Want more nuclear power? Don't read this – you'll just get bummed out.
Top | Newest First | Oldest First
LFTR is the nuclear power technology we should be investing research dollars into but it has one major problem.
You can’t use the by product for nuclear weapons production.
Seriously though, that’s the nuclear power of the future and worth throwing a few billion dollars at.
China is currently pursuing the technology.
But what do they know!
You can’t use the by product for nuclear weapons production.
Seriously though, that’s the nuclear power of the future and worth throwing a few billion dollars at.
China is currently pursuing the technology.
But what do they know!
View 1 more replies »
@SusanInFlorida
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
These reactor types are very efficient with lower operating pressures and recyclable fuel components that can be reused in the reactor thereby limiting waste material and the incumbent problems with storage of the same.
They present technical challenges because the high temperature liquid fluoride is corrosive making it difficult to cycle through the heat exchanger system.
This technology is old but with current materials science and engineering technology it could be a feasible solution to the nuclear power problem.
Advantages are no meltdown because the reaction is self moderating and in the event of a loss of coolant issues
the molten core could simply be drained out of the reactor into a containment chamber where it would cool naturally over a period of time and the material could then be recycled back into the reactor.
The fuel cycle would be nearly 80
Percent efficient whereas the uranium fuel cycle is about five percent efficient.
Also there is a nearly infinite supply of thorium available to produce power.
The biggest drawback seems to be that the waste material can’t be easily used to produce nuclear weapons
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
These reactor types are very efficient with lower operating pressures and recyclable fuel components that can be reused in the reactor thereby limiting waste material and the incumbent problems with storage of the same.
They present technical challenges because the high temperature liquid fluoride is corrosive making it difficult to cycle through the heat exchanger system.
This technology is old but with current materials science and engineering technology it could be a feasible solution to the nuclear power problem.
Advantages are no meltdown because the reaction is self moderating and in the event of a loss of coolant issues
the molten core could simply be drained out of the reactor into a containment chamber where it would cool naturally over a period of time and the material could then be recycled back into the reactor.
The fuel cycle would be nearly 80
Percent efficient whereas the uranium fuel cycle is about five percent efficient.
Also there is a nearly infinite supply of thorium available to produce power.
The biggest drawback seems to be that the waste material can’t be easily used to produce nuclear weapons
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@Onestarlitnight you make some good points. LFTR should be on the table in america. I don't think we're using the local electric plants to supply the ingredients for hydrogen bombs any more, are we?
@SusanInFlorida
Nah but waste storage is a serious problem that needs addressing.
But with a radioactive toxicity of thousands of years it is simply impossible to store safely.
Alternative methods should have been developed decades ago.
Nah but waste storage is a serious problem that needs addressing.
But with a radioactive toxicity of thousands of years it is simply impossible to store safely.
Alternative methods should have been developed decades ago.
GerOttman · 61-69, M
I don't read most of your post due to length however truck trailer combos as depicted above do exist for transport of very heavy specialized cargo. They're kind of cool to watch. I'm ok with off planet nukes, kind of skeptical of the ones in my own backyard.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@GerOttman thanks for tell me one page is too much to read. i will take this into account in future posts.
The biggest tractor trailer I've personally seen is a 26 wheeler. That's an 18 wheeler with 3 axels behind the cab, and 3 at the end of the trailer. I have never seen an articulated trailer like they use in australia - a road train.
The biggest tractor trailer I've personally seen is a 26 wheeler. That's an 18 wheeler with 3 axels behind the cab, and 3 at the end of the trailer. I have never seen an articulated trailer like they use in australia - a road train.
GerOttman · 61-69, M
@SusanInFlorida Hey, you do you on the length. entirely your deal. I saw an huge MRI magnet being delivered on a truck-trailer combo that had more wheel than I could count and a driver at the end to steer the ass end around. It was made in Germany, shipped across the atlantic and sent by barge up the river. The last five miles or so to the facility were on the trailer at night. I had a couple pictures somewhere but I'd have to did them up.
pride49 · 26-30, M
Careful not to use lead pistons in the plant. They can make boom booms when they react to stuff like in Chernobyl
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
18,425 people following
Politics Personal Stories, Advice, and Support
New Post Associated Forums Topic Members
Politics Personal Stories, Advice, and Support
