventional resources, such as uranium in seawater, could increase the supply significantly. Techniques to extract uranium from seawater are being developed, which could provide a virtually unlimited supply of uranium. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), these resources could sustain nuclear power for centuries at current consumption rates (‘A Turning Point’: First Ever Nuclear Energy Summit Concludes in Brussels | IAEA) (Nuclear Energy - Our World in Data).
- Thorium: Thorium is another potential nuclear fuel with greater abundance than uranium. Estimates suggest that there are about 6.2 million tonnes of thorium resources globally. Thorium reactors are still in the experimental stage, but they promise to be a significant future energy source due to thorium’s abundance and potential efficiency (In focus: EU nuclear energy policy – why it matters to us all - European Commission (europa.eu)).
Technological AdvancementsAdvancements in nuclear technology, such as breeder reactors and small modular reactors (SMRs), can greatly extend the supply of nuclear fuel:
- Breeder Reactors: These reactors generate more fissile material than they consume, effectively multiplying the energy potential of nuclear fuel. With breeder technology, the existing uranium and thorium resources could last much longer, potentially providing thousands of years of energy (Nuclear Power in a Clean Energy System – Analysis - IEA).
- Small Modular Reactors (SMRs): SMRs are designed to be more efficient and flexible than traditional large reactors, potentially improving the overall efficiency and reducing the amount of fuel needed (In focus: EU nuclear energy policy – why it matters to us all - European Commission (europa.eu)).
Energy Demand and Supply CalculationsTo estimate the potential supply of nuclear power, let’s consider the following:
- Global Energy Consumption: The world consumed about 173,000 terawatt-hours (TWh) of energy in 2019 (Nuclear - IEA).
- Nuclear Energy Efficiency: Modern nuclear reactors are quite efficient. Assuming an average efficiency of 33% for thermal reactors, converting thermal energy to electrical energy means more uranium or thorium would be required to meet global energy needs.
Using these assumptions, let's perform a simplified calculation:
- Annual Uranium Needs: To meet the global energy demand of 173,000 TWh using current nuclear technology, approximately 7,000 tonnes of uranium per year would be required (based on current consumption rates).
- Resource Lifespan: With 6.1 million tonnes of uranium, the supply could theoretically last around 871 years (6.1 million tonnes / 7,000 tonnes per year) if used in current reactors. With breeder reactors, this lifespan could be extended by several factors, potentially reaching tens of thousands of years (‘A Turning Point’: First Ever Nuclear Energy Summit Concludes in Brussels | IAEA) (Nuclear Power in a Clean Energy System – Analysis - IEA).
ConclusionIf nuclear power were to supply 100% of the world's energy needs, current uranium resources could last for several centuries with existing technology and for many thousands of years with breeder and thorium reactor technologies. This makes nuclear power a highly viable long-term energy source, provided that technological advancements continue and safety and waste management concerns are addressed.
If you need to strap hundreds of nuclear powered batteries to an engine, then so be it.
It's better to not have war/militaries to begin with
Where is your source for this information?
