Thorium reactor from China

  • What do you think about this?


    External Content youtu.be
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

  • This and other news related to the same topic already posted In the thread of LENR vs renewable and ERNC.


    I think we are 70 years late with this. I have known about the LFTR since 2009, this is a technology that was validated in the 1960s and the fact we don’t use it since is only explained by the control of the military industrial complex over all governments.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

  • What do you think about this?

    :thumbdown:

    The problem is that the novel technology may be eventually good.. idealistically/ theoretically etc

    as long as you have a diverse team of competent scientists/engineers

    and decades for trial and error.


    Political shortcuts and lack of consultation/diversity lead to failure/disaster..


    To a certain extent this happens in the West..but it is worse in

    Soviet style , politburo type science.

    and the current Chinese party bureaucracy

    has little idea of hazard reduction or effective problem solving


    also the idea of

    "

    Silicon Valley's “fail faster, fail often, fail better” is anathema to rigid politicised structures.

    The XJP bureaucracy is rapidly rigidifying.


    I am thinking of starting my own backyard thorium reactor

    with a a small stumble for myself but a Great Leap Forward for humanity.

    Great Leap Forward Definition
    The Great Leap Forward was an economic campaign in the late 1950s to evolve China from an agrarian economy to an industrial one that ended in disaster.
    www.investopedia.com

    To quote Mao's Little Red Book

    "

    "Though death befalls all men alike, it may be
    weightier than Mount Tai thorium or lighter than a feathe
    r."

    https://www.marxists.org/ebooks/mao/Quotations_from_Chairman_Mao_Tse-tung.pdf

  • (2015)


    “The Essential CANDU


    3.6 Thorium Cycle


    232Th is fertile and can be used to produce 233U, which is fissile and is used in situ as it is pro- duced. In the CANDU reactor, a once-through thorium cycle is economically viable, which enables energy to be derived from 233U without reprocessing and recycling. Full benefit from the thorium cycle would require reprocessing of the used fuel to recover and recycle the 233U at an appropriate concentration as new reactor fuel.


    Thorium cycles are important because thorium is much more abundant on Earth than ura- nium. Some countries or regions have thorium resources, but lack plentiful uranium. They can extend the energy from natural uranium (which is the source of the only natural fissile material) by using the thorium cycle. In addition, thorium cycles provide other benefits, such as in fuel performance and fuel safety, as explained in a later section devoted specifically to thorium.”


    https://www.unene.ca/essentialcandu/pdf/18%20-%20Fuel%20Cycles.pdf

    (56 page PDF)


    9.3.1 Energy from thorium

    The paragraphs below are based largely on and/or reproduced from Boczar et al. [2012], IAEA [2005], and WNA [2014].

    As illustrated in Section 2.2 , 232Th must first be converted into 233U for use in power genera- tion. “Therefore, thorium fuel concepts require that 232Th be first irradiated in a reactor be- fore fissile material can be made available. The 233U that is produced can either be chemically separated from the parent thorium fuel and recycled into new fuel, or the 233U may be us- able in-situ in the same fuel form”.

    “Thorium fuels therefore need a fissile material as a ‘driver’ so that a chain reaction can be initiated and maintained. The only fissile driver options are 233U, 235U, or 239Pu, none of which is easy to supply”.…

  • Molten salt technology is safer (seems like), but a Th reactor is still a U reactor.


    Canada and China have been working together on Th reactors for many years.

    And a pilot reactor run perfectly in Oak Ridge in the 1960s. It worked for 4 years and proved the concept viable. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik…n-Salt_Reactor_Experiment

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

  • It worked for 4 years and proved the concept viable

    The cleanup at OakRidge took a long time ...supposed to done by 2009..

    But appears still not to be complete..2021

    Oak Ridge Reservation Cleanup


    Soviet Russia still has cleanup issues at a large number of sites..

    not just military

    but they are now no longer a Soviet.,, its someone else's problem

    I imagine that the environmental concern is not a high priority at the China site.

    There is no 'green' lobby.. just as there wasn't under the Soviets

    its not difficult to get permission to build nuclear like it is in the West.


    LENR... LENR LENR ? Maybe I will write to Zhang about a deuterium-samarium reactor..

  • I have never said this is an alternative that doesn’t come with problems, but the problems of LFTR are far less complex to solve than the problems of the enriched uranium classic approach.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.