• nyan@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    How much old copper piping is still out there that could be replaced by other materials to recover the copper? I’m sure there are other common obsolete applications. The nice thing about metals is that we already have a pretty robust recycling chain in place for them. That plus the remaining supply plus aluminium plus other replacements plus careful design to minimize the use of copper where it’s absolutely necessary might be enough to carry us through.

      • nyan@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        The poor will have scavenged the abandoned buildings in built-up areas, yes. Still-occupied buildings and those in smaller towns with no easy access to a scrapyard are more likely to be intact. So it’s more likely to be a case of “these are no longer to code, they are not grandfathered, you have a two-year grace period to switch them out” (staggered geographically or by building classification to avoid a run on plastic pipes) plus “road trip!”

        We might also end up mining older dumps for stuff discarded when copper was cheaper.

    • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Aluminum is a substitute for copper in any straight wiring application. PEX for domestic piping.

    • MangoCats@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      There’s also the idea of crashing a metallic asteroid somewhere convenient, like the Outback.

        • MangoCats@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          I’m envisioning extracting more copper and other metals that would be utilized in space, so - yeah, if you can develop smelting and refinement capabilities on-orbit there’s some attractiveness there, but down on the mud-ball we’re going to use over a million times as much material as we are currently utilizing on orbit and beyond, so getting that material down is going to be a whole lot cheaper and more efficient as a “natural skyfall” than any kind of controlled re-entry.

      • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah, that ain’t happening for the next 50 years. The amount of logistics and technology required for that is beyond immense, never mind risks

        • MangoCats@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Well, I suspect we’ve got enough copper for the next 50 years, so… good timing.

          And, you don’t start with a Manhattan sized rock, you practice with little ones just big enough to survive re-entry and work your way up. The key is learning to operate long term with “rock moving tech” in solar orbit. We’re not there, which is why we should have started 50 years ago…