Thorium Electric plant - realizable?

[Michael Moewes]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyqYP6f66MwHi I just came to this thorium movies on youtube.
sounds very interesting to me.
Uranium was chosen because it's weaponisable.
Thorium is less dangerous, produces less trash, is not radioactive and runs on much less material. but it's not weaponisable.
I'd go for it.
what's your opinion?

[Michael Moewes]

another one

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kBCMEUuSNw

[Baby Steps]

Molten salt reactors are so safe they hardly need containment. Weinberg, who developed it subsequently developed conventional PWRs and got the chop when he told bosses that thorium was far superior. Of course it was all about making bombs. There are scientists working on thorium around the world but only the Chinese are resourcing this properly. It produces 1% of the waste and with a far smaller half life and virtually no fissionable products. Makes one wonder why countries like Iran are not trying to get these. They should be given to countries like that. Their criticality relies on the thermal expansion and contraction of the salt medium so if it gets too hot the salt expands and just chockes off the reaction. Conversely the more thermal energy you extract, the more they produce as cooling shrinks the salt. Really it is tragic and speaks of the appalling enertia in the nuclear industry (or something far worse?) that this is not in place. The technology is fifty years old. Thorium is plentiful . The reactors are inherently small and safe. Thorium rods can also be inserted into conventional reactors, and the Indians amongst others are developing this. Of course we want a future of free energy but thorium would definitely be an improvement on what we have . In uk there is a parliamentary working party organised by the Alvin Weinberg foundation. Uk has just signed up to pay the French/Chinese to build a pwr. To secure the investment we had to guarantee to pay more than twice the bulk price that a manufacturer would pay in France , I mean, dude, surely we can come up with something better than that?

[sigma6]

love it, I want to put this link on another thread... good to see more awareness on Thorium, it's coming... there is no stopping it... (except the Rockefellers, but then again they are getting out of the gas business... HELLOOOooo!!! )

[Etherios]

SO anyone know or found any new info on this? ... i mean will this be left to grow or ... its too much against oil interests?

[Michael Moewes]

actually china is going to start this in a huge aspect. as I heard. but the chinese like keeping things secret, and I don't speak chinese,
so it's difficult to find something about that.

[jmag0904]

Here's an older interview I did w/ Mark Dansie, and our conversation focuses mostly on traditional "free energy" topics for the first half, but then gravitates toward cold fusion, and finally Thorium. He's very sold on Thorium, and I take his opinion seriously. With that said, we're still dealing with tons & tons of nuclear waste after the fact, right? Even if half-life is way shorter, is this the best we can really do? Seems like the Risk:Reward is still not what it should be:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=2GpeEY1jJj0

[Baby Steps]

http://www.the-weinberg-foundation.org/#Blog

Even if we got better tech going we might want to use molten salt reactors to burn nuclear waste which they can do. I would suggest that if we are still pretending we don't have toroidal antigravity fields and free energy when we set off for Mars officially, then a msr might be used to power the mother ship?

[Bob]

Hia HugoJudd and the OP - something that makes good sense too, is DE-CENTRALIZATION..

meaning, stop with the multi-billion dollar massive reactors, drop down to kilowatt systems enough for JUST 10 homes, which puts it into a cost effective reality..

Decentralization means no massive high tension power lines, and NO residual EMF fields coming from the massive grids that can go down during a solar CME for instance..

Operating such systems, i.e. maintenance is minimal, low cost, and clean..

Putting the wastes into a larger recycling plant allows for full burn-up..

Disadvantages? Can't be controlled by powers that be, that People would have low cost decentralized energy..

Not be stuck on some massive power grid... seems is a good thing, besides getting off weapons grade uranium and plutonium systems..

[Etherios]

Posted by Bob (here)
Hia HugoJudd and the OP - something that makes good sense too, is DE-CENTRALIZATION..

meaning, stop with the multi-billion dollar massive reactors, drop down to kilowatt systems enough for JUST 10 homes, which puts it into a cost effective reality..

Decentralization means no massive high tension power lines, and NO residual EMF fields coming from the massive grids that can go down during a solar CME for instance..

Operating such systems, i.e. maintenance is minimal, low cost, and clean..

Putting the wastes into a larger recycling plant allows for full burn-up..

Disadvantages? Can't be controlled by powers that be, that People would have low cost decentralized energy..

Not be stuck on some massive power grid... seems is a good thing, besides getting off weapons grade uranium and plutonium systems..

i agree but they wont allow that till they lose power ... thorium at least is still in their control as centralized energy BUT alot more countries can have it eventually.


Its not the best possible outcome but its a step towards a better future.


Besides energy production ... i really like how you can use up nuclear waste and also you can use the heat for medicine and industry.

both the amounts and the half life of the wastes are hugely lower than what we have now. i mean we can accept the following pictures amounts ... if its real ofc.




250 tons compared to 1 tonn and 17% of that 1 ton is a 300 year half life ... not thousands of years.

[Bob]

I agree Etherios, the power control industry won't allow freedom from energy slavery at this time.. I feel though, pointing out such decentralized systems are possible, that brings the idea of community power into a reality, literally Power to the People...

The larger burn up thorium reactors can be used as a centralized waste recycling and power generation station.. SO one of those and thousands of decentralization based systems, and no major "power grid" with electrical field hazards.. Low voltage on-site power from local production "thorium heat batteries" (another way of looking at it) is much safer.. I've even talked with folks who asked about a type of heat generator, a "stationary" system able to create hot water or steam for business/factory/home use and such can be done with how heat is transferred out of the system - then we have heat/light/electricity/steam - taking it further, we can add in creating cryogenic cooling.. All with decentralization..

The massive system restricts the "thorium heater" to power generation and massive ultra-high electrical voltages, requiring a massive electricity generation network..

It's kinda funny - back in the turn of the 19th to 20th century Edison was pushing the concept of a power station on every block because of the DC (thermal waste/losses) encountered in the resistance in wires. Powering a city would be a massive expensive and dirty task, using coal for making steam to run the dc generators..

Along comes Tesla with rotary multi-phase power, (AC) and shows that the losses are minimal due to the "skin effect", that the current moves to the edge of the wire, and not having to go through the central core.. And that costs less.. (No need to get to his wireless concept, just the wired concept for the discussion).. SO the idea of massive high current high frequency AC power, the "grid system" was pioneered by Tesla.. Tesla only wanted that as a stopgap, able to get power to the People, where wireless was the ultimate goal..

Big money said well we can CONTROL power distribution by metering WIRES, and with less capital expenditure for power stations, it was a win for the manipulators.. Edison would have controlled his DC generator stations, making money and keeping the strangle-hold that way, but that was MORE expensive having many generators, and extremely dirty with the smoke from the coal..

The goal by the bastard-maggots setting up the power grid was to create a need for product and a strangle-hold on distribution..

When that grid concept can get shut down permanently and decentralized power, low voltage power with zero emission (both in residual RF and magnetic/electric fields coming from the wires), and the ability to do heating and cooling, at that point we might become disconnected from the bastard-maggots who are the slave-masters..

-- my 15 cents

Going to update this -
One of the things with the massive thorium plants, gigawatt for instance, is it can be used to make HYDROGEN, and liquid hydrogen, and AC power would NOT have to be transferred from the power-plant.. That would stop the need to have high tension lines blasting the countryside with ultra-strong levels of RF (both magnetic and electric fields)..

One of the issues with hydrogen powered vehicles (besides a lot of water exhaust), is that they need low cost hydrogen.. Getting less efficiency from hydrogen and a high cost to produce requires some low cost method.. to allow it to become practical.

The massive thorium stations being used for uranium/plutonium waste burnup, and (recycling of the power modules from the decentralized community power stations) can produce the hydrogen depending on where they are located.

I have been doing studies of DEEP SALINE water way deeper than the aquifer's the water table used for drinking and agriculture.. These deep saline water tables are usually associated with oil and gas production.. and are an issue now, the waste water has to be disposed of when the hydrocarbon is removed. These saline waters would be available mid-country for instance or wherever oil and gas is normally found.. No reason to have the massive thorium station for making hydrogen then located at the ocean..

This takes the thorium centralized "burnup recycling station" concept more into practicality.. getting off uranium plutonium, and getting away from long lived nuclear wastes, AND at the same time making hydrogen fuels (cryogenic) at lower costs..

[Michael Moewes]

I really Like this point of view. thanks

Posted by Bob (here)
Hia HugoJudd and the OP - something that makes good sense too, is DE-CENTRALIZATION..

meaning, stop with the multi-billion dollar massive reactors, drop down to kilowatt systems enough for JUST 10 homes, which puts it into a cost effective reality..

Decentralization means no massive high tension power lines, and NO residual EMF fields coming from the massive grids that can go down during a solar CME for instance..

Operating such systems, i.e. maintenance is minimal, low cost, and clean..

Putting the wastes into a larger recycling plant allows for full burn-up..

Disadvantages? Can't be controlled by powers that be, that People would have low cost decentralized energy..

Not be stuck on some massive power grid... seems is a good thing, besides getting off weapons grade uranium and plutonium systems..