The reason we don't have an abundance of nuclear energy is because it would end the climate change racket

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.

Click here to see all the comments (43).

[–] • 1 pt

(edited )

I think the real problem with Thorium reactors is they are molten salt reactors and the salt is corrosive as hell.

I don't think they've figured out a way to build a containment vessel or cooling system (think there are designs which use molten salt in one or the other) that doesn't have the risk of structural failure after a few decades.

Here's a decent link. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11837-018-2981-2

What I think is rather than developing speculative technology (China has already invested a ton in Th reactors anyway), just go with pebble bed reactors. Here enriched U is put in graphite spheres at precise distances and weights. If the reactor ever overheats, the graphite sphere expands, increasing the distance between fissionable material, and naturally stopping the reaction. It's a passive fail safe that 100% works, even if you drain all of the coolant. It's not theoretical, pebble bed reactors have been built, tested, and proven. We just need to industrialize the production of fuel pellets, build the reactors, and make it happen. These would be great candidates for micro-reactors using heat pipes too. Put the micro-reactors in the basement of every major police station for security. Boom. Practically free power.

It's possible the problem is we're applying U reactor rules to Thorium, and if we loosened them, and just replaced the corrosive bits of Thorium reactors on a regular basis (since the radioactivity hazard is practically nil compared to U), we would be fine. Like, planned obsolescence, the Westinghouses would love that because they get a recurring revenue stream.

Do pebble bed U reactors now, and send some spies to China to steal whatever technology they've developed around Thorium.

Then after we've stolen their intelligence, invest in researching Thorium. For Thorium, you probably want to start with a clean slate rather than have the current US regulation apply. Thorium is way, way less dangerous than U reactors. They're really kind of safe. Love the idea, but that corrosive molten salt is a real problem.

We owe China some industrial spying. Even if they haven't found anything useful, we should still spy on them, just because we need to get even.

The other thing is, well, C02 fear porn is bullshit. C02 isn't a major driver of climate change. It's the sun. We were actually getting dangerously low C02 concentrations before the industrial revolution. Plants begin to die off around 150ppm. We were at 170ppm. I think we should keep burning lots of hydrocarbons until we're at 1,000 or 2,000 ppm C02. Plant life would grow like crazy and the earth could easily support 2x or 3x more people. Hell we could bring back dinosaurs with that level of C02 because there would be so much plant life.

Posting before coffee so probably word salad. Deal with it too lazy to edit.

I think the real problem with Thorium reactors is they are molten salt reactors and the salt is corrosive as hell. I don't think they've figured out a way to build a containment vessel or cooling system (think there are designs which use molten salt in one or the other) that doesn't have the risk of structural failure after a few decades. Here's a decent link. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11837-018-2981-2 What I think is rather than developing speculative technology (China has already invested a ton in Th reactors anyway), just go with pebble bed reactors. Here enriched U is put in graphite spheres at precise distances and weights. If the reactor ever overheats, the graphite sphere expands, increasing the distance between fissionable material, and naturally stopping the reaction. It's a passive fail safe that 100% works, even if you drain all of the coolant. It's not theoretical, pebble bed reactors have been built, tested, and proven. We just need to industrialize the production of fuel pellets, build the reactors, and make it happen. These would be great candidates for micro-reactors using heat pipes too. Put the micro-reactors in the basement of every major police station for security. Boom. Practically free power. It's possible the problem is we're applying U reactor rules to Thorium, and if we loosened them, and just replaced the corrosive bits of Thorium reactors on a regular basis (since the radioactivity hazard is practically nil compared to U), we would be fine. Like, planned obsolescence, the Westinghouses would love that because they get a recurring revenue stream. Do pebble bed U reactors now, and send some spies to China to steal whatever technology they've developed around Thorium. Then after we've stolen their intelligence, invest in researching Thorium. For Thorium, you probably want to start with a clean slate rather than have the current US regulation apply. Thorium is way, way less dangerous than U reactors. They're really kind of safe. Love the idea, but that corrosive molten salt is a real problem. We owe China some industrial spying. Even if they haven't found anything useful, we should still spy on them, just because we need to get even. The other thing is, well, C02 fear porn is bullshit. C02 isn't a major driver of climate change. It's the sun. We were actually getting dangerously low C02 concentrations before the industrial revolution. Plants begin to die off around 150ppm. We were at 170ppm. I think we should keep burning lots of hydrocarbons until we're at 1,000 or 2,000 ppm C02. Plant life would grow like crazy and the earth could easily support 2x or 3x more people. Hell we could bring back dinosaurs with that level of C02 because there would be so much plant life. Posting before coffee so probably word salad. Deal with it too lazy to edit.

parent
link