/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.15132859]

What happened thorium?
I remember it being talk about like the great replacer for worse alternatives in nuclear reactors,
but I've not seen it mentioned at all in like the past 5 years

[Anonymous No.15132864]

>>15132859
Funding for nuclear is at an all-time low because the current controllers want energy scarcity rather than energy abundance. That's all it is.

[Anonymous No.15132889]

>>15132859
Couple things. The main point of contention with the technology in the west is that the guy pushing the lftr agenda and existing industry can't agree on putting uranium into the molten salt reactor. Which isn't just a bribe, it also offers advantages of thorium or thorium/nuclear waste reactors. And disadvantages.

Primary issue last I checked was the production of corrosive gasses, that the salt itself is corrosive and the chemistry is complicated and difficult to manage efficiently.

China was supposed to be "on the cusp" like 6 or 9 months ago but no news since which has reached me.

Thorium also has to contend with fusion and right now a lot of us have committed to fusion because even though it may not be the silver bullet we are being promised, the technology leads into very exciting things like fusion rocketry for interplanetary craft. So we decided that is where the money is better spent.

The breeder reactor more generally is very exciting technology but I think people are hoping to find evidence for the island of stability in the core of Mercury before committing to anything in that area.

We need more resources. We can't afford everything at once.

[Anonymous No.15132893]

>>15132859
It's terrible because its a shitty breeder and needlessly complex compared to a regular nuclear reactor
Just build EPR's until we don't need energy anymore problem solved

[Anonymous No.15132917]

>>15132893
It is very complex which is what makes it an important technology. Just not until we are ready for the outer solar system and require more of the isotopes a breeder reactor is capable of producing.

[Anonymous No.15132926]

>>15132917
Thorium doesn't give us any exotic isotopes we need
Generally most exotic isotopes are just toxic lumps of metal that kill us from a distance or from inside if we happen to inhale it (by being extremely toxic)
Wake me up if one of these isotopes happens to be a room temperature super conductor (so never)

[Anonymous No.15132935]

>>15132926

[Anonymous No.15132942]

>>15132935
No thorium and it's logistical challenges are needed
Just more uranium breeder reactors
I wish they built 10x EPR's next to my house (they're cool)

[Anonymous No.15132951]

>>15132942
You've hit the nail on the head really. If only we could go back and start again.

The truth is that right now we don't need any kind of nuclear reactor. Everyone is investigating massively into trying to make a more efficient type of plant leaf (solar cells).

[Anonymous No.15132956]

>>15132951
Which is a waste of resources and space really
Just build nuclear, much easier, more more reliable and gives you useful stull like nukes to throw on Tel Aviv

[Anonymous No.15132963]

>>15132956
I agree that there are better ways of generating electricity than solar cells. I don't agree with more nuclear power though. Not on earth. We have proven multiple times that we are incapable of having nuclear power without having nuclear meltdowns.

It's time for us to stop polluting our environment. Enough poisons have built up as it is.

[Anonymous No.15132997]

>>15132963
Only ones to have blown a nuclear reactor up are russians due to many factors that are not a thing in western designs
It's really not hard for humans (not russians or gooks) to keep them in 1 piece
>le waste meme
God you're actually retarded, the amount of waste nuclear reactors have made and will ever make total fits in a single abandoned mine 3-4km deep underground, complete non-argument

[Anonymous No.15133025]

>>15132997
No. The entire planet has been contaminated by fallout from reactors in Europe, USA and Japan. Honestly the spent fuel is a resource not waste.

It's the meltdowns which keep happening which are the problem. It's cleaner than coal but so what. We want to get rid of coal too because it's filling the oceans with lead and mercury etc.

Nuclear plants simply DO keep having meltdowns, venting toxic waste directly into the environment every few decades.

We don't need to use nuclear so we won't.

[Anonymous No.15133044]

>>15133025
>which keep happening
But they don't
3 mile island was a retard missing a piece of information for too long (fully contained)
Chernobyl was a completely retarded design no sane person would ever make staffed by absolute subhumans
Fukushima was caused by typical island gooks being barbarians and ignoring warnings that the seawall wasn't high enough and that the generators should be higher up for a decade and did barely anything pollution wise
Now count the meltdowns that have happened in the west (excluding slavs and gooks) in the past 50 years, 0.
The occasional release of cooling water means absolutely nothing compared to the mountains and mountains of toxic spills and chemical pollution caused by everything else
>No. The entire planet has been contaminated by fallout from reactors
The fuck are they putting in your corn syrup over there??? Lead??? Most (99%) of the pollution from Chernobyl (the only real polluter reactor wise) has already decayed away or been buried
Stop being afraid of something you don't understand and have no reference point for

[Anonymous No.15133080]

>>15133044
Look man I like nuclear. I never was a fan of fission but lftr and then Krusty got me interested. On the edge of the inner solar system it's going to be, hands down, the ultimate source of energy. Even on Mars anyone with a small reactor like a Krusty is going to have huge advantages.

Here on Earth the environmental movement wins, no debate. Additionally every energy solution currently being implemented is a stop gap between now and fusion. Nobody is going to spend money on fission because they are banking for fusion.

[Anonymous No.15133088]

>>15133080
>Here on Earth the environmental movement wins
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, the amount of nuclear waste generated total is less than the amount of waste generated by a year of coal plants
>Nobody is going to spend money on fission because they are banking for fusion.
Extremely retarded take, the amount of money still needing to be poured into fusion is tremendous and will take decades at this rate to give viable results, meanwhile fission is ready to go and will start giving you clean renewable energy in a couple years and will start making you money a decade and a half after going into operation

[Anonymous No.15133092]

>>15133088
I mean if I were a child you might convince me but I'm older and more informed than that. Anyway thanks for providing the opportunity to expand my points

[Anonymous No.15133095]

>>15133092
>but I'm older and more informed than that
You mean you're fucking retarded and have never looked at anything yourself nor formed your own opinion and blindly croak the same bullshit being shoved down your throat by the epic television man? Because that is what you sound like

[Anonymous No.15133101]

>>15133095
You degenerated into producing disinformation halfway through the debate. Keep it up and things are going to keep going this way till you learn how to debate properly kek.

[Anonymous No.15133106]

>>15133101
>disinformation
>i don't like number, it false!!! disinformation!!
Yawn, pot, kettle

[Anonymous No.15133126]

>>15133106
You simply can't argue with the fact that there has been a nuclear meltdown every few decades since we split the atom. Nobody wants to increase the scale of that.

Ironically you and people like you have pushed your own field toward extinction by selling the public a product you have proven to be incapable of delivering.

Fission is not delivering safe, clean energy. Has not, is not, never will.

The only place for them is places where meltdowns don't matter.

[Anonymous No.15133134]

>>15133126
>Fission is not delivering safe, clean energy.
True. Because without oil/petrol, there are no ways to make the technology to do other alternative forms of energy.

Humans will revert to steam power fueled by trees. It's the only sustainable method. Humans will have to do without as much tech that uses electricity.

[Anonymous No.15133142]

>>15133134
>Humans will revert to steam power fueled by trees. It's the only sustainable method. Humans will have to do without as much tech that uses electricity.
If we turn Africa into a continent-wide tree farm we can use more technology.

[Anonymous No.15133144]

>>15133134
If they remain on earth. It's the best way to ensure we have control over the carbon cycle. It won't be the only solution but you can do a lot with trees and algae but everyone is waiting to see if it's really necessary before messing with something we don't understand.

The simplest way to reduce energy consumption is to reduce the population. When people on earth are energy poor and they see people offworld expending tremendous amounts of energy on high tech gadgetry they will be more inclined to leave.

If given the option between spending the time, money and resources on moving the population beyond earth or on building a carbon/energy cycle which do you choose.

[Anonymous No.15133243]

>>15133044
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_and_radiation_accidents_and_incidents#Nuclear_meltdown

[Anonymous No.15133405]

>>15132859
Thorium doesn't uniquely solve any of the problems we're facing and it requires a lot more institutional learning than Uranium. Simply put, the downsides don't outweigh the benefits.

[Anonymous No.15133470]

uranium
-------------------------------------
fuel rod
mixture of U-235 & U-238
U-235 5%
U-238 95%

when burning
U-235 --> breaks up
U-238 --> U-239 --> Np-239 --> Pu-239

when the U-235 share is only 0.3%
the fuel rod has been used up

waste storage: 10,000 years

As such, Pu-239 is used in nuclear weapons


thorium
-------------------------------------
Th-232 --> Th-233 --> Pa-233 --> U-233

U-233 is then used as fuel
there is no U-238 in the fuel => Pu-239 is not produced

when burning
U-233 --> U-232 --> Tl-208

waste storage: 300 years

U-233 can be used in nuclear weapons,
but only after it is separated from the U-232

[Anonymous No.15134138]

>>15133243
>in the past 50 years

[Anonymous No.15134152]

>>15132859
radiation and rf shielded kkk pajeet hata

[Anonymous No.15134288]

>>15134138
lrn2read

[Anonymous No.15134293]

>>15134288
You seem to be incapable of it, read your list, soviet subhumans don't count
You'll quickly realize there's only 1 in france and that was a nothingburger too

[Anonymous No.15135707]

>>15132859
Who would have thought that molten salt is corrosive

[Anonymous No.15135714]

>>15134293
1 > 0

[Anonymous No.15135779]

>>15132963
This. We need to dismantle all technology and dismantle whiteness in general.

[Anonymous No.15136030]

[Anonymous No.15136043]

>>15133144
> The simplest way to reduce energy consumption is to reduce the population.
I agree, let’s genocide all western white people and American niggers.

[Anonymous No.15136056]

>>15136043
Scary aside for you. Most of the deaths in WW1 for example were caused by artillery. I tried to check WW2 but Google just keeps giving me genocide spam I can't filtering through. Was sure it was the same but anyway the big question is; was it the enemy artillery, or was it out own. Artillery gets given grid coordinates, they don't know what's there. They can't see it. They just angle their guns, then load and fire on repeat.

Anyway. It's possible our forebears committed a series of attrocities. SOME of us would like to try something new this time.

[Anonymous No.15136442]

>>15132889
>hoping to find evidence for the island of stability in the core of Mercury
How the fuck would we even determine that?
We cant even be 100% sure about earth's inner core, having only strong deduction from density/overral crust composition and magnetic field
How the fuck are they hoping to determine if there are trace amounts of super-heavy elements in the core of a planet we can barely land probes on?

[Anonymous No.15136482]

We should kill those afraid of nuclear energy

[Anonymous No.15136486]

>>15132859
You happened. The industry realised runts loved the stuff and that was enough to realise the whole thing was a bag of hot shit.

[Anonymous No.15136859]

>>15136442
The core of Mercury is much more accessible than that of the earth. Even before we are able to access it we will be able to study it. This core is important because Mercury has a magnetic field and that's something we need to know how and why.

It's on the backburner for now but accessing or even temporarily exposing the core of a planet probably is not an experiment best done on Earth. Fusion is more important than the island of stability because it will open up the outer solar system (fusion rockets).

The difficulty of landing on Mercury also makes it difficult to hit with missiles. Difficult is not impossible. It's just not a priority.

Tldr: you are right. Nobody knows how yet.

[Anonymous No.15136866]

>>15132864
https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/US-FY2022-budget-request-includes-record-for-nucle#:~:text=The%20DOE's%20budget%20request%20totals,the%20enacted%20budget%20for%20FY21.

[Anonymous No.15136884]

>>15136866
They can ask all they want to. Passing it is political suicide. I doubt the nuclear industry has enough money to buy that.

[Anonymous No.15136995]

>>15136884
Well the article says they asked for an increase of 23% which means they got it last year and now they want more.

[Anonymous No.15136998]

>>15136884
So yeah, I went up and checked. They got 1.5$ billion for Nuclear in 2021.
>$1.5 billion for Nuclear energy research and development, a $14 million increase compared to FY 2020.
https://www.ncsl.org/state-federal/fy-2021-omnibus-appropriations-bill#energy

[Anonymous No.15137177]

>>15136995
I'm one of those internet fossils who doesn't click hyperlinks. If something piques my interest enough I run my own searches so quite ignorantly my assumption was based on intuition from the url only.

>>15136998
That's not an insubstantial increase. I'd be interested to know more specifically what was being funded with that extra money. I'm expecting most of it to be allocated to r&d of SMRs, fusion and KRUSTY or it's evolution.

Nuclear is still going to be an essential technology in the future. It just goes against the flow of all the other movements taking place right now.

[Anonymous No.15137995]

>>15133243
I suggest reading the details for each of those incidents.

[Anonymous No.15138432]

>>15132859
>what happened to thorium?
More relevant question: why were people so enthusiastic about it in the first place?

Sodium cooled breeders can basically do everything a MSR-Th reactor does, and the tech is much more mature.