The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
Though I must admit that I have not followed the topic closely, my impression is that the technical implementation has been harder then the physics, and that the bold ideas of using up waste has been replaced by newly mined isotopes. But I am open for correction here. Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
Thorium is found in small amounts in most rocks and soils; it is three times more abundant than tin in the Earth's crust and is about as common as lead. [and later] Present knowledge of the distribution of thorium resources is poor because of the relatively low-key exploration efforts arising out of insignificant demand.
[and later]
Present knowledge of the distribution of thorium resources is poor because of the relatively low-key exploration efforts arising out of insignificant demand.
Something may be "common" and still uneconomical to mine. There's a whole bunch of gold in sea water and even at today's prices nobody has been foolish enough to try and extract it.
Further, I note the extensive use of the Future Tense in the Los Alamos Gee-Whiz page on Thorium Reactors as well as some out-right falsehoods [emphasis added:]
Because of no risk of proliferation or meltdown, thorium reactors can be made of almost any size.
NO risk?
The thorium fuel cycle creates 233U, which, if separated from the reactor's fuel, can be used for making nuclear weapons.
[from the Wikipedia link]
And, once again, we see the nuke-power people are in half-truth/lying mode. She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre
Generation IV reactor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Generation IV reactors (Gen IV) are a set of theoretical nuclear reactor designs currently being researched. Most of these designs are generally not expected to be available for commercial construction before 2030. Current reactors in operation around the world are generally considered second- or third-generation systems, with most of the first-generation systems having been retired some time ago. Research into these reactor types was officially started by the Generation IV International Forum (GIF) based on eight technology goals, including to improve nuclear safety, improve proliferation resistance, minimize waste and natural resource utilization, and decrease the cost to build and run such plants.
So it is still 20 years off (cue xkcd reference).
While on this topic, I would like to point out something else that often crops up among those entusiastic for this technology (I was one once): Generation IV reactor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
100-300 times more energy yield from the same amount of nuclear fuel [4]
While true it is also misleading if the reader thinks "Woo-hoo, lots and lots of energy!" as this is not related to EROI. Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
European Tribune - The future promise of Energy amplifiers/ Thorium reactors/ 4th gen nuclear
Cyrille linked a Monbiot article in the Salon which caused some discussion, a lot on other things. In an attempt to refocus the discussion, here comes a diary.
Danke. "Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin
Good thing I am writing under a pseudonyme or my physics courses might be retroactively failed. Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
The point is that Pauli called his protegé neutron which was all right since the particle called "neutron" today (the chargeless proton) had not yet been discovered. However, that name was not "copyrighted" since it was only used in private conversations and correspondence and never in print. When, in 1932, James Chadwick proved the existence of a chargeless particle with a mass closely equal to that of a proton, he called it neutron in his paper in the Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. When Fermi, still being a professor in Rome, reported Chadwick's discovery at the weekly physics seminar, somebody from the audience asked whether "Chadwick's neutron" was the same as "Pauli's neutron". "No" answered Fermi (naturally speaking in Italian), "i neutroni di Chadwick sono grandi e pesanti, I neutroni di Pauli sono piccoli e leggeri, essi debbono essere chiamati neutrino".
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 26 3 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 22 3 comments
by Cat - Jan 25 31 comments
by Oui - Jan 9 21 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 13 28 comments
by gmoke - Jan 20
by Oui - Jan 15 90 comments
by gmoke - Jan 7 13 comments
by gmoke - Jan 29
by Oui - Jan 2731 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 263 comments
by Cat - Jan 2531 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 223 comments
by Oui - Jan 2110 comments
by Oui - Jan 21
by Oui - Jan 20
by Oui - Jan 1839 comments
by Oui - Jan 1590 comments
by Oui - Jan 144 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 1328 comments
by Oui - Jan 1219 comments
by Oui - Jan 1120 comments
by Oui - Jan 1031 comments
by Oui - Jan 921 comments
by NBBooks - Jan 810 comments
by Oui - Jan 717 comments
by gmoke - Jan 713 comments