Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Thorium-Salt Reactor Has Fired Up for the First Time in Four Decades

thoriumenergyworld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 170 posts

Re: A Thorium-Salt Reactor Has Fired Up for the First Time in Four Decades

#121

Post by njarboe »

Sukotto wrote: post #76

I think we're making a serious PR mistake calling these "Thorium Reactors" even though the term is accurate. "Reactor" evokes "Nuclear Reactor". For many people, "nuclear reactor" is a deeply loaded term. Likewise "Thorium" (and other words that end in "-ium") sounds dangerously like "plutonium" and "uranium". It doesn't matter how much better/safer this technology is. Don't expect the public to respond positively wh…

I think nuclear power could follow other products like Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging (NMRI) and just drop the word Nuclear (MRI). How about fission power or fusion power, depending on the source?

Re: A Thorium-Salt Reactor Has Fired Up for the First Time in Four Decades

#122

Post by aidenn0 »

adrianN wrote: post #120
aidenn0 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sun will burn out at a fixed time regardless of how much or little energy we harvest from it. Assuming energy demand growth of 5% per year, we have enough land-based actinates for less than a century of energy usage in fast breeder reactors (if you prefer 2% annual demand growth, it's enough for about 2 centuries). Seawater uranium buys you more time, depending on how you extract it, but hundreds of years and the…

A hundred years would give us plenty of time to develop alternative energy sources (fusion?). The fossil fuel age also last(s/ed) for about that long.

And I'm all in favor of fission as a bridge-fuel to something more sustainable, but many people act as though it will last indefinitely, when it seems clear to me that it won't.

Re: A Thorium-Salt Reactor Has Fired Up for the First Time in Four Decades

#123

Post by djsumdog »

acidburnNSA wrote: post #91
Sukotto wrote: post #76

I think we're making a serious PR mistake calling these "Thorium Reactors" even though the term is accurate. "Reactor" evokes "Nuclear Reactor". For many people, "nuclear reactor" is a deeply loaded term. Likewise "Thorium" (and other words that end in "-ium") sounds dangerously like "plutonium" and "uranium". It doesn't matter how much better/safer this technology is. Don't expect the public to respond positively wh…

A bunch of people have tried to rebrand our most energy-dense fuels (uranium and thorium). "Terrestrial Energy" comes to mind. And the unofficial Thorium PR lead, Kirk Sorensen, rebranded the Thorium-Molten Salt Reactor (T-MSR) as the LFTR (Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor) because "lifter" sounds better. As an engineer I'm a stickler on accurate naming so this suggestion bothers me, and I think the opposing forces wi…

One of the major problems is we were told our current reactors would provide safe and environmentally fuel. The trouble is it's not as clean as most people think.

Mining Uranium ore does have a significant environmental impact. There have been leaks at plants; trace amounts of tritium has been found around breeder reactors like Watts Bar (and TVA has bought up more and more of the land around the area).

The waste, currently held on site at most plants, is another big issue. Engineers will tell you it's depleted and encased in half a meter of concrete that won't break down for tens of thousands of years. Some of these containers are already leaking. There have been several recent controversies recently on the Yukka Mountain facility.

While newer reactors may not have these problems, the fact is there are problems we weren't aware up that cropped up from our traditional Boiling/Pressurized Water Reactors that companies will not fess up to. That's why people are apprehensive.

I don't think that will go away unless someone discovered how to make Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENRs) viable .. which would also involve understanding how/why they world, and getting them to work consistently (which no one has).

Re: A Thorium-Salt Reactor Has Fired Up for the First Time in Four Decades

#124

Post by lugg »

rangibaby wrote: post #89
bduerst wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen an increase in the number of NLP bots that give snippets, but they're far from consistently being accurate. Are there any services that can give you summations like this, kind of like the WSJ's What's News section?

Autotldr on Reddit does a very good job

It's not perfect but does the trick 9 out of 10 times, it just uses tfidf irrc.

Re: A Thorium-Salt Reactor Has Fired Up for the First Time in Four Decades

#125

Post by the8472 »

snarfy wrote: post #94
acidburnNSA wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bunch of people have tried to rebrand our most energy-dense fuels (uranium and thorium). "Terrestrial Energy" comes to mind. And the unofficial Thorium PR lead, Kirk Sorensen, rebranded the Thorium-Molten Salt Reactor (T-MSR) as the LFTR (Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor) because "lifter" sounds better. As an engineer I'm a stickler on accurate naming so this suggestion bothers me, and I think the opposing forces wi…

Unfortunately regardless of what you wish, people do not weigh the risks. They have knee jerk reactions to terms like 'nuclear reactor'. It's human nature and shouldn't be ignored. Is it more important that it have an accurate name or that it's accepted by the public?

You're not really proposing "acceptance by the public". You're proposing to spin the euphemism treadmill to gain some temporary ignorance by the uninformed. Until some negative event hits the news again and everyone will once again associate them with that.

I think honesty will get you much further. Instead of making bold promises that everyone has heard before ("these are fail-safe", "unsinkable" etc.) just point at the radioactive dust emitted by coal plants instead. Or open pit mining for coal. Or CO2 emissions. Don't claim to be perfect, just better than the competition.

Re: A Thorium-Salt Reactor Has Fired Up for the First Time in Four Decades

#126

Post by ece »

knowThySelfx wrote: post #113
ece wrote: post #68

India has the most thorium reserves, according to USGS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occurrence_of_thorium And they have had the plans and motivation to build domestic reactors for the past two decades: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India%27s_three-stage_nuclear_... NSG membership keeps getting held up by someone or the other and would provide more energy security for India. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/…

India's Thorium rich sands are being mined and exported. Not many people are aware though. Hope it isn't too late. Scandals have throttled many efforts to grow indigenous techs. The ridiculous ISRO spy case is one such example. Cui bono?

Cui bono indeed. Corruption benefits. I don't think the spy case affected much of anything.

Re: A Thorium-Salt Reactor Has Fired Up for the First Time in Four Decades

#127

Post by varjag »

wil421 wrote: post #92
nnfy wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For years I've been confused by the two different names. That was an insightful comment.

It's also important to note nuclear refers to the atomic nucleus and not a nuclear reaction.

Nucleus fission/fusion is what constitutes a nuclear reaction, so they in fact refer to exactly same thing involved in entirely different processes. But yeah you'd have to explain it every time it is mentioned.

Re: A Thorium-Salt Reactor Has Fired Up for the First Time in Four Decades

#129

Post by xorfish »

ece wrote: post #68

India has the most thorium reserves, according to USGS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occurrence_of_thorium And they have had the plans and motivation to build domestic reactors for the past two decades: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India%27s_three-stage_nuclear_... NSG membership keeps getting held up by someone or the other and would provide more energy security for India. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/…

Thorium is so common that it would be profitable to mine Thorium at nearly any place on earth.

Re: A Thorium-Salt Reactor Has Fired Up for the First Time in Four Decades

#130

Post by xorfish »

pizza wrote: post #87
WillPostForFood wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“We will begin to revive and expand our nuclear energy sector, which I’m so happy about, which produces clean, renewable and emissions-free energy,” Trump said. https://www.nei.org/News-Media/News/News-Archives/2017/Trump...

ah yes the renewable nuclear

At current energy consumption, Thorium on earth is so able to power the whole planet for 100'000+ years.

Solar panels do also need resources to produce...

Post reply on HN