• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

Thorium molten salt reactors

Found out the thorium can be used as a fuel in the current CANDU reactors. Without modification much cheaper
trials within the next year. with the need for electricity growing rapidly and global warming being taken more seriously a convergence and Confluence will happen mot rapidly than any of us could anticipate.
 
Last edited:
Seeing more and more companies putting together modular nuclear reactor proposals some that can run on thorium. Last time I saw this was in the 1970's with snowmobiles anybody who could manufacture one did.
Looks like a repeat of that. No one cares about the green stuff follow the money to see what is really happening, not the protests. We are about to see a Paradyme shift when it comes to energy production, and it will happen quickly
quicker than the computer revolution. which I watched from the beginning with my brother remember going to University of Waterloo in grade nine for tour my older brother graduated as an Engineer from here. I missed to revolution that time, this time I can see it as plain as day.
 
The more I look the more interesting things are getting The only current reactors that can use thorium without modification and can be done immediately is the existing Candu reactors. Either way molten salt is the way to go.
 
The more I look the less interest their seems to be with the molten salt even got my son to talk with a friend of his that is a nuclear engineer same story too costly material are the main issue molten salt is very aggressive. However, did notice the renewed interest in the CANDU, burns thorium plutonium, natural uranium, cheap proven technology.
Even Americans talking notice illegal for them to use as it is technically a breeder.
 
One quarter of the world's population needs energy, but they have low uranium reserves but have high thorium reserves. A reactor developed in Canada in the 1960's can run on thorium combined with uranium. both countries warned to purchase the Candu reactors Us being boy scouts sold a few to India and non to China and then refused to sell more to India as they could use the technology to produce plutonium. India took the plans copied them and build more. Nobody wanted to buy any more from us so we sold the plans cheap. The company that bought the plans wants to be suppliers of fuel to the reactors. Is this a chance to get in the ground floor? We have the world's largest uranium reserves.
 
I bought a handful of shares in the company that bought the technology for the Candu reactors as part of the technology is making the pellets for the reactors, which could include thorium pellets. Noticed Australia checking this out for next reactor. It's not about reactors its about pellets used in the reactors.

Green is garbage, we need energy nuclear is the only real source when you think critically. Only route through the maze, Ontario plans to build five more nuclear plant to replace old coal burning plant that were closed that already have infrastructure in place. Even hydro does damage big foot prints.
 
Last edited:
Noticed Australia checking this out for next reactor.
There's a lot of political hoohaa about this in Australia at the moment but at the end of the day the winner is going to be whatever is most commercially viable, and for us that's wind and solar.

At the moment the majority of our green energy is coming from wind generators but only in a technical sense due to infrastructure issues that are now well on their way to being solved. The problem is not enough battery storage, and we're holding off against lithium batteries now because in collaboration with China we've developed commercially viable sodium ion batteries and they'll be going in to full production soon. Prototypes have already been installed and are in regular use.

The real problem for us at the moment is the old coal fired power stations. You can't just shut them down and start them running again whenever you feel like it, they have a minimum level that they have to keep running at and they never stop. During the peak of the day when the solar panels are generating their most power we have to disconnect those inputs to allow the coal fired generators to keep running.

It's fully expected that there'll be no coal fired power stations left here in the next 10 to 15 years and the traditional power companies are losing their market. They're the ones pushing the nuclear argument here.
 
Our coal stations were closed tore down years ago location is good lines still there, other infrastructure we need the power now not ten years from now. Candu tech can be use thorium now not years from now. I do not think green is the future as Germany is currently finding out. Korea showed use a Candu can be built in two years on budget. Either
up here green is stupid as stupid as is electric cars. Either way its always Soon waiting for fusion since college still waiting. We need power now getting sick of power going off already lost my new induction stove due to power spike. Had to sue to get warranty honoured. I had surge protector installed still cost me $500 for electrician.
stove was top of line so I'm doing my bit also all lights are led as I do not like the red incandescent lights.
metamerism sucks. I even am familiar with reverse osmosis, or electrolysis to produce clean water any where. Sure helps to have power source. I worked with E-coat primer years ago. I know enough engineering I do not get easily taken in by the B. S. floating around. Even the green B. S. Nuclear small foot print Hydro, wind solar large foot prints.
Plus I know enough chemistry not to buy into the B.S. about radiation. Sorry I turn 70 in a few weeks. Too old for B. S. any more. 4 days after my birth day the real B. S. starts and six days after that I thank God I'm still here stroke five year anniversary. My out of body experience was very informative.
 
Last edited:
Each time I changed jobs in the past the first thing I would do was go to maintenance and get them to put a surge protector on the lab to protect the lab instruments I hate losing the spectrophotometer visual colour matching is too subjective and it takes weeks or months waiting for the replacement or repair. That's my mind set.
 
I strongly suspect in the next ten years hundreds on nuclear reactors will be installed every where. I do not see a green future. I no longer buy in on the green B. S.
 
I strongly suspect in the next ten years hundreds on nuclear reactors will be installed every where. I do not see a green future. I no longer buy in on the green B. S.
A lot depends on where you live. A lot of Australia gets unbroken sunshine for better than 270 days a year, with roughly 1/3 of the country getting unbroken sunshine for over 300 days a year. Solar makes sense here and we have been building that infrastructure since the 80s. Now that more and more batteries are coming online power supplies are becoming a lot more stable and the need for coal is becoming less and less.

There's also a few points along our south coast that touch on the Roaring Fourties jet stream in the southern oceans and in those places wind generators rule.

In my own state, South Australia, we haven't used coal for many long years but we have been using gas to run the big turbines, but even so, those old power stations only supply 12% of our power, the rest is from renewables.

Tasmania doesn't use coal or gas, but they do have a large hydro-electric system. That won't be being replaced when it starts to wear out though, Tasmania is down in the Roaring Fourties and they generate so much wind powered electricity that they export it across the straights to Victoria.

Live Australian Electricity Generation Source Statistics
 
Wind turbines are great why do greens never consider how quick the blades wear due due to pitting, other words very high maintenance costs. This is what I mean by green B.S. Sort of like cavitation with propellers. Always thought hydro power was green not so much any more destroy towns flood thousands of hectares of land more green B. S
Now we cannot remove small old dams quick enough of the real cost came apparent. I sur their is lots of hidden costs with solar. Just watched in the next three days no more gas through Ukraine to Europe.
 
Last edited:
Wind turbines are great why do greens never consider how quick the blades wear due due to pitting, other words very high maintenance costs.
Yes, exactly like an aeroplane's propeller. Also just like the vanes and bearings on a steam driven turbine.

Solar panels also wear out and die, depending on the force of the light they're exposed to they'll only last between 8 and 15 years. And the batteries have a maximum life of around 15 years too. That's a part of life that has never changed and never will, nothing lasts forever.

What is driving the nuclear argument here is the large corporations that have been controlling our electricity markets for the last 25 years, before that all electricity generation in Australia was owned and operated by the government, it was a government utility.

With lots of little privately owned electricity farms all over the country these large corporations are losing their market and they're buying politicians to push their agenda. They don't want lots of little privately owned electricity farms, they want singular large and expensive power plants supplying whole cities because only they can afford to build and own it and then only they will control it and with this model they get to manipulate prices and increase their fortunes.

One of the big differences between Australia and a lot of other countries is that all the infrastructure for electricity distribution is still owned by the government. They privatised the operation of power plants but retained ownership of all the infrastructure. The same with our phone systems, the government owns all the infrastructure.

Centralised electricity generation is incredibly wasteful. Unless you can afford to install heavily shielded cables for your entire electricity network a lot of power is lost in the form of electromagnetic radiation from overhead high voltage cables. The further along a line the electricity has to travel the greater the loss. Decentralising power generation makes simple practical economic sense.

The shift has been a godsend for many farmers in Australia's drier regions too. There is a deliniation between two different climates in Australia called The Goyder Line, south of that line we can grow wheat and sheep, north of that line we can't. Due to climate change that line has been steadily crawling further and further south, farms that were viable 10 or 15 years ago are now too dry to grow much at all. No rain, no clouds, nothing but dust and sunshine. This is how those farmers are diversifying:

neon-3.jpg
 
Last edited:
Our almost useless land up her in Ontario is called the Canadian shield rock with thin top soil with trees, sparsely
populated, I own 6.9 hectares for camping lean on a tree it falls over. All trees need carbon dioxide bit of soil water.
The population lives between the great lakes most in what is called the golden horseshoe, This is where the power is required, rest of province basically endless forest, no infrastructure. Great for hunting I could drive from my home to Florida and drive the same distance to get to next province Manitoba only one highway across. Maps distort the distance.
 

New Threads

Top Bottom