LFTR Reactors
- Thread starter denverpilot
- Start date
ajstoner21
Cleared for Takeoff
hmm Very interesting.. How did you come across this?
Jim Logajan
En-Route
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2008
- Messages
- 4,024
- Display Name
Display name:
.
Critics of nuclear power generally don't care about details and will, as you have done, ask "What is the bad news they aren't sharing."
Side note: he was stupid to concede that Uranium is rare - it isn't. It turns out it isn't hard to collect yellowcake from seawater in useful quantities, and the amount in the ocean could power the entire human race current power usage (from all sources) for hundreds of thousands of years.
Do you think nuclear energy technology has not advanced just because industry and idiots decided in their mass stupidity they didn't want it? Like they ever had a choice, bloody moronic race. The anti nuke scare mongers can blame themselves for global warming, though I kinda like it. So all you Greenies, this is how you can atone for the sins of your shortsightedness. We are now able to do this very safely, especially if you keep the nuke out over the deep ocean canyons, suspended neutrally buoyant several hundred feet in hulls that can be detached from the tending TLR platform and dispatched into the great pressures of the deep abysmal canyons will keep everything in check as it fizzles away. Compared to the tectonic activity that's going on down there, it would be a pimple on th azz comparison. The TLR rigs take the electricity for electrolytic H2 production. The waste heat from that process will be used to dry the algae produced on the adjacent greenhouse barges with the algae growth farms. Both the H2 and the oil is then brought to port. This also allows us to deny nuclear technology to anyone, we just provide them the H2. If we do this as a public utility, the US could be a major exporter of H2, fresh water, and carbon neutral algae fuel oil products. The US could actually take a lead in the market and start actually taking care of our own without having to go blow somebody up while we pay them for the fuel to do it with.
BiffJ
Pre-takeoff checklist
Just like most other subjects we find that preconceived notions destroy the chance to advance. The thorium reactor is much more efficient than the uranium but since it uses the "nuclear power" label idiots think its bad. End of story.....for them.
Try opening any business in the US and you'll find that there are reams of paperwork for fed, state, and county taxes, licenses, permits etc. Now try to open a business in one of the environmentally "dangerous" fields and your permitting and licensing costs explode as well as the timelines for getting anything done.
What he said about uranium being rare was exactly correct as he was referring to uranium 235 which is a very very small part of the metal compound extracted from the ore. Uranium 238 is fairly common but the isotope needed for the reactor is 235...as compared uranium as a whole the 235 is rare. Compared to other materials like coal or oil its very rare.
One of the issues with the thorium reactors of the type he's talking about is the flouride compounds. They are pretty toxic and expensive to make. The cost of the original reactor is high but since its long lasting without refueling the cost overall is lower. Now you just need to worry about the wastes from producing the flouride compounds and leakage from the plant.
Frank
Try opening any business in the US and you'll find that there are reams of paperwork for fed, state, and county taxes, licenses, permits etc. Now try to open a business in one of the environmentally "dangerous" fields and your permitting and licensing costs explode as well as the timelines for getting anything done.
What he said about uranium being rare was exactly correct as he was referring to uranium 235 which is a very very small part of the metal compound extracted from the ore. Uranium 238 is fairly common but the isotope needed for the reactor is 235...as compared uranium as a whole the 235 is rare. Compared to other materials like coal or oil its very rare.
One of the issues with the thorium reactors of the type he's talking about is the flouride compounds. They are pretty toxic and expensive to make. The cost of the original reactor is high but since its long lasting without refueling the cost overall is lower. Now you just need to worry about the wastes from producing the flouride compounds and leakage from the plant.
Frank
steingar
Taxi to Parking
Way back when they were saying the exact same things about Uranium reactors. Still, if the guy is right I hope he gets some backers with deep pockets and builds one of the things. The guy who invents the fix for our energy crunch will retire young and very, very wealthy.
It's already here, nobody wants to listen and accept it because they are afraid of change and the future. We already have 100 reactor power plants sitting around with 20 years of fuel in them we already paid for costing us billions in storage and security producing zero benefit for their investment that could easily be making electricity and hydrogen for a minimal extra investment in generators and electrolisizers.
Last edited:
steingar
Taxi to Parking
We've been over this Henning. You should check your calculations, they're way off.
What part of the word "start" do you keep having trouble with? Figure even at hard production, offshore equipment will be 5 years down the line. Now the electrolysis equipment will be available much sooner and can be powered initially from the power stations we have on line currently. The cost of the H2 per kg will now be less than the equivalent gallon of gasoline given current equipment costs (which will decrease) and industrial electricity rates. The problem is that you are green negative using fossil fuel plants.
The submarines only get converted BECAUSE WE ALREADY PAID FOR THEM!!!
We have to quit wasting money hand over fist, throwing it away like we do everything we've finished using once. These machines cost us Billions of dollars, they did not come from freaking Wal Mart.
It's funny, people hate good ideas they didn't come up with.
steingar
Taxi to Parking
Love good ideas no matter who came up with them. Don't like bad ones based on faulty logic, though.
Please show the fault in the above logic? Do you fault the economics of the H2? If so when I get home I'll email you the stuff from NREL. Do you fault using trillions of dollars of weapons for something else productive now that we don't need them as weapons?
steingar
Taxi to Parking
I went though the calculations awhile back and found your scheme capable of producing only a small fraction of power output currently used in the US. While it certainly could be done, and perhaps safely, it is not game-changing at all.
Right, you keep erroneously attaching the submarine issue into a one of exclusivity when it is only a small particle of it.
JOhnH
Touchdown! Greaser!
As par for this course, I suppose I have to find something to argue with, so:
What makes you think that the person that invents this will be young?
edited to add the smiley, because if you add a smiley you can say anything you want and nobody can get mad.
Last edited:
Because the older we get, the more comfortable we are with the world as it is and we resist anything that may upset that. Youth sees the problems in the world and tries to find a solution. That's why even when old people invent something new and great, it's typically something they have been at for their entire career.As par for this course, I suppose I have to find something to argue with, so:
What makes you think that the person that invents this will be young?
edited to add the smiley, because if you add a smiley you can say anything you want and nobody can get mad.
When we are young we are fearless so we welcome change. As we age change scares us because we know it could get worse as it often does. The problem is twofold, since we live in the world we think of, predicting failure is nearly a guarantee of it, and when things are screwed up bad, you almost always have to make it worse for a while in order to fix it, so like drowning people we hang on to bricks for dear life thinking they're the only things keeping us from drowning.
Last edited:
JOhnH
Touchdown! Greaser!
Well, don't you think that the effort to solve something like this probably will take most of a person's career? If you think not, then I think you are underestimating the problem. Just getting the permits will probably take the best part of a career. The person that gets rich off this WILL be old. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Yes and no, it's not necessarily true. An idea can be developed or come in an instant. Depending on what is required to develop for that idea to come to fruition, that can take a day or a lifetime.