Category: space

Posted on

Wormholes Could Exist in the Real World…and They Could Be Safe for Human Beings

With the way scientific research is going, it seems like life in our beloved science fiction stories could end up being a reality one day – even if that one day remains so far off that we’ll probably never get to see it ourselves.

One thing that has fascinated humans for years, whether they’re super smart at science or not –  are wormholes. In fiction, they’re required to allow characters to get quickly from one place to another, even if those two places are separated by many, many light years.

Image Credit: iStock

The idea that we might be able to use them for the same purpose in the real world, though?

That’s kind of blowing my mind.

Two new studies, published in Physical Review Letters and Physical Review D, have done what physicists like Albert Einstein and Kip Thorne could not – prove the physical existence of wormholes.

Not only that, they propose that they could be safe enough for humans to travel through.

One of the biggest issues theoretical physicists have had with explaining wormholes is the concern that their “necks” – the narrowest spot in these portals – would collapse under the weight of its own gravity. The first new paper, though, led by a researcher from the University of Madrid, has proposed a real, workable solution to this issue.

Even though these papers deal with the possibilities of microscopic wormholes, we can extrapolate theories based on the way they suggest tweaking the mass and charge of fermions – the fundamental building blocks of matter – into talking about wormholes large enough for a human being.

Image Credit: iStock

The second paper, written by researchers from the Institute for Advanced Study in New Jersey and Princeton University, takes on that challenge, working with the theoretical existence of wormholes that are large enough for people to squeeze through out there in spacetime.
They have devised on that forms in five-dimensional spacetime, and that would look like intermediate-mass black holes to the untrained observer, they say in the paper.

Inside a wormhole like this, they posit you would experience around 20g of acceleration – uncomfortable, sure, but survivable. Still, if there were, say, errant particles floating around, the paper acknowledges there could be trouble.

“If particles that fall into the wormhole scatter and lose energy then they would accumulate inside, contributing some positive energy that would eventually make the wormhole collapse back into a black hole.”

Which would probably be bad.

In addition to that trouble, space is really stinking cold (and that’s ignoring the trouble of actually creating the wormhole in the first place.

Image Credit: iStock

We’re still working on figuring that out.

If we (and by we I mean they) can figure out these little problems though, a trip across the galaxy would only take around a second (or less). That said, anyone waiting in regular time for you to come back will definitely be dead by the time you do.

So make sure you pack absolutely everything and everyone you love when you leave.

The post Wormholes Could Exist in the Real World…and They Could Be Safe for Human Beings appeared first on UberFacts.

Posted on

Mars Isn’t as Red as You Might Think

Mars is called “The Red Planet” because of the way the surface shows up a rusty color in the images we get from the many NASA probes and expeditions we’ve been lucky to successfully launch.

What if I told you, though, that’s it’s really just the dirt – that the redness of the planet is actually only a few millimeters thick?

The close tie between Mars and the color red is nothing new; in Sanskrit, the word for ‘red’ and ‘Mars’ are literally one and the same. In Egyptian, too, the word for the planet means “red one,” and even with all of the great photographs we have now, all we see is red everywhere we look.

Image Credit: Pexels

The red is likely the result of dust particles in Mars atmosphere, which is much thinner than the one on Earth and allows for greater absorption at short optical wavelengths than at longer ones.

It also allows larger dust particles to scatter longer-wavelength light more efficiently.

The dust on Mars is high in reflectivity, represents bright soil deposits, and is rich in iron – which is to say, it contains large amounts of ferric oxides.

The most common type of dust is made from nano-crystalline red hematite, and is made up of small enough particles that the rapid Martian winds have no trouble sweeping large amounts of it around and even up into the atmosphere.

They also continually sweep over the surface, changing the landscape and features in both color and shape on a regular basis.

Then two scientists, one of whom was Carl Sagan, figured out why – the red layer we see on Mars’ surface is just a thin dusting of, well, dust and sand. It easily travels short distances, moving from higher to lower elevations or staying on like elevations, and is often blown off areas with steeper slopes onto flatter ones, changing the brightness of the color briefly.

The layer of dust that gives Mars its color, then, is only a few millimeters thick – even at its thickest, in the Tharsis region, it’s only around 7 feet deep.

More recent expeditions involving landers and rovers on Mars have proved, of course, that the red of Mars isn’t uniform at all, with much of the planet appearing more orange or even a butterscotch yellow up close and personal, with rocks and other deposits showing up an average brown, tan, or gray upon closer inspection.

Image Credit: iStock

If we could wave a magic wand and calm the planet’s atmosphere for long periods of time that dust would settle, and all of those other colors would be visible across the planet, much the way that blues and greens and whites dominate images of Earth from outer space.

Scientists are still looking to figure out the process by which those red hematite particles form, and in big enough quantities to turn the far away pictures red in the first place.

Which means that Mars will probably forever remain the red planet, because it’s the only color that reaches our eyes.

Until, of course, we have the opportunity to relocate there ourselves. Then, we’ll be able to see all of Mars’ true colors for ourselves.

The post Mars Isn’t as Red as You Might Think appeared first on UberFacts.

Posted on

A Scientist Thinks the Earth Is Actually Two Planets Fused Together After Colliding

Just when you thought you knew how the world works, science throws something new at you.

There’s a ton of great research coming out of PhD programs these days–new discoveries and new ideas.

One such researcher is Qian Yuan from the School of Earth and Space Exploration at Arizona State University.

His research suggests that parts of the Earth are not actually Earth at all.

His team’s research was presented at the 52nd Lunar and Planetary Science Conference this past March.

For years it has been widely believed that a proto-planet called Theia helped to form life as we know it.

According to Popular Mechanics:

In 2016, UCLA researchers proposed that Earth could actually be two planets that fused together after colliding: itself and Theia. At the time, scientists said they believe the two planetary masses mixed together uniformly. Now, Qian Yuan of Arizona State University and his colleagues suggest the mysterious dense spots in Earth’s interior are the specific pieces of Theia that are still intact.

Theia is thought to be very similar in size and structure to Mars.

Scientists also believe that the Earth’s Moon may have formed during this impact.

You might remember from science class that the Earth is made up of 3 layers: the crust, the mantle, and the core.

The mantle itself is also made up of layers of varying density, and is at the center of Yuan’s research.

In some cases, there are massive pockets that are more dense, called “Large Low Shear Velocity Provinces” or (LLSVPs).

I honestly don’t understand most of Yuan’s science-related tweets, but he compares the Earth to chocolate, which is always a language I can understand:

The team did a lot of math, and they have been able to compare the objects of their study with the mantle on Mars, which can be examined in the form of meteorites that have landed on Earth–over 100 of them.

What the researchers found is that:

“The total mass of the moon, together with the LLSVPs, is almost perfectly matched with [Mars’s] mantle.”

Unlike the original supposition that the two planets fused completely, Yuan’s team believe that the heavier Theia material sank into the deepest part of the Earth’s mantle, closest to the core, and there it stayed, like the gritty dregs at the bottom of a cup of coffee.

Popular Mechanics explains it this way:

How have the dense Theia materials stayed intact for billions of years?

It’s a function of the way Earth’s mantle works, where convection circulates materials that are a certain temperature and density.

The Theia materials are so dense that they sank and never floated back into the convection zone.

Think of this like the stuff that accumulates in a sharp corner that’s hard to reach with the vacuum cleaner.

So now you know. The Earth is like an Easter candy egg with a vacuum cleaner hidden deep inside.

And even though Mars feels very far away, we are all technically walking on a foreign world.

Did Yuan’s research completely blow your mind like it did mine? 🤯 Tell us in the comments.

The post A Scientist Thinks the Earth Is Actually Two Planets Fused Together After Colliding appeared first on UberFacts.

Posted on

The Department of Defense Is Evaluating UFO Data That Might Be Released to the General Public

Anyone who grew up on “The X-Files” can’t help but think that “the truth is out there” was more than just a catchphrase.

And as it turns out, we could finally begin to learn a little bit more of that truth very soon.

I’ve never seen a UFO, unless you count the cow-abduction road signs in New Mexico.

But I definitely think it’s a little bit silly and hugely egotistical to assume that in the whole vast cosmos, our planet is the only one to sustain intelligent life.

It turns out, the U.S. government has seen enough unexplained evidence that they think so too.

Who that’s heard the audio of Australian pilot Fred Valentich’s encounter and subsequent disappearance can deny that something has visited us?

The U.S. government doesn’t refer to them as UFO’s anymore.

Maybe that’s considered a little too hokey and little-green-manish now, so they instead describe them as UAP or Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, which can take in a broader range of encounters.

Just last year, after videos filmed by Navy pilots was leaked to the public, the Department of Defense established a new task force for investigating these phenomena, or UAPTF.

Not only that, but Popular Mechanics reports:

When Trump signed the coronavirus relief and government funding bill into law in December 2020, it contained the IAA for Fiscal Year 2021, which means the UAPTF must report its findings to Congress by June 25.

That’s June 25 of this year.

The Director of National Intelligence who served under President Trump at the time went on Fox News recently to talk about the project, and it sounds like he’s a believer too, stating that the reports will cover:

[UAP that make] “movements that are hard to replicate that we don’t have the technology for, or traveling at speeds that exceed the sound barrier without a sonic boom. In short, things that we are observing that are difficult to explain.”

The note about the sound barrier is particularly relevant.

Image credit: U.S. Navy, via Flickr

Here’s why, according to Popular Mechanics:

When an aircraft increases its speed, pressure waves build up on it and eventually coalesce into a single shockwave. When the plane outruns that shockwave and travels faster than the speed of sound in air, it causes a sudden change in pressure, which in turn creates the sonic boom. There’s no publicly available scientific data to suggest any aircraft can break the sound barrier without producing a sonic boom; while engineers can take steps to try to reduce sonic booms, physics says it’s impossible to outright eliminate it.

Which means that if the government has proof of aircraft that defy physics, then they have proof of civilizations more advanced than our own.

And so, although a watchdog group will be evaluating how the Pentagon handled UAP reports:

the Pentagon itself will be busy this month reviewing all the data they have been collecting under the UAPTF project ahead of that June deadline to release the information.

And it’s not all going to be blurry videos and darting shapes, either. There’s actual concrete data.

According to a source from The Debrief, a contributor to Popular Mechanics:

“Some of the best evidence acquired has come from measurement and signature intelligence (MASINT), rather than from videos or still images.”

Suddenly I’m on the edge of my seat waiting for summer!

What do you think? All an elaborate hoax, or FINALLY some transparency?

Let us know in the comments!

The post The Department of Defense Is Evaluating UFO Data That Might Be Released to the General Public appeared first on UberFacts.

Posted on

Uranus Passed a Gas Bubble 22,000 Times Bigger Than Earth

I don’t think it’s possible for a planet to be embarrassed, but if it were, Uranus should definitely be ashamed of the gas bubbles that are emerging from its bowels.

Do farts stink in space? There’s a question for NASA the next time I’ve got them on the line.

In all seriousness, this discovery is something special, because with all of the information we’ve been able to gather from various planets in our solar system – earthquakes on Mars, grooves in Saturn’s rings, jet streams on Jupiter, and even Pluto’s heartbeat – our image and knowledge of Uranus hasn’t been substantially increased since Voyager 2 passed by the blue beachball in 1986.

Image Credit: iStock

In 2020,though, two planetary scientists noticed an anomaly that everyone had overlooked – a magnetic bubble, perhaps.

Their report appeared in Geophysical Research Letters, and has led scientists to take another look at the mysterious planet.

Gina DiBraccio and Daniel Gershman are two of the scientists who are brushing off old research, seeing what else we might have missed. They’ve spent hours manually looking at 30-year-old data, and found that by focusing on what Voyager 2 considered extraneous noise, there is much we could have missed.

Specifically, they spotted a 60-second long section of the 45-hour flyby where the magnetic field rose and fell in a way they immediately recognized.

It was a plasmoid.

Those are charged globs of atmosphere blown out into space when solar winds whip around planets, and losing them can transform a place over a long period of time.

Image Credit: Public Domain

Studying them is one of the ways scientists believe they can gain insight into how planets live – and how they die.

DiBraccio explained,

“We expected that Uranus would likely have plasmoids.

However we didn’t know exactly what they would look like.”

The plasmoid looks similar to ones they’ve seen emitting from Saturn and Jupiter, but it’s much larger – it formed a cylinder roughly 22,000 times larger than Earth.

Uranus is ripe for study, with updated imaging showing a world that’s not just blue, but painted with white, candy-striped clouds. We’ve also really never understood that way it rolls instead of spins, tipped on its side with its poles pointing either toward or away from the sun.

It’s magnetic field is different, too. It’s offset from the planet’s center, around 60 degrees to the side instead. Planetary astronomers have never really been able to see it or how it works, though the Hubble can occasionally catch an indirect glimpse.

NASA and other space researchers have a growing interest in sending a dedicated probe to Uranus or Neptune. Sketches of possible missions have emerged over the past three years, and DiBraccio confirms they’re likely not going to stop until one is approved to go ahead.

Image Credit: iStock

The plan is to send a Cassini-style orbiter to circle the planets for years, surveying the magnetic field and studying its heat flow. There would also be at least one smaller probe the ship could fire into the atmosphere to measure invisible gasses leftover from the planet’s formation.

Uranus and Neptune, made from heavier molecules (water and ammonia) than the more common “gas giants” in our solar system, aren’t anomalies anywhere else. Neptune-like planets are one of the most common in the galaxy, and understanding more about them could tell scientists about the fundamental ways our galaxy seems to differ from the majority of known space.

Image Credit: iStock

Still, nuclear power will have to catch up, and getting to the outer reaches of our galaxy will be a years-long mission, even after it gets off the ground, says Heidi Hammel, a planetary astronomer and VP for Science at the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy.

“Even with our current best rockets and gravity assists, it’s still a decade to get out there. Most of us tend to think in multi-decade time scales.”

“I dream about exploring Uranus and Neptune and I dream about fantastic space telescopes. That’s how we get through tough times. We dream about the future.”

We’ve certainly had plenty of tough times lately, so let’s hope it pays off when we see some of these dreams and visions of the future come true.

The post Uranus Passed a Gas Bubble 22,000 Times Bigger Than Earth appeared first on UberFacts.

Posted on

Scientists Say There Could Be 36 Alien Civilizations in the Milky Way

We’ve all wondered–could there be, not just life, but intelligent life, out there?

And while relative intelligence of life on Earth could be debatable, two scientists from the University of Nottingham have a new theory that suggests there is.

36 different potential civilizations, to be exact.

Image credit: NASA via Rawpixel

How can scientists possibly make a prediction about the number of undiscovered civilizations?

It’s a mathematical theory based on a fifty-year-old equation called the Drake equation.

As Popular Mechanics explains:

Drake’s seven key variables, which range from how many habitable planets exoplanets there are in the galaxy to the amount of time over which intelligent life takes shape, are almost impossible to pin down.

The formula acts more like a framework for the probability of finding life; previous estimates have ranged from zero to over a billion civilizations.

But Professor of Astrophysics Christopher Conselice, his colleague Tom Westby, and their team at the University of Nottingham used new technology and assumptions about our galaxy, the Milky Way, to formulate a new hypothesis.

They published their work last summer in The Astrophysical Journal.

Image credit: NASA via Rawpixel

As quoted in Phys.org, Conselice explains that they based their assumption on the length of time it took a civilization to develop on Earth:

“There should be at least a few dozen active civilizations in our Galaxy under the assumption that it takes 5 billion years for intelligent life to form on other planets, as on Earth.

The idea is looking at evolution, but on a cosmic scale. We call this calculation the Astrobiological Copernican Limit.”

The Copernican limit guides researchers to think on a pretty large scale–where intelligent life develops in either more or less than 5 billion years.

By intelligent life, scientists mean a civilization capable of communication.

On Earth, that development took more than 4.5 billion years, thus the 5 billion year threshold.

Image credit: NASA via Rawpixel

These calculations have been used for years, but the Nottingham team took it one step further, factoring in the specific composition of Earth’s sun.

As Westby explained:

“In the strong criteria, whereby a metal content equal to that of the Sun is needed (the Sun is relatively speaking quite metal rich), we calculate that there should be around 36 active civilizations in our Galaxy.”

When all of the data is combined and analyzed, they believe just 36 exoplanets possess all the right conditions to support the development of an alien civilization.

Of course that means 36 alien civilizations that are enough like us to be recognizable as communicative beings.

Who knows how many are out there that are so different that we might not even recognize them if we saw them.

The problem is, a theory needs to be proven, and the exoplanets are so far away that while we can see them with high powered telescopes and gather some sensory data on them, we don’t yet have the technology to visit them–even with probes.

Image credit: NASA via Rawpixel

If they’re so far away, why do we even care?

Well aside from the intrinsic human need to explore and discover, finding out how many other civilizations co-exist could actually tell us something about how long life on earth will last.

As Professor Conselice points out:

If we find that intelligent life is common then this would reveal that our civilization could exist for much longer than a few hundred years, alternatively if we find that there are no active civilizations in our Galaxy it is a bad sign for our own long-term existence.

By searching for extraterrestrial intelligent life—even if we find nothing—we are discovering our own future and fate

This is very exciting in the world of astronomy.

But according to Popular Mechanics and The Guardian, not every scientist is convinced.

Oliver Shorttle of the University of Cambridge told the news organization that more factors need to be considered—such as how exactly life formed on Earth—before taking the new findings as fact.

That’s science for you. There’s always more to consider.

Even so, it’s pretty cool to have such a specific number, don’t you think?

Do you believe there’s life out there? Let us know your theories in the comments!

The post Scientists Say There Could Be 36 Alien Civilizations in the Milky Way appeared first on UberFacts.

Posted on

Did You Know That Mass Extinction Events Happen Every 27 Million Years?

Right now, we’re in the middle of a mass extinction event, in which we are in danger of losing hundreds, maybe thousands, species of animals forever.

It’s sad to think about, this morbid marking of time passing, of the marks we humans leave on the planet, but recent evidence suggests it’s not a novel event at all.

Image Credit: iStock

In fact, the mass extinction of land-dwellers – amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and birds – cycles around every 27 million years.

The study also found that these events align with major asteroid impacts and volcanic eruptions, which could have encouraged the acceleration of these events, says lead author Michael Rampino, a biology professor at New York University.

“It seems that large-body impacts and the pulses of internal Earth activity that create flood-basalt volcanism may be marching to the same 27-million-year drumbeat as the extinctions, perhaps paced by our orbit in the galaxy.”

66 million years ago, 70% of all species – land and sea – suddenly went extinct in the aftermath of a large asteroid or comet collision.

This study examined the record of mass-extinctions of land-dwelling animals and concluded that they coincided with the extinctions of ocean life as well.

Image Credit: iStock

Until our current mass extinction event, every one previous seems to have happened alongside a catastrophic even like we mentioned earlier, and some events – like comet showers – also appear every 26-30 million years.

The planets also cycle through the Milky Way in the same period of time, the movements creating conditions that would stress and potentially kill off life on Earth due to widespread dark and cold, wildfires, acid rain, and ozone depletion.

Image Credit: Pexels

Those massive volcanic eruptions – flood-basalt eruptions – could also have come into play.

“These new findings of coinciding, sudden mass extinctions on land and in the oceans, and of the common 26- to 27-million-year cycle, lend credence to the idea of periodic global catastrophic events as the triggers for the extinctions.

In fact, three of the mass annihilations of species on land and in the sea are already known to have occurred at the same times as the three largest impacts of the last 250 million years, each capable of causing a global disaster and resulting mass extinctions.”

Ramptino adds,

“The global mass extinctions were apparently caused by the largest cataclysmic impacts and massive volcanism, perhaps sometimes working in concert.”

What do you think about this information? Could an extinction event be coming sooner than we had anticipated based on this new theory?

Let us know your thoughts in the comments!

The post Did You Know That Mass Extinction Events Happen Every 27 Million Years? appeared first on UberFacts.

Posted on

This is Why the Discovery of Water on the Sunlit Moon Is Such a Game-Changer

You’ve probably noticed that whenever scientists find water in outer space, they get super excited about it.

Unless you’re a scientist yourself, or maybe a space enthusiast, you might not know why we’re supposed to be so amazed and excited, too, though – and we just can’t stand for that.

Image Credit: Pexels

NASA has always known there is water on the sunlit side of the moon, but late last year, telescope observations revealed that it exists in more abundance than anyone had thought.

Image Credit: NASA

NASA’s SOFIA (Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy) confirmed that water exists across the lunar surface, not just in cold, shadowed places – even in the Clavius Crater, which is visible from Earth.

Here’s a video about how they did it.

There are several theories about how the water got there, including that micrometeorites could have deposited water as they rained down, or that hydrogen carried from the Sun’s solar winds interacts with oxygen in the moon’s soil to create the water, but discussions are ongoing.

Another mystery scientists are looking to solve is how the water accumulates there, and how and where it is stored.

Image Credit: Pixabay

But back to the question at hand – why are scientists so exited?

Along with the obvious thrill of discovery, they’re also looking to figure out whether the existence – and the continued existence – of water across the lunar surface could mean less trouble for astronauts who want to visit (or even for those who might want to stay on a planned lunar base near the South Pole).

As of now, NASA still plans to land in that location, and eventually establish a permanent base where they know water ice exists in nearby craters. The highlands in the area also catch sunlight, which will be essential for the planned solar power collectors.

One of the reasons NASA hasn’t been back to the moon is that, for a long time, the moon was assumed to be dry. That changed when a probe found the water ice at the lunar poles, and then on subsequent missions, confirmed by NASA and other organizations.

Image Credit: Pixabay

Dr. Paul Spudis, who worked on the majority of these robotic missions, was the first to realize what this could mean for additional manned missions to the moon.

There are great resources on the moon, but it’s the water that could enable us to be able to access the rest of them – whether it’s used for drinking, refueling, for crops, or something else, it’s a most precious resource that could be a key to making life beyond Earth possible.

The post This is Why the Discovery of Water on the Sunlit Moon Is Such a Game-Changer appeared first on UberFacts.

Posted on

People Debate if Nuclear Energy Is the Best Option for the Good of the Environment

Whenever the word “nuclear” is mentioned, some people seem to get nervous because of the negative connotation it has.

But maybe nuclear energy is the ideal component we need moving forward when it comes to concerns about the environment?

I really don’t know much of anything about this subject, so I’m gonna leave it to the folks on AskReddit to debate this one for me.

Let’s take a look at what they had to say about it.

1. Here’s a hot take.

“The amount of long term waste with solar and wind is undeniably higher than with nuclear energy. Nuclear power plants in America that are not on fault lines are safe and are designed to be impossible to melt down (really).

A decentralized power system will always be more expensive than a centralized one, and we have the ability to make our grid carbon neutral in a matter of years. What are the downsides?

Why are politicians ignoring this obvious option. I’m not even talking fusion, just fission.”

2. Fear mongering.

“Of course people don’t talk about it, they hear the word nuclear and they think of Hiroshima, Chernobyl, Nagasaki.

The idea of nuclear energy has been pushed to be something feared.”

3. Fired up.

“This gets me f*cking mad.

Chernobyl was an incredibly outdated reactor already at the time it exploded, there was a human and structural mistake and were talking about a time when you were allowed to smoke inside f*cking hospitals, let’s be honest it would never happen again.

And Fukushima just makes me laugh cause it was literally caused by a freaking tsunami.”

4. Perceived as dangerous.

“You can compare it with air traffic: Aeroplanes are statistically the safest method of traveling, but when something goes wrong there are hundreds of dead people, so we perceive it as dangerous, altough it is actually the safest way of travelling.

The same goes for nuclear energy: It is the safest and most efficient way to produce energy, even when you include (very rare) terrible cases such as Chernobyl and Fukushima.”

5. The best option.

“It’s all about energy capacity per acre of land. I heard a Ted Talk and the scientist was saying that to have the UK use only solar, it would require about 1/3 of the land to be covered in solar cells.

Plus, the solar system installed in the Mojave Desert which impact the Desert Tortoise habitat. Wind farms actually ensnare bats, birds, etc. Both however, only work on small portions of land (where the sun shines or the wind blows), but even these power sources are subject to mother nature.

Nuclear on the other hand is incredibly energy dense per acre. If we had invested in nuclear years ago, we would be on generation 250. Also, nuclear energy only produces steam. And finally, we have the land use available to store nuclear energy should we finally get a national plan on how to deal with it.

Again, it’s what options do you have today to solve climate change – warts and all?

Nuclear is the best.”

6. Fission and fusion.

“People are too afraid that a nuclear bomb will go off or something, which can’t possibly happen at a power plant.

Fission and fusion are the only renewables energy types we should even bother pursuing.”

7. Those politicians…

“The 1980s scared people away, once the majority of people who remember those times are dead, nuclear will be easier to push.

Nuclear being bad was the truth for them, people don’t like when you questions something they’ve fundamentally believed for decades, they will just push the discussion away.

Politicians ain’t discussing nuclear because they know this.”

8. Some good info.

“Nuclear plants in their traditional forms have numerous technical issues that can end up prematurely shuttering the plant. Graphic cracking for example.

There’s no denying that nuclear energy is great for base load generation normally provided by thermal fossil fuel generators but the cost of building nukes in their most updated and safe hi-tech forms is enormous compared to adding renewable capacity and using hydro storage or battery with renewables!

Obviously not every energy system is the same but in modern economies by the time FF thermal generation shifts off we could engineer completely renewable systems!”

9. Stigmatized.

“Chernobyl kinda put a stick in it. However it was because of faulty construction.

Nuclear energy provides constant, clean and efficient energy. If you want green energy, go Nuclear.

Today’s process is much safer with more knowledge and understanding in past mistakes. It is the best way to go forward. It’s because of either misinformation, fear and the general media/public view on it.”

10. We need new options.

“Yes nuclear has it’s benefits and fission is simple enough that I understood it when I was 10. And safety management is done very well, using the same principles as with aviation.

But the downsides to the rare but certain f*ck ups are so serious that they change nations and the planet. And we still don’t know the long term effects of all the strontium and other fall out chemicals we all carry around in us, along with every other mammal.

Are you are aware that our governments lied their rectums off about this, ruining lives and careers? And still are? That doesn’t necessarily negate the possibility but reasonable people hesitate in the face of interest-groups-fueled government f*ckery.

Your statement about centralized vs decentralized power systems is bold.

And the long term waste – what are you talking about? And the energy involved in the entirety of each cycle (and hence, the total cost) … are you are aware of how they compare?

Ultimately we need new and better nuclear power options in general and the ultimate aim is to get to a position of having endless energy available that is cheaper than water. Development depends on it. And the trick will be creating power cycles that remove the additional carbon and other compounds from the system over time.”

11. Not the way forward.

“The future of the energy industry is not nuclear.

I’ve spent my career so far building and running electricity companies, and there are a few simple facts that have become apparent:

In modern, deregulated electricity industries, off-grid low voltage generation (think household solar panels) is rapidly reaching cost/performance parity with on-grid power. Investment in storage-based supply in batteries (as opposed to peak generation such as fossil fuel) is f*cking massive – renewables and batteries are projected to take 80% of the $15.1 trillion forecast investment in new power generation.

We will reach a tipping point in about 2035 where transporting electricity (colossal steel pylons and cables across countries) is more expensive than generating it and storing it close to the consumer What this means: Tomorrow’s electricity grids are distributed, made of many small nodes of generation and consumption, and not made of giant power plants with long inefficient transmission lines.

Today’s solar and wind plants can be spun up to utility scale in under a year. A nuclear plant has historically taken over 8 years to build and cost massive up-front capital. Nuclear plants are also designed to have operating lifetimes of 60+ years. Investing in nuclear is not only making a bet that nuclear will stay at the top of the price/kWh curve, but also that it will be there in a decade’s time and then stay there for half a century.

What this means: Nuclear is not only a losing bet based on current economic forecasts, but it’s an absolutely colossal bet that ties you down for 70 years whether you win or lose.

Pro-nuclear research is tainted by pro-nuclear lobbies and governments. Schrader-Frechette found that the majority of research that has pro-nuclear conclusions is funded by parties with conflicts of interest.

Fossil fuels are dying anyway (never fast enough, sadly), so the true question is not if we go renewable but which renewable to take, and it seems we can’t take for granted that pro-nuclear attitudes are based in unbiased critical thought. What this means: It may not even be true that nuclear energy is a good option – nevermind the best option – if we cannot trust the research.

Now, this sucks for me. I’m a huge physics fanboy, and thorium reactors and fission are absolutely my favourite ideas for future energy production. I’m attracted to space-age nuclear ideals at a very emotional level – I know how it feels – but the facts just aren’t panning out that way.

In the end, it’s not true that politicians are ignoring the “obvious” nuclear option. This is a very serious issue that very, very many of the worlds smartest are working on, and the sensible option is already the one we’re taking.

Turns out scientists are largely pretty good at what they do. Who’d have thought?”

12. Fearful of nuclear.

“The fossil feul industry obviously has a vested interest to keep people fearful of nuclear. They’ll spend lots of money on add campaigns covered with nuclear bomb explosions and zero facts.

I read recently that nuclear deaths per year is even less than some other green energies, wind iirc and that has to be a wake up call for those that are fearful. As for fossil fuel, its a no contest in comparison.

Fossil fuel has powerful lobbies, powerful corps and the republican party receives about 90% of their donations or something.”

What do you think about this?

Is nuclear energy the way to go for the good of our environment?

Talk to us in the comments and share your thoughts. Thanks!

The post People Debate if Nuclear Energy Is the Best Option for the Good of the Environment appeared first on UberFacts.