In a very real sense, energy density is the technical history of humanity. The first artificial heat used by humans came with the discovery of fire about 800,000 years ago. Fire, along with clothing and shelter, was one of the key technologies which permitted humans to migrate to temperate climates from the purely subtropics.
Fire made possible the smelting of iron. First used and smelted about 3000 BC, iron required much higher temperatures than simple cooking fires to forge into tools or weapons. That in turn required more efficient fuels containing greater heating ability than wood, such as charcoal.
As Zion rightly noted, uranium is the most energy dense fuel source ever discovered. That means its fuel produces a huge amount of energy per unit of mass. The typical fuel requirement of one modern nuclear power reactor is about 150 tonnes of uranium-oxide fuel. Gathered in one place, this mass of fuel would form a cube of about three metres. The same size of coal-fired station would consume several million tonnes of coal annually. It would need so much coal that it would be receiving one large 100-car coal train about twice a week.
So as a species our entire existence is dependent upon high energy density fuels. And this dependence on energy density increases as our knowledge and technology grows. Increasing energy density is the only way to expand the benefits of energy use and technology to those parts of the world currently lacking it.
Yes correct. Energy/power density is one of the most important factors when considering different sources. The importance of this parameter is usually under-appreciated by energy pundits, especially those without an engineering background.
Leslie White in 1943 said that civilization advances with increasing energy use per capita. This correlates with increasing energy density of fuels: from human to animal power, to biomass, wind and hydro power, to fossil fuels and now to fission and ultimately fusion nuclear power.
And a picky point. Uranium is the most energy dense fuel but not the most energy dense element. The element with the greatest nuclear binding energy is iron. Fission is splitting heavier nuclei to nuclei closer to iron and fusion is joining lighter nuclei to nuclei closer to iron. “The curve of binding energy is a graph that plots the binding energy per nucleon against atomic mass. This curve has its main peak at iron and nickel and then slowly decreases again…”
The universe started with lots of hydrogen and has been driven by converting hydrogen to iron ever since. We live on an iron ball with a silicon crust.
In a very real sense, energy density is the technical history of humanity. The first artificial heat used by humans came with the discovery of fire about 800,000 years ago. Fire, along with clothing and shelter, was one of the key technologies which permitted humans to migrate to temperate climates from the purely subtropics.
Fire made possible the smelting of iron. First used and smelted about 3000 BC, iron required much higher temperatures than simple cooking fires to forge into tools or weapons. That in turn required more efficient fuels containing greater heating ability than wood, such as charcoal.
As Zion rightly noted, uranium is the most energy dense fuel source ever discovered. That means its fuel produces a huge amount of energy per unit of mass. The typical fuel requirement of one modern nuclear power reactor is about 150 tonnes of uranium-oxide fuel. Gathered in one place, this mass of fuel would form a cube of about three metres. The same size of coal-fired station would consume several million tonnes of coal annually. It would need so much coal that it would be receiving one large 100-car coal train about twice a week.
So as a species our entire existence is dependent upon high energy density fuels. And this dependence on energy density increases as our knowledge and technology grows. Increasing energy density is the only way to expand the benefits of energy use and technology to those parts of the world currently lacking it.
Yes correct. Energy/power density is one of the most important factors when considering different sources. The importance of this parameter is usually under-appreciated by energy pundits, especially those without an engineering background.
Love the new name of your publication! Fascinating information. I feel like I get educated every time I read your work. Keep it up!
Great piece. We definitely need more nuclear power plants. Why mess with anything else?
BTW, Where did you get the awesome cartoonish illustrations?
Leslie White in 1943 said that civilization advances with increasing energy use per capita. This correlates with increasing energy density of fuels: from human to animal power, to biomass, wind and hydro power, to fossil fuels and now to fission and ultimately fusion nuclear power.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White%27s_law
And a picky point. Uranium is the most energy dense fuel but not the most energy dense element. The element with the greatest nuclear binding energy is iron. Fission is splitting heavier nuclei to nuclei closer to iron and fusion is joining lighter nuclei to nuclei closer to iron. “The curve of binding energy is a graph that plots the binding energy per nucleon against atomic mass. This curve has its main peak at iron and nickel and then slowly decreases again…”
The universe started with lots of hydrogen and has been driven by converting hydrogen to iron ever since. We live on an iron ball with a silicon crust.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_binding_energy
It takes real courage to change your mind and leave the cult. Thank you for sharing real science. What are the best ways to deprogram others?