Zalmoxis Posted October 23, 2016 #1 Share Posted October 23, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrLzs Posted October 23, 2016 #2 Share Posted October 23, 2016 Given your last two posts have been nothing but Youtube links, how's about actually telling us what it is about and *discussing* the content inc. your opinion. Some of us pay for our bandwidth, and others don't have endless time... I'm in both categories. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.Nomenon Posted October 23, 2016 #3 Share Posted October 23, 2016 21 minutes ago, ChrLzs said: Given your last two posts have been nothing but Youtube links, how's about actually telling us what it is about and *discussing* the content inc. your opinion. Some of us pay for our bandwidth, and others don't have endless time... I'm in both categories. Lol liquid fluoride thorium reactors - apparently its the perfect fuel and cant meltdown? Im sure Z is going to fill us in? Right? Z? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendy Demon Posted October 23, 2016 #4 Share Posted October 23, 2016 So we are supposed to sit and watch a two-hour "documentary on...stuff that "they" don't want us to know about? How about a real discussion since many of us don't have the time to watch a two hour "cat-in-the-bag" type film. (meaning we don't have a clue as to what the movie is vaguely about) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrLzs Posted October 23, 2016 #5 Share Posted October 23, 2016 (edited) 15 minutes ago, P.Nomenon said: Lol liquid fluoride thorium reactors - apparently its the perfect fuel and cant meltdown? Im sure Z is going to fill us in? Right? Z? There seems to be a suggestion in the OP that the knowledge is being suppressed. Yeah right, it's on freakin youtube.. Thorium has much open research going on, and while it has some good points it also has some bad ones, requires much more research, is difficult to implement and the killer is probably that is very expensive and requires much infrastructure that currently doesn't exist, so utility companies are not all that interested - they are interested in shareholder returns, not the betterment of society. That's not exactly a mystery/conspiracy.. Similar to fusion power - we have a ways to go yet before either becomes a serious contender for power generation. If/when they become economically viable, those same companies will be jumping on board.. Edited October 23, 2016 by ChrLzs 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daughter of the Nine Moons Posted October 24, 2016 #6 Share Posted October 24, 2016 34 minutes ago, ChrLzs said: There seems to be a suggestion in the OP that the knowledge is being suppressed. Yeah right, it's on freakin youtube.. It's always on freaking youtube (sigh) 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habitat Posted October 24, 2016 #7 Share Posted October 24, 2016 Whenever people refer to the undefined "they" as villains, you know there is a strong chance that paranoia has set in. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likely Guy Posted October 24, 2016 #8 Share Posted October 24, 2016 I'm on dial-up Zalmoxis. There is no way I'm going to watch that (unless you pay me). C'mon, don't be lazy and give me the breakdown what it's about (or at least a link that explains it). 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted October 24, 2016 #9 Share Posted October 24, 2016 What they dont want you to know, means you will likely NEVER know...or even hear of, It wont be found on youtube 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zalmoxis Posted October 24, 2016 Author #10 Share Posted October 24, 2016 (edited) Thorium isn't only great for it's abundance it's half-life is the lifespan of a fly. It's much safer and it's also renewable. It appears as though Thorium is greater than what we use right now on every single point. If we switch to Thorium then our Uranium demand would sink instantly, freeing it up for other uses instead of energy consumption. Edited October 24, 2016 by Zalmoxis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrLzs Posted October 24, 2016 #11 Share Posted October 24, 2016 21 minutes ago, Zalmoxis said: Thorium isn't only great for it's abundance it's half-life is the lifespan of a fly. It's much safer and it's also renewable. It appears as though Thorium is greater than what we use right now on every single point. If we switch to Thorium then our Uranium demand would sink instantly, freeing it up for other uses instead of energy consumption. Please CITE your information, as you seem to be missing a lot of rather important points. It is NOT a fairy tale happy ending to our power needs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zalmoxis Posted October 24, 2016 Author #12 Share Posted October 24, 2016 6 minutes ago, ChrLzs said: Please CITE your information, as you seem to be missing a lot of rather important points. It is NOT a fairy tale happy ending to our power needs... My information is directly from that video in the thread start box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrLzs Posted October 24, 2016 #13 Share Posted October 24, 2016 Nuff said. Ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zalmoxis Posted October 26, 2016 Author #14 Share Posted October 26, 2016 (edited) On 10/23/2016 at 6:25 PM, P.Nomenon said: Lol liquid fluoride thorium reactors - apparently its the perfect fuel and cant meltdown? Im sure Z is going to fill us in? Right? Z? There isn't any reason to not believe the scientist in that video. He certainly has the credentials. I didn't find anything on Google that opposes his claims. The scenario that he outlines is that we use uranium reactors today because that is what material all of our research was built on in the early days. When it came time to develop power plants they went with uranium instead of thorium because they didn't want to start over again and go back to the drawing board even though the math showed that thorium was more economical and sustainable and less dangerous. Today we don't need new reactors, so, these ideas aren't so valuable to the USA at this time. China is building a lot of thorium reactors because they believe what this scientist says. Edited October 26, 2016 by Zalmoxis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.Nomenon Posted October 27, 2016 #15 Share Posted October 27, 2016 In the early days we explored all sorts of power reactors, comparing the advantages and disadvantages of each type. Thus, at the very beginning of nuclear power, we had to choose which possibilities to pursue, which to ignore. We went ---->solid fuel (uranium) (ex. USS Nautilius)...why? It was the likeliest to be ready soonest. And the uranium fuel cycle offered as a byproduct plutonium-239, which was used for the development of thermonuclearordnance. Solid uranium fuel has inherent challenges. i.e climate change, peak oil, Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and the Deepwater Horizon, etc. But it works and the tech is getting better. Although thorium is present in the Earth’s crust at about four times more abundant then uranium and it is more easily extracted. And advantages in design, operation, safety, waste management, cost and proliferation resistance over the traditional configuration of nuclear plants, dont you think we would use liquid fuel reactors instead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now