It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A really good video on LFTR nuclear reactors

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 01:13 AM
link   
Kirk Sorensen is a ex-NASA scientist who's been advocating a molten salt nuclear reactor using Thorium as fuel. Here's a really good video discussing the pros and cons. The best thing about a LFTR reactor is the safety system is passive and does not require human interaction. The safety system works on the presence of gravity. And molten salt does not require huge amounts of water to cool the system. And the LFTR reactor is very efficient at burning up almost all the fuel so there's no huge amounts of nuclear waste. Kirk is more convincing that I am. Enjoy:



Chinese are spending billions on LFTR research. Some reports claim the Chinese will have a working reactor by 2020.

Chinese leading the World in LFTR research

Chinese Prototype LFTR reactor

Another article on Chinese LFTR investments

The other good thing about thorium is how cheap it is to mine. Plutonium is as expensive to mine as platinum. Thorium cost the same to mine as lead. Thorium is everywhere.


edit on 19-7-2019 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 02:19 AM
link   
This nuclear path is indeed promising but the big problem is the nuclear lobby which won't budge unless ough to: they have their toys working and no competition...why invest billions? As long as they give money to both parties nobody is going to force their hand, saddly. Same goes to France, heavily in uranium and plutonium.



Jeff

Ps: hope will copy China for a change

edit on 2019 7 19 by LoveSolMoonDeath because: Add



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 03:39 AM
link   
a reply to: LoveSolMoonDeath

I actually think India will get it down before china. They have been working with thorium far more seriously and has about twice the published literature on the subject than any other country as of late.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 07:32 AM
link   
Thorium is decades away from being viable.
Thorium also doesnt have the ability to have a chain reaction on it's own. It must be bombarded by uranium which creates another waste product to deal with.

The research should continue but dont count on it anytime soon to be a cost effective option to standard nuclear fuel.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 07:47 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

I have been saying this for 10 years.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 07:49 AM
link   
a reply to: LoveSolMoonDeath

Except that is not true. Where I live 2 nuclear reactors have started construction and then failed to materialize. It was a huge financial blow to the energy sector here.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 08:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: dubiousatworst
a reply to: LoveSolMoonDeath

I actually think India will get it down before china. They have been working with thorium far more seriously and has about twice the published literature on the subject than any other country as of late.


About 3/4 through the video Kirk makes and interesting comment on India's efforts.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 08:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Thorium is decades away from being viable.
Thorium also doesnt have the ability to have a chain reaction on it's own. It must be bombarded by uranium which creates another waste product to deal with.

The research should continue but dont count on it anytime soon to be a cost effective option to standard nuclear fuel.


This is not what the guy from Nasa is saying.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 08:23 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

I think India's goal is to have them up and running by 2050.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 08:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Thorium is decades away from being viable.
Thorium also doesnt have the ability to have a chain reaction on it's own. It must be bombarded by uranium which creates another waste product to deal with.

The research should continue but dont count on it anytime soon to be a cost effective option to standard nuclear fuel.


This is not what the guy from Nasa is saying.


Yep, kirk Sorenson, I know him well.
The maker of the video from 2011.
The video is 8 years old so nearly a decade has already passed.
Founder of flibe energy.


"Flibe Energy will receive $2.1 million from DOE and $525,500 from other sources to study the use of nitrogen trifluoride to remove uranium from the nuclear fuel solution. The funding is part of a $20 million DOE package for nine industry-led advanced nuclear R&D projects.­"

Like I said, we should keep doing research but let's have some realistic expectations.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 10:42 AM
link   
I suspect the main impediment to renaissance in the U.S. nuclear power industry is the fanatical anti-nuke movement. The new generation of small, modular nuclear reactors, especially the molten-salt thorium-cycle reactors, would do wonders for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.




top topics



 
4

log in

join