Turn on thread page Beta

Safe nuclear does exist, and China is leading the way with [b] thorium[/b] watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    A few weeks before the tsunami struck Fukushima’s uranium reactors and shattered public faith in nuclear power, China revealed that it was launching a rival technology to build a safer, cleaner, and ultimately cheaper network of reactors based on thorium.

    This passed unnoticed –except by a small of band of thorium enthusiasts – but it may mark the passage of strategic leadership in energy policy from an inert and status-quo West to a rising technological power willing to break the mould.

    ...

    Chinese scientists claim that hazardous waste will be a thousand times less than with uranium. The system is inherently less prone to disaster.

    “The reactor has an amazing safety feature,” said Kirk Sorensen, a former NASA engineer at Teledyne Brown and a thorium expert.

    “If it begins to overheat, a little plug melts and the salts drain into a pan. There is no need for computers, or the sort of electrical pumps that were crippled by the tsunami. The reactor saves itself,” he said.

    “They operate at atmospheric pressure so you don’t have the sort of hydrogen explosions we’ve seen in Japan. One of these reactors would have come through the tsunami just fine. There would have been no radiation release.”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/c...h-thorium.html

    Brilliant article and really does highlight how safe nuclear power is when we use the right materials. As I have consistently said since the question of nuclear power rose again, we can make nuclear work for this country and make it far safer than most other ways of generating power.

    It's cheap, it's abundant, it's a safe and it should be our energy future.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    A few weeks before the tsunami struck Fukushima’s uranium reactors and shattered public faith in nuclear power, China revealed that it was launching a rival technology to build a safer, cleaner, and ultimately cheaper network of reactors based on thorium.

    This passed unnoticed –except by a small of band of thorium enthusiasts – but it may mark the passage of strategic leadership in energy policy from an inert and status-quo West to a rising technological power willing to break the mould.

    ...

    Chinese scientists claim that hazardous waste will be a thousand times less than with uranium. The system is inherently less prone to disaster.

    “The reactor has an amazing safety feature,” said Kirk Sorensen, a former NASA engineer at Teledyne Brown and a thorium expert.

    “If it begins to overheat, a little plug melts and the salts drain into a pan. There is no need for computers, or the sort of electrical pumps that were crippled by the tsunami. The reactor saves itself,” he said.

    “They operate at atmospheric pressure so you don’t have the sort of hydrogen explosions we’ve seen in Japan. One of these reactors would have come through the tsunami just fine. There would have been no radiation release.”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/c...h-thorium.html

    Brilliant article and really does highlight how safe nuclear power is when we use the right materials. As I have consistently said since the question of nuclear power rose again, we can make nuclear work for this country and make it far safer than most other ways of generating power.

    It's cheap, it's abundant, it's a safe and it should be our energy future.
    Better Idea, if it works:
    ITER

    Fusion all the way, baby :cool:

    _Kar.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Good idea, if it works it will be a breakthrough but isnt Thorium hard to obtain??? :confused:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kareir)
    Better Idea, if it works:
    ITER

    Fusion all the way, baby :cool:

    _Kar.
    Too bad it doesn't work :/

    There's probably another 30 years before the technology becomes proven enough for commercial use, more if we can't find a reliable source of tritium before then.

    OPs article is very interesting though, I do support nuclear power as an interim between fossil fuels and future technologies. Hoping to see more movement towards safer nuclear power (I.E. Not 50 year old reactors like Fukishima) and less of the German-style reactionary backlash.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kayak dan)
    Good idea, if it works it will be a breakthrough but isnt Thorium hard to obtain??? :confused:
    Nope - it's as common as lead. Unlike Uranium all of the mineral can be used... Uranium will last us for another 80 years. Thorium; assuming it replaces Uranium at current levels, will last us for a millenium!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aaargh)
    Too bad it doesn't work :/

    There's probably another 30 years before the technology becomes proven enough for commercial use, more if we can't find a reliable source of tritium before then.

    OPs article is very interesting though, I do support nuclear power as an interim between fossil fuels and future technologies. Hoping to see more movement towards safer nuclear power (I.E. Not 50 year old reactors like Fukishima) and less of the German-style reactionary backlash.
    Yeah, the German response was ridiculously reactionary borderlining stupidity
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    A few weeks before the tsunami struck Fukushima’s uranium reactors and shattered public faith in nuclear power, China revealed that it was launching a rival technology to build a safer, cleaner, and ultimately cheaper network of reactors based on thorium.

    This passed unnoticed –except by a small of band of thorium enthusiasts – but it may mark the passage of strategic leadership in energy policy from an inert and status-quo West to a rising technological power willing to break the mould.

    ...

    Chinese scientists claim that hazardous waste will be a thousand times less than with uranium. The system is inherently less prone to disaster.

    “The reactor has an amazing safety feature,” said Kirk Sorensen, a former NASA engineer at Teledyne Brown and a thorium expert.

    “If it begins to overheat, a little plug melts and the salts drain into a pan. There is no need for computers, or the sort of electrical pumps that were crippled by the tsunami. The reactor saves itself,” he said.

    “They operate at atmospheric pressure so you don’t have the sort of hydrogen explosions we’ve seen in Japan. One of these reactors would have come through the tsunami just fine. There would have been no radiation release.”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/c...h-thorium.html

    Brilliant article and really does highlight how safe nuclear power is when we use the right materials. As I have consistently said since the question of nuclear power rose again, we can make nuclear work for this country and make it far safer than most other ways of generating power.

    It's cheap, it's abundant, it's a safe and it should be our energy future.
    Thorium is not used directly as a fuel. You have to convert it into uranium-233. The one they use right now on the nuclear power stations is uranium-235. Power stations will be more efficient and produce less hazardous long-term waste. However in the article the advantages of the thorium fuel are exaggerated. It is better than what we use now but not by a such a large amount.

    (P.S. my source is my research project, 40 pages worth of good nuclear stuff =) )
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    Yeah, the German response was ridiculously reactionary borderlining stupidity
    As was Britain's and the USA's.

    People are scared of what they do not understand. Throw the words meltdown radiation and Chernobyl and you can easily convince the public nuclear power will kill them and give their children 6 fingers on each hand.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    The plans were shelved because thorium does not produce plutonium for bombs.
    Why didn't they revive the plans after the war? :confused:

    Sounds like it could solve alot of problems if its not an exaggerated article.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    “If it begins to overheat, a little plug melts and the salts drain into a pan. There is no need for computers, or the sort of electrical pumps that were crippled by the tsunami. The reactor saves itself,” he said.
    Famous last words there. It is true though, apparently thorium is where it's at, there's more of it as well.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    Nope - it's as common as lead. Unlike Uranium all of the mineral can be used... Uranium will last us for another 80 years. Thorium; assuming it replaces Uranium at current levels, will last us for a millenium!
    10 seconds on wikipedia and you can see its not as simple as the article makes it out to be.

    I'd be more inclined to trust the guy whos doing a report on the subject than a random article that only looks at the good points.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Thorium power
    Hells yes, HIGH FIVE
 
 
 
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.