What's new

Safe nuclear does exist, and China is leading the way with thorium

Status
Not open for further replies.
Exactly. And for that precise reason, being China's mineral rich backyard, Australia refuses to sell Uranium to India.

I'm sure its nothing personal.

Selling to China is just more profitable and steady.
 
.
I'm sure its nothing personal.

Selling to China is just more profitable and steady.

Its not personal. Its not being profitable or steady, it has more to do with monopolizing the supply from a particular supplier. Other countries which initially refused to sell, have agreed to supply India with Uranium. Australia still holds back, and Chinese pressure is quite evident, I would presume.
 
.
You're mixing up India's thorium reactors which are SOLID fueled with the LIQUID fueled thorium research at Oak Ridge. These are totally different technologies and have nothing in common except for their use of thorium as the feedstock. India's thorium reactor research is designed to leverage EXISTING uranium reactor technology so that thorium can eventually act as an almost drop-in fuel replacement for existing uranium reactor designs. China's LIQUID thorium reactor research requires the complete rebuilding of nuclear infrastructure for its support because it is an unpressurized reactor design and fundamentally different from all existing nuclear reactor designs whether solid uranium fueled or solid thorium fueled.

So it can operate at atmospheric pressure? That would certainly decrease costs, complexity, and size as well as improve safety as there is not a pressure differential that caused the Hydrogen explosion at Fukushima.
 
.
Yes, kinda guessed it.

But you would research and build the whole thing on that premise!

Why not simply use Uranium that you have already and that you can also source?

What is the benefit of Thorium over Uranium for China?

Anyone can answer this?
 
.
Anyone can answer this?

It produces less radioactive waste. Stated it was around a thousand times less.

Safer as well. Operating at atmospheric pressure would be much safer. Much lower core temps, as well as automated fail safes that do not require electricity.

They also can't claim we have any devious plans for more nuclear weapons. TMSRs produce a pitiable amount of fission material. Its why US abandoned it.
 
.
It produces less radioactive waste. Stated it was around a thousand times less.

Safer as well. Operating at atmospheric pressure would be much safer. Much lower core temps as well.

Yes, but the supplies are much less assured.

Even the Mandarin speaking Rudy was not so pro China in the end! I don't think China can really scale the Thorium reactors to the same extent.
 
.
Yes, but the supplies are much less assured.

Even the Mandarin speaking Rudy was not so pro China in the end! I don't think China can really scale the Thorium reactors to the same extent.

Well then we can always fall back on uranium.

As for scaling the first one will be a 100 Mw testbed. Later ones will be much larger.
 
. .
Yes, but the supplies are much less assured.

Even the Mandarin speaking Rudy was not so pro China in the end! I don't think China can really scale the Thorium reactors to the same extent.

I think Thorium ore is much easier to process as compared to Uranium.
 
. .
India's Kakrapar-1 achieved critical in 1995, and was unplugged soon after due to a major accident and re-plugged earlier this year.

However , that India led the world to field such a minor technology at a time is very different from that India led the world in its tech. " the early pioneer of the technology was U.S. physicist Alvin Weinberg at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, who helped develop a working nuclear plant [ read THE FIRST] using liquid fuel in the 1960s. " ( source: Thorium - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

Therefore, it is correct to say that the US developed the technology and India used it ( by collaborating with [read begging] the US researchers and /or with other means) firstly in a large trial.

This is because in nuclear field, as well as in all other major technology fields, India is decades and more away behind world leaders. It is, thereof, impossible that India leads here or there. Illogical and hence impossible.

Therefore whether India was the first to field such a thing or not has no significance. To claim that India was the first ( with the sinuation that it leads the rest of the world in the tech as we meant in above discuss context) is similar as to claim that Somalia desert fielded world's first QED Accelerator ( presumablely researched by the US /UK scientists instead of Somali pirates ? ) or as to claim that Porto Rico fielded the world's biggest (hence the "first", too) telescope, or world's deep-sea oil drill was first used in the shore of Indonesia ( "who got the tech to have done that?" ) , which has no meanng in either case, surely.




As for your world-leading Hot Air technology, one thing puzzles me that is your operational "AHWR" as expected as your LCA , or as expected as your Arjunk? :lol:

You continue to amaze with the buffoonery every day.

Here is something more for you to chew on.

Chandrayaan_1_orbit_484.jpg


Obviously decades behind the world. After all, even China launched their moon mission in the 1950s. Or the place where you are living as a politically persecuted refugee!
 
. . .
Well then we can always fall back on uranium.

As for scaling the first one will be a 100 Mw testbed. Later ones will be much larger.

Yes, I meant you will be dependent on Western nations for the supply.

But I guess the CCP must have thought through this.
 
. .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom