Nuclear power

Some nuclear reactor designs are better than other, more fail safe. The old GE models that have been pushed have never made a profit, and they are environmental disasters, each one. The new SMR designs were specifically designed to address those shortcomings. However, as we have seen, there can be a huge gulf between a nuclear engineer's promises, and what's delivered.

Additionally, in terms of nuclear fission, there seem to be energetic processes and emanations which we simply do not fully understand. These occasionally show up as 'anomalies'. Any new nuclear reactor design would have to be very, very safe before I would sign off on it.

There does remain an energy source readily available to us, yet untapped: deep geothermal. It requires alot of initial capital outlay, but it simply always works, works well, and is in every way safe. This solution has been around awhile…

renewableenergyfocus.com/view/12469/drilling-10-000-m-deep-geothermal-wells/

youtube.com/watch?v=tyqYP6f66Mw&t=1s

required viewing

Question. If he classifies it all as "clean" what happens to the waste and cleanups currently underway for all the very UNCLEAN crap like at Hanford etc.?

Well if they wouldn't stifle the tech and bring out proper breeders that weren't using weapon fuel, it would be.

Bury it under Africa, maybe it'll mutate niggers into people in a few millenia.

If they're modular you could decommission them with this method.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_borehole_disposal

The only reason why we can't deal with the waste is that of the anti-nukes.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yucca_Mountain_nuclear_waste_repository

If we could get rid of it they would have one of their cornerstone arguments eliminated.

Thorium fission products are just as radioactive as uranium or plutonium fission products. The threat to your life from fission products is effectively nil.

dont be such a pussy

BOI HE BOUT TO DO IT.

ok cuck

Neat. Could extending fracking holes (if near a city) be a cheaper way of digging? Subsidies for this would probably be better than solar or wind 1000x, because you know, it actually works.

Waste isn't a problem if fucks are given to its disposal.

seems sketchy. If you could bury it near a crust that you know is being pushed into the magma it could work.

thorium is vaporware

energyfromthorium.com/2006/04/29/how-much-thorium-would-it-take-to-power-the-whole-world/
Thorium is cheaper too. The lftrs are cheaper to build and maintain. They can also dispose of other nuclear materials (fast spectrum MSR). Easier to place, no steam containment, no water required.
They can be used to desalinize water. Hell, they can even use them to make fuel out of water and carbon dioxide.

Half-life is a concept you should read up on.

Again, so with the waste ALREADY ACCUMULATED AT THE HANFORD SUPERFUND SITE, DECLARING NUKES CLEAN, what will happen with said waste sites. Hanford is just one example as we have many sites with a lot of accumulated radioactive waste that no one disposed of properly because zero fucks were given for many decades.

How so? Oak Ridge works just fine.

...

Dude, calm down. Look at the difference in half-life’s between the two. Thorium’s radioactive isotopes have a really short half-life.

Can you read nigger? Hanford isn't using thorium you stupid cunt.

Why are you calling me a nigger? Did I steal your television last night or something?

I was replying to the other guy saying Thorium was vaporware. Read the thread.

More info on Thorium and salt reactors for the folks that want to read up on it. It really is good tech that we should have used long before now. Instead of playing the nuke game to make weapons we should have just separated the tech. Screw the games and optics. Everyone knows you're using it to make weapons.
eic.rsc.org/feature/is-thorium-the-perfect-fuel/2000092.article
At least the Euros are planning ahead for the inevitable shitskin takeover. They are already testing lftrs again. They don't want real nuke facilities in the stinkbeard hands.
sciencealert.com/researchers-have-conducted-the-first-thorium-salt-experiments-in-over-40-years
world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/thorium.aspx

Not your property either.

So, just pretending to be retarded?

Seriously why the hostility? I don’t have your TV or anything else.

Bad enough I get called racist for pointing out that there are real differences between whites black and everyone else. I don’t need someone that portends to be my ally clawing at me like a rabid animal for no reason whatsoever.

You even changed my digits.

You get one more chance. I haven't even laid into you yet. If you can't handle being called out on your fuckup, you may want to head back to reddit.

You’re not going to win this. I am not sure what you think is going to happen. I haven’t moved out of my seat.

I am sorry who are you?

Not your mommy, nigger.

There isn't considering Uranium's huge energy density compared to carbon-based fuels.

Do you own this site? I own stock in his bank. What about you?

I am not you servant Jew.

Not your slave, and not going to work for free for you. One two three? Keep it secret? Figure it out? How about four? Perfect? The more you know? You already owe me money.

You have me confused for someone else.

I guess I expect too much from the unevolved monkey.

Oh look jigger started its bot up.

Handling it becomes the issue though, and you can’t get 100 efficiency out of the fuel due to having to mix it with a holding material.

Playing games with IDs and digits. Weak sauce. You little girls really should find a job.

they're talking about tesla/nuclear/thorium again, damn cattle

start it up!

Compare that to Thorium. While the energy density of Uranium is "huge" it is inefficient as fuck as we can't get all that energy out of it.

See
It is completely broken because it got BTFO because it was caught replying to the wrong person.

So what? Are you really that autistic?

We can eliminate it, it was just previously made illegal by Jimmy Carter due to proliferation concerns (plutonium is usully produced during reprocessing) . What's commonly referred to as 'nuclear waste' isn't really waste, and can be used in other nuclear fuel cycles. Actual nuclear waste is comparatively much shorter lived and more energetic, and occurs at a much, much lower volume than the shit we're currently burying in yucca.

Oh I get it, steal my point do a google search for images and pretend you did the work and have the knowledge. Gotcha, since you’re going to behave like that as well, good bye.

You guys aren’t strong. Strong people don’t need to steal.

...

Good lord, now who is it replying to? Stolen images and research?
They really need to hire whites to code their yidbots. kek

We could eliminate it even NOW with the restrictions but the kikes don't want the spend the cost for vitrification. Yet another reason the hanford site is never getting cleaned up and is falling apart. We tested out vitrification so long ago. I still have glass samples from the process but heaven forbid we handle the problem when there are shekels to be shined.

Incorrect, you're confusing fuel cycles for the fuel. Fast-neutron reactors can take advantage of a multitude of fuels and are much more efficient than the traditional PWR and other related designs.

In order to understand the science behind nuclear energy, you need to understand and isotopes "neutron cross section," which is measured in barns; the isotope's decay chain (how long it's lived and what it breaks down into); and neutron speed and population.

There aren't any restrictions anymore, it's just prohibitively expensive to run any kind of plant. I think you're mistaking what I said in my post: I'm not advocating for vitrification and burying waste, I'm saying that stuff we're labeling as waste is actually fuel in fast-breeder reactors.

Over regulation is killing the industry.

That's what I get for trying to simplify it. We are currently discussing nuclear power as fuel and Trump declaring it "clean."
"Clean" is debatable for many reasons and they are being discussed both pro and con. We have NEW technology that we don't use because we want to keep weapons programs going. We use INEFFICIENT AS FUCK reactors and fuels for our power and weapon needs.
We have studies and comparisons comparing the fuel and ultimately USABLE energy. Uranium is an interesting substance, consisting overwhelmingly (99.3%) of an isotope, uranium-238, that is not fissile. But if uranium-238 captures a neutron it becomes plutonium-239, which is fissile. One more neutron into the plutonium and you get a fission reaction and energy. So you can imagine that it takes two neutrons to “burn” uranium-238. But there is a very small amount of uranium (0.7%) that consists of the isotope uranium-235, which is fissile and only requires one neutron to fission. Despite constituting such a small fraction of uranium, this U-235 is where nearly all of our nuclear energy comes from today. And the fact that we are burning up this small resource is one of the basic reasons that our nuclear infrastructure is not sustainable. It’s also one of the basic reasons that today’s reactors make so much nuclear waste.
Plus, every 18 months you have to put in another 33% fuel for a lot less output than what the same weight of thorium will give you.

How does classifying nuclear as "clean power" do anything?

I misunderstood that?
I am aware we can use the waste I was simply mentioning we had other means of dealing with it that didn't violate hippy laws if not for the almighty shekel.

No more regulatory authorities looking over your shoulder? That big old pit in your back yard can hold whatever waste water you want to put in it? I mean hell, the animals are drinking from it and I don't see them dropping dead so it's ok right?
It can go many ways. Devil is in the details and more often than not it's used to give corporations the carte blanche to do what they want. Libs take it to one extreme and the corporate shills take it to the other.
Hopefully this will allow more and newer technologies which ARE cleanER to be utilized without becoming prohibitively expensive.

I am not though.

This is what niggers do, they do this to their own parents home and bring potential illegality into the mix 😏

is it cleaner than coal? yes.
is it cleaner than combustion engines? yes.
is it cleaner than the creation of solar panels? yes.
is it more efficient than all of those? yes.

that's not bad; it can be cleaned up in a minute

you should hear some of the section-8 horror stories that pop up around here occasionally

Depends
Depends
Have you seen the mining and processing for radioactive materials?
When done right.
At least try and put some effort into it.

If anyone is interested I can put a couple images of the vitrification samples up. Neat stuff. Glass actually corrodes.

I am not cleaning up after this kid. He’s 18, and thinks his future is in selling pot. When WWIII started he’s going to get drafted and no matter how you tell him he thinks he’s going to escape the situation.

I want to see that, does it oxidize?

Knew you'd be here, thoria shill.

First, I fucking hate that youtube poster. Always titles and thumbnails as if actually answering thorium shills. Yet video content is always just more thorium shilling itself. Thinks they're clever, and slowly spams out all other dissent. Guess thoria shills are worth their shekel salt, they do seem to be controlling the room.

Second, fuck you. Every single time. Fucking thorium lies. Academic shitposting for more currency to shitpost thorium ads – that's what thorium is, that's what thorium was in the 1960s, and that's all thorium ever will be (until Whites, not kike and designated academics, decide to solve it). Fact: Thorium and molten salt reactors are orders of magnitude more dangerous. Fact: Your coolant pumps will still fail (because you think salt plugs will save you, you'll go all Chernobyl and underbuild and underman, again). Fact: Your salt frozen plugs are shit and won't work, and now you'll have radiosalt pipe -and- radiosalt pump problems, which will fail outside your damn plugs. Every single time. More facts: You will never solve the exotic trace isotope poison separation problem, you will never attain efficiency because of it, and you are still crucially dependent on classical uranium to start your reactor anyway.

So I say again:

We just need to Colonize the Moon and mine Helium-3. This gas is emitted by the sun and can be used as fuel for a cold fusion reactor (cold means, no radioactive waste or radiation).

This means atomic rockets and space faring civilization. The cost of the moon base would be 1/3 of the Iraq War….. think about that….

Respectfully I question this "Free Energy" Tesla thing. If it was real, someone would have tried to emulate it on some degree.

It just takes one breakthrough, then he could share it on the web. Instantly everyone would copy it and have free energy.

It just comes off as a myth to me.

Didn't say you should; don't put words in my mouth. My point was, it's just a mess; it's not actually dirty. He could put those cups in the sink and throw away the bottles and carboard or whatever and be done in a minute. There's no organic shit left out, no mold or fungus, no stains, no dirt/mud, whatever. No literal shit smeared on the walls or anything coated in old grease.

That's not nigger tier, it's lazy teenager tier, and not even bad for that.

we built some thorium reactors back during ww2; did they fail catastrophically like you're saying they should? No?

I'm not a nuclear engineer and I'm not claiming to be, but where's your proof?

My apologies if it came across that way, was not intentional. I won’t show you the rest of the mess, because well I don’t want to doxx the kid.

That is not what cold fusion means and that isn't how fusion works.

it's questionable, for sure

But tesla was uniquely genius, and super disciplined to the point where I don't see anybody like that today. Also, he needed a lot of funding to do what he did; he was always struggling to get it. I don't think anybody today could get it. Also, he's been buried; very few people even knew about him before about 10 years ago when the internet got big. It's at least plausible that it's true and the kikes buried it, but I'm not investing in it myself.

Lemme go dig them out of the box and take pictures.

tesla's "free energy" is just harnessing natural magnetic fluctuations that are inherent in the earth, capturing solar wind, and the sun's interaction with the earth's magnetic field.

Thorium does not fail in an uncontrolled manner like uranium reactions. The uranium fuel rods needs to be kept cooled, even the "spent" rods. Thorium needs to be kept energized/bred to kick it up to produce energy. It fails into an automatic shutdown. Further there are different types of thorium reactors and you shouldn't confuse the technology. Molten Salt Fueled reactors are different from molten salt COOLED reactors.

Here are the samples.

You don't use molten salt of any kind to fuel a nuclear reaction—molten salt isn't even used to define any kind of reactor. This is some Vice level shit.

You really need to do some research.
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_reactor
Kill yourself.

What you are saying is absolute nonsense.

Efficiency isn't even related to what you are saying and molten plugs work. You have one in your car oil and water thermostat. Wax plug thermostat. Read about it

...

That’s crazy, looks like it’s crystallizing.

...

You cannot get 100% out of carbon either (heat thrown out into smokestack)

That and BBR thermal scatter, etc.

Methane and Thorium are the best options still.

I HAVE HEARD OF SOME SOLDIERS GETTING THERE TEETH FALLING OUT AND SKIN BURNT FROM EXPOSURE TO SPENT TANK SHELLS ALSO WORKING IN STORAGE FACILITYS DON'T KNOW FOR FACT BUT WHO KNOWS ANYONE GOT SAUCE ?

ENERGY FROM SOURCES LIKE THIS ARE THE FUTURE BUT PEOPLE NEED TO WANT THEM GIVE VOICE BECAUSE IF (((THEY))) HAVE THERE WAY MAKING MONEY IS ALL THEY CARE ABOUT IF THEY CAN'T MAKE A PROFIT YOU CAN'T HAVE IT GREED or SPACE EXPLORATION YOU'RE CHOICE

That's a breeder reactor you fucking moron, and the salt is never used as a fuel, because it doesn't fucking work that way. Sure, you could reach and say that Be has an effect in some cases as a moderator, but still, that would be a reach.

That's why I'm saying you're vice-tier, you fucking armchair expert.

No such thing as We The People either.

No, if done properly it can last for a very long time.

They should have taken Alex Jones iodine pills m8

breeder reactor != moletn-salt reactor != molten-salt-cooled reactor
in a LFTR it does
the salt IS the fuel

If you knew anything about the military, you'd know that radiation is the least harmful thing they are likely to come in contact with. The dust from all sorts of heavy metals, unburned propellant, and explosive chemicals are first and foremost what you should suspect to be causing soldiers problems while they are still in the service. The exception for this is people in the navy that are tasked with pushing barrels full of mystery off of ships into the middle of the ocean.

Things like depleted uranium are first and foremost a toxic chemical hazard. The minor amount of radiation it gives off is a red herring, and only comes into play when it's a fine dust that sticks in the lungs for a few decades. The vast bulk of short and long term affects attributed to it, are from it's toxicity rather than radiation. Tungsten, which replaced DU due to being non-radiative, has very similar effects.

If the US military is given a choice between a chemical or material that is mostly safe, vs an alternative that produces horrific mutations and diseases for a 10% increase in efficacy and 10 times the cost, it'll take the second one pretty much every time.

And now you understand why it's so hard to contain highly radioactive materials. The are constantly transmuting into different (often highly reactive) chemicals (some of which are gasses), and the neutrons they give off destroy not only their chemical structure, but the structure of anything around it. A chunk of malleable radioactive metal will become brittle and porous with enough time. Really nasty stuff, and why every containment effort will always fail and start leaking, to the complete "surprise" of the people that designed it.

not so much. modern breed/burn reactors leave behind much less waste which is radioactive for much less time.

99% of what you see regarding nuke plants is marketing horseshit. In the engineering business you have to quickly come to terms with the huge difference between what the people selling new designs claim and what they can actually deliver. That is why utilities spend billions testing these things before putting them into production. If all these meme reactor designs lived up to the hype, they would already be in service. Sales Engineers are completely full of shit.

Nuclear reactors are extremley efficient and safe, if your worried about alittle radiation, know that people living closer to coal plants are exposed to higher amounts of radiation than reactors. Also what about all those nuclear bombs we sleep on every night, just waiting to completley destroy the world? Nuclear fission is whats best for now, but if we get our shit together and put massive funding into science we can acheive fusion in our lifetimes

SMR's have been drilled into the bedrock beneath the WAIS ice sheets to separate/melt the Ross Sea Ice sheets and allow them slide into the ocean. Flooding the coasts and forcing Agenda 21 under the guise of global warming.Notice no hot spots in East Antarctica only where the US bases and field sites are.

Mr Fusion when?

I wonder who was behind this post.
Given how every single nuclear accident has been a (((bureaucratic))) fuckup, yes, they are.
Even Fukushima, it was supposed be able to survive a hit from a tsunami.

Friendly reminder that the (((green))) lobby is funded heavily by oil and energy kikes.

Alternatively, don't fucking make high radiation waste?
Not to mention waste is literally overhyped nothing anyways, barely any is produced, and, most importantly, we use shit reactors anyways.

W-what?

And you know this because he told you?

I don't think you did either.
The tesla coil was a way to deliver energy, not create it out of thin air.

There is more Helium-3 in the oil and natural gas than in the Moon's regolith.

Anyway there are no energy reactors that use Helium-3.

archive.is/A1APO
This is just the most famous example.

Tesla never died, he ascended this plane to become the very essence of the energy waves of his visions. He'll speak to you if you allow your heart to accept his perfect resonance.

Kaijus soon, fellow stalker.

I've read in a science magazine that fast neutron reactors can theoretically be modified as depleted uranium reducers even giving a small positive energy networth with it.

Is it true?

Nevermind, just read the picture you posted confirming it.

Why are we not building these in droves?

Same shit, new package.

Fuck off you nuke shills poisoning white populations.
Nukes = kikes. Simple as fuck.

someone's butthurt

nukes aren't going away, and thanks to SMRs it's much more likely your individual town will own one by 2050 than ever before

With all the space the US has, it's probably going to be the other way around, Build an NPP and then a town for the workers.

dubs checked. the first nuclear reactor in moorpark ca used KaP because it could transfer a lot of heat. There was a melt down at the Santa Susana Field Laboratory which was the USA's first reactor. KaP didn't work out so well because of the meltdown so they don't use that for heat exchange in reactors anymore.

You should look up molten salt reactors using thorium, user. the jews just use uranium so they can make it into nukes.

Can you elaborate on this Antarctic reactor stuff? Is there any more evidence?

Wrong. We either need our robots to colonize the moon, or we need to colonize the Kuiper belt. The moon is rich in titanium oxide which can be processed for near-Earth space construction. However, long term space exploration and colonization means asteroid mining.

Fuck LEO space stations. We need factories in the Kuiper belt. Plus it would be nice to have a few billion miles of space with a couple gas giants and lots of moons between us and any potential space industry catastrophe.

Reminder that the more radioactive the waste, the less time it remains radioactive, higher radiation means it's giving off lots of energy very fast and depletes itself rapidly.
You can either have highly radioactive waste that burns itself off in a few years, or waste that's radioactive for a hundred years because it's decaying very slowly.

General ban on Nuclear development and research? General stigma on nuclear development and research?

nuclear power is the only guaranteed energy source
>>>/reddit/

Oh but user,using thorium in LFTR would require a large amount of people to quit being retarded
and that is impossible
instead i have hopes for putting cheaper than ever solar panels and batteries on people's properties

Lunar mining>Kuiper-belt sci-fi