- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmy.ml
It marks the first long-term, stable operation of the technology, putting China at the forefront of a global race to harness thorium – considered a safer and more abundant alternative to uranium – for nuclear power.
The experimental reactor, located in the Gobi Desert in China’s west, uses molten salt as the fuel carrier and coolant, and thorium – a radioactive element abundant in the Earth’s crust – as the fuel source. The reactor is reportedly designed to sustainably generate 2 megawatts of thermal power.
You must log in or register to comment.
If true, this is a huge step! Congrats to China!
“Strategic stamina” is something that the US used to have but which has disappeared as the country just tries to catch its breath.
America has been strategically sitting on a couch eating strategic cheeseburgers for the past 50 years
America has been destroyed by the politics of the southern strategy.
I mean mostly it was destroyed by
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics
Being executed very well through social media companies that cared about nothing but profit, but yes, that led to the strategy you’re describing
No, that was only possible because of the southern strategy of the 60s-90s, which pivoted electoral weight to the section of our country most enamored with fascist racism.
Lmfao no we have not. Also, have you payed your couch rent this month?
If it’s true, China has energy security for the foreseeable future - as Thorium is usually found along side rare earths, and China has the largest deposits of those. More than anywhere else in the world.
I don’t mean to be a pessimist, but we’ll see how it lasts and scales 😅 it’s certainly promising, but 2MW also isn’t much. I’m curious how large they can scale single reactors, and how close they can safely be to populations - one of the problems with nuclear always ends up being transporting the energy (usually quite far away) once you’ve generated it.
Isn’t the loint of Thorium reactors that they are small and modular, thus highly scalable by multiplying units. Your comment about scaling a single reactor is a cheap rhetorical device to miss the point entirely.
Scaling small things up is always a logistics and repeatability issue. Always.
We had.technology to put a capsule of three men on the moon for a week before most humans alive today were born, and yet we haven’t gone back because while both “number of humans” and “length of stay” are fairly simple ideas to scale up, we never had the logistics to create and fuel the one.saturn V launch every other day that a permanent moon base would need.
Heck, the Internet is full of ground breaking improvements that were “buried” by the challenge of scaling up out of a lab.
one of the problems with nuclear always ends up being transporting the energy (usually quite far away) once you’ve generated it
I don’t get this part. How is this any different from transporting power from hydro? Quebec transports hydro power from all the way north at the bay to the south and then even sells it to USA.
2MW also isn’t much
It’s a proof of concept, they’re not actually trying to power anything with this. They’re just checking their math on a small scale before doing the full scale lol
Currently, we’re trying to catch our breaths while stabbing ourselves in the lungs
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Too bad we do not know which exactly thorium salt mixes they are using, what the materials facing the molten salt at high neutron fluxes are and how they fare long term, whether they use on-site constant or batched fuel reprocessing, whether they kickstarted the reactor with enrichened uranium or reactor-grade plutonium waste and other such questions.
US experiments were broken off because of materials corrosion problem.
US experiments were broken off because it gives no excuse to attain materials for nuclear weapons. Same excuse everyone else use.
Thorium fuel cycle is useful for weapon production. Germany also abandoned thorium despite no interest in weapon production.
This excuse doesn’t make any sense. This myth also needs to die. You can’t get weapons grade materials from fission reactors, and you certainly aren’t converting spent fuel into weapons. The process of refining weapons grade uranium or synthesizing plutonium have nothing to do with energy producing reactors
Uranium was endorsed because it was easier to create a reactor with and didn’t have to deal with the corrosive issue that metallurgy of the early nuclear age into the 50s couldn’t really handle economically.
It gives you a reason to access the materials you need for nuclear weapons.
Who is saying they’re using the fuel for reactors to make the weapons? Just you.
And not that I count it. But they do infact make weapons from spent uranium. They make artillery shells from it. Buy like I said. I don’t even count that.
There is no correlation between nuclear weapons production and nuclear power generation. If anything they compete for the same raw materials. They were developed in the same era because that’s when we discovered how to harness fission.
Also depleted uranium is not spent fuel. Depleted uranium is the byproduct of enriching uranium to weapons grade. Given the natural ratios of u238 to u235, there’s an abundance of it from refining nuclear weapons hence why some weapons and armor utilize it.
Yes. They compete for the same raw material. That’s the whole point. Gives you a perfectly good reason to excavate it.
That’s not a point in favor of why they coexist. The military is going to fund uranium mining one way or the other, given the potency of nuclear weapons as a deterrence, as well as their own militarized applications of nuclear reactors powering aircraft carriers.
The only valid argument for why military planning influenced civilian nuclear power because the military also tested and decided on nuclear power for various applications because it was efficient, reliable and had long term viability with minimal space investment. But even the military came to the conclusion it wanted nuclear power where it could get independent of wanting nuclear weapons.
Edit: And as a bonus, just because this myth is so dumb, Chicago-1 predated the Manhattan project and is directly cited as being an inspiration for the Manhattan project, not the other way around as people keep trying to claim. Even without nuclear weapons we would still have uranium powered nuclear reactors, and they’d probably be more prevalent without all the fearmongers hopping on the big oil bandwagon and spewing propaganda that couldn’t be further from the truth.
It is a point for them to coexist. It’s called plausible deniability.
What exactly are you trying to argue? That it’s not a good reason for a country to get a bunch of uranium without raising questions?
There was absolutely no incentive to research more about alternative fuels, uranium and plutonium were materials the nuclear powers wanted. For more than just 1 reason…
If countries REALLY wanted nuclear power without Uranium. They would have researched it. Like China have. But no one else has. Well some have, but they all gave up a long time ago.
Sweden was researching it, but decided to go with Uranium, coincidentally, they just happened to also research nuclear weapons… very strange coincidence that… (Sweden was later encouraged to halt all nuclear weapons research)
Sounds like the US should take a page from China’s playbook and steal the design, then claim to have built it on their own.
it should perhaps be pointed out that we originally had proposition for both reactors but we ended up with uranium reactors because the US wanted a reason to mine uranium for nuclear bombs and were well aware of the risk difference but didn’t care about the potential lives being lost if something went wrong. later, the cost to develop a thorium reactor had no monetary benefits beyond generating power and keeping people safe so no country wanted to invest in it when the uranium blueprints were available, literally because of capitalism.
Yeah, the title calls this out… “Strategic Stamina”. Something meant countries just don’t have anymore
All nuclear programs were started for military purposes. “Civilian” nuclear power has always been a fig leaf. While the current Chinese thorium effort is a break from that tradition, it’ll be far too late to make any impact.
Is it actually a break from that tradition? As tech requires more energy, and militaries become more technological, advancing thorium as an energy source that can be done domestically and no longer needing to rely on as much foreign crude, like Canada is gearing up to provide to them, is also a way to support military applications.
Blaming capitalism for every evil in the world is just dumb. Surely Stalin and Mao started their nuclear programs because of capitalism?
i wasn’t aware they redesigned nuclear from the ground up. why did they pick uranium then?
Because they wanted bombs.
Thorium tarnishes to olive grey when exposed to air. This makes it kinda greenish. Green is the color of stamina, so this checks out.
If you’re feeling out of breath, drink a thorium potion!
If I drink the blue potion, I get tingly and my skin starts sloughing off. Must be the cobalt.
It’s got electrolytes!
Then why isn’t viagra green? Checkmate!
It’s temporary stamina, so it’s the cyan at the end of the green bar.
Refreshing not to see the comment section full of anti-nuclear brainlets. For a second I thought Lemmy was a Greenpeace hot-spot.
Anyway…
One good turn deserves another. If others won’t follow because of good example, hopefully other countries will instead follow because of competition.
green peace is cool and all, but nuclear the only way forward, other than asking everyone nicely to use much less energy…
and supposedly the new molten salt thorium reactor design automatically shuts itself off and basically can’t have a meltdown… if that’s real it’s a great way forward….
well, except for all the nuclear waste, but i’m sure they’ll figure that out too….Yeah, thorium reactors can’t meltdown because they need to constantly being powered by thorium, sick you can find anywhere. There’s a 2008 or so bill gates Ted talk on nuclear power that talks about it. For better or worse, china is going to lead the world regarding energy (and economy, seeing all those trump tariffs)
i did see that TED talk… i saw someone say that’s just the reactor design that’s safe, and uranium couldn’t melt down in that type of reactor either….
but that was just some comment and i’m not qualified to speculate on it… but meltdowns are the biggest problem with nuclear, imo….i think we should just dump all of our nuclear waste off the coast of japan… and hopefully generate some kaijū
Radioactive nuclear materials comes from the Earth. All one has to do is put it back in the Earth. Finland built a massive underground nuclear waste storage facility, but there are also technologies being developed to reclaim nuclear waste (because only a very small amount if the material actually gets used in the fission process).
pretty sure it’s not so simple….
For the amount of actual nuclear waste, it kind of is. Earth is so huge and the amount of waste so small, that you could bury literally ALL of it under a mountain somewhere and chances are high that it would never see daylight again nor would never be found by anyone in the future.
Even despite this, extraordinary measures are taken to make sure nothing escapes the containment until such time that Earth’s crust has completely rolled down into the mantle or the mountain erodes, which by then it wouldn’t be nuclear waste anymore.
We need to store the waste for thousands of years. This is bad. We are able to recycle the waste for more power but we’re not allowed to because it produces a tiny bit enriched uranium and that’s not allowed by the pact the US and Russia made. But recycling waste is tech from the 70’s and it can reduce the half life of 100.000 years to 100 years.
Thorium however, is a different story. It doesn’t work with gamma radiation but with alpha radiation. Alpha radiation is the most dangerous form of radiation, but it doesn’t go far and doesn’t go through many things. You can contain it with a piece of paper. Gamma radiation is the least harmful form of radiation but the big issue is it goes really far and goes through almost anything.
So waste from a Thorium reactor is much less harmful, easy to contain, also has a very short half life (I don’t know how long but it’s really short, as in several years) so Thorium really is awesome. Thorium is also a waste product of many other mining operations so it’s already a form of recycling. The downside of a Thorium reactor is that it’s far more complex than the reactors we know so it’s very hard and expensive to build, more than a regular reactor. So it will cost a lot, takes a long time, but it’s an extremily safe and wise investment.
We need to store the waste for thousands of years. This is bad.
I feel like you didn’t read my comment and just wanted to talk about thorium. Which is fine, yes I know it generates less waste and creates its own fuel and all that, I am speaking about nuclear waste as we know it right now, from our hundreds of traditional power plants, the things that MOST people associate with dangers of nuclear waste. Which I explained is not even remotely the problem people think it is, because the actual amount is so small and those thousands of years pass in a blink of an eye deep under earth’s crust.
Thorium is good. Traditional nuclear power is also good.
Yeah but traditional nuclear power can be with much less waste which has a much shorter half life if we recycle the waste, is my point. Less than 100 years instead of thousands. But the recycling process which dates from the 70’s is banned because the process also provides a tiny bit of enriched uranium.
So I’m not against traditional nuclear power, I think we can do much better if we recycle, plus Thorium reactors are a good addition.
so thorium is harmless… unless you eat it.
Don’t eat Thorium kids!
It’s a lot simpler than the majority of humanity reverting to pre-industrial lifestyles.
you don’t know anything about nuclear energy
Tell me you don’t know anything about nuclear energy without saying you don’t know anything about nuclear energy.
you don’t know anything about nuclear energy
I know enough to know that if you’re worried about pollution from Nuclear then you should be worried about all the waste products in production of solar panels which can be extremely toxic. And that if you’re specifically talking about the amount of radiation a megawatt reactor will produce in it’s life time you should never venture anywhere close to a coal burning plant because the amount of radioactive material they let loose into the atmosphere is orders of magnitudes greater than you could get from a uranium reactor, with thorium reactors being predicted and shown in small scale testing to have significantly less dangerous byproducts left over. With several theories and proposed designs for fusion and thorium reactors that could recycle spent fuel and further reduce the amount of high level waste a facility would have at the end of it’s life cycle, because unlike all other forms of energy generation, the nuclear facilities contain and keep their waste products on site for decades and only transfer it off site during decommissioning.
you don’t know anything about nuclear energy
Thanks for the archive link, OP. Shit that site was cancerous
Good news, mankind should be pushing farther into this technologies… so we finally have our first gen IV reactor? I honestly thought we would never reach them on time.
Plus Thorium rocks
I’d like to thank the thorium. Great job guys! All around, great stuff!
Thorium? Fucking sweet!
That’s what I tell my partners. They are, thus far, unimpressed.
Remember when it was all the hype when things just started - crazy to see it actually happen
My broke ass stole all my thorium related stocks years ago, im not a holder
“Strategic Stamina,” Is that what they’re calling the 996 now?
deleted by creator
