Which has an enormous carbon footprint. Mining nuclear fuel is also pretty bad in terms off land use and habitat destruction. The bulk of uranium mining is done in Kazakhstan, mostly through hydraulic fracturing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_situ_leach). I'm not necessarily against nuclear as part of an energy mixture that gets away from fossil fuels, but it's still just one shitty option among many.
Solar is 50% worse than nuclear for lifetime CO2 emissions per kilowatt-hour. Nuclear and wind tie for the best.
Obviously, not all countries can use wind. You can find the academic sources by googling their images. Hydroelectric is also good but that comes with its own problems. You're severely underestimating the amount of solar panels needed and the amount of mining that will require in comparison to even just uranium. You don't need a huge supply of uranium to accomplish a decade's worth of energy production. Thorium and other reactants are better because we accidentally dig that stuff up all the time, so it requires less concerted mining.
for reference on wind: https://globalwindatlas.info/
The United States is a good candidate for wind generation but there are still industrial hurdles there. You need an average wind speed greater than 7.5 m/s in order to export energy, lets also not forget that it takes significant amounts of energy to transfer electricity from one region to another. When you take this into account, the only sensible options are Wind, Hydroelectric, and Nuclear, with Hydroelectric and Nuclear being the top choices by a long shot. However, due to the fact that hydro is very environment damaging, you are confined to Wind and Nuclear, with nuclear being the bulk. Wind typically only works in currently well developed nations, unfortunately, so many of developing nations are going to be shoehorned into relying on the west for solar panel imports or learning nuclear tech from China for green alternatives. With the first option, you might as well laugh it off. It means nuclear is the only way forward and it would be wise to focus all our efforts on it in order to make development easier for the global south.
Which has an enormous carbon footprint. Mining nuclear fuel is also pretty bad in terms off land use and habitat destruction. The bulk of uranium mining is done in Kazakhstan, mostly through hydraulic fracturing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_situ_leach). I'm not necessarily against nuclear as part of an energy mixture that gets away from fossil fuels, but it's still just one shitty option among many.
Obviously, not all countries can use wind. You can find the academic sources by googling their images. Hydroelectric is also good but that comes with its own problems. You're severely underestimating the amount of solar panels needed and the amount of mining that will require in comparison to even just uranium. You don't need a huge supply of uranium to accomplish a decade's worth of energy production. Thorium and other reactants are better because we accidentally dig that stuff up all the time, so it requires less concerted mining.
https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2019/04/nuclear-energy-is-50-better-than-solar-for-lifetime-co2-emissions.html
http://www.world-nuclear.org/uploadedFiles/org/WNA/Publications/Working_Group_Reports/comparison_of_lifecycle.pdf
for reference on wind: https://globalwindatlas.info/
The United States is a good candidate for wind generation but there are still industrial hurdles there. You need an average wind speed greater than 7.5 m/s in order to export energy, lets also not forget that it takes significant amounts of energy to transfer electricity from one region to another. When you take this into account, the only sensible options are Wind, Hydroelectric, and Nuclear, with Hydroelectric and Nuclear being the top choices by a long shot. However, due to the fact that hydro is very environment damaging, you are confined to Wind and Nuclear, with nuclear being the bulk. Wind typically only works in currently well developed nations, unfortunately, so many of developing nations are going to be shoehorned into relying on the west for solar panel imports or learning nuclear tech from China for green alternatives. With the first option, you might as well laugh it off. It means nuclear is the only way forward and it would be wise to focus all our efforts on it in order to make development easier for the global south.