Nuclear Energy. Do you want more or less?

[Schleicher]

That's right. Coal contains radioactive stuff too. That's the reason I would prefer natural gas.

[1714125048]

1714125048

[1714125048]

1714125048

[TiagoTiago]

And don't forget modern nuclear reactor and plant designs are way safer than the stuff that went bad in the past

[AntiVigilante]

I love it when anti-nuclear fanatics use the argument that I should build a reactor in my back yard, because I practically have one. It's 1500 meters away. I can see the containment building and exhaust rising above the trees. Unfortunately, it's only a research reactor.

I've never been inside the facility, but my girlfriend knows someone who works there as an operator and they arranged a tour for us this week. I hope we get to see the pool! As a nuclear hobbyist, one of my wishes is to see the Cherenkov effect before I die

What's the smallest Thorium reactor possible?

[MoonShadow]

I love it when anti-nuclear fanatics use the argument that I should build a reactor in my back yard, because I practically have one. It's 1500 meters away. I can see the containment building and exhaust rising above the trees. Unfortunately, it's only a research reactor.

I've never been inside the facility, but my girlfriend knows someone who works there as an operator and they arranged a tour for us this week. I hope we get to see the pool! As a nuclear hobbyist, one of my wishes is to see the Cherenkov effect before I die

What's the smallest Thorium reactor possible?

Possible I don't know.  Smallest practical is about 14 Kw thermal, which is tiny.  There is no theoretical minimum for an energy amp thorium reactor.  But the reactor size itself is rarely the issue.  It's usually the containment and shield mass that is the largest expense, which is why civil reactors favor such huge economies of scale. 

[TiagoTiago]

I wonder how long until mobiles will carry their own little plants

[MoonShadow]

I wonder how long until mobiles will carry their own little plants

A long time.  People still freak out about the electromagnetic radiation that cell phones emit under normal operation.  Neutronic radiation actually merits such panic.

[AntiVigilante]

I wonder how long until mobiles will carry their own little plants

A long time.  People still freak out about the electromagnetic radiation that cell phones emit under normal operation.  Neutronic radiation actually merits such panic.

It's not the radiation. It's the proximity. Frankly, in exchange for increased connectivity and communication havoc opportunities going the way Marie Curie isn't too shabby.

[TiagoTiago]

People already keep those things packed with acid waiting to explode resting by their crotches; if they were at least as safe and didn't cost nor weight much more than regular batteries i wouldn't expect there to be much issue with public aceptance, specially if pushed by big companies with intense followers like Apple and Nokia

[dannickherpderp]

nuclear plants are still safer (injures/kills less) than fossil fuel plants

Yeah, right.
Tell that to the people living near Chernobyl.

World health orginzation puts total deaths from chernobyl accident at 4000, with 31 deaths happening directly because of the meltdown.  Deaths in mine collapses as well as black lung and related conditions are orders of magnitude higher in the fossil fuel industry.  Plus the chernobyl reactor was of a TERRIBLE design as you learn in any introduction to engineering course.

[lemonginger]

The problem with nuclear energy (besides the scale issues, of which I agree with Jaime Frontero on) is that we have to figure out a secure way to store the waste that is beyond any time scale we can reasonably envision. Because of this, we essentially are creating incredibly toxic management problems for societies that we have no idea of. I believe it is an unfair burden for future generations to have to deal with, when we do not know what their capacity to deal with it will be, just so we can have more energy now.

[AntiVigilante]

The problem with nuclear energy (besides the scale issues, of which I agree with Jaime Frontero on) is that we have to figure out a secure way to store the waste that is beyond any time scale we can reasonably envision. Because of this, we essentially are creating incredibly toxic management problems for societies that we have no idea of. I believe it is an unfair burden for future generations to have to deal with, when we do not know what their capacity to deal with it will be, just so we can have more energy now.

Thorium is wasteless. It uses Uranium as a catalyst.

[compro01]

The problem with nuclear energy (besides the scale issues, of which I agree with Jaime Frontero on) is that we have to figure out a secure way to store the waste that is beyond any time scale we can reasonably envision. Because of this, we essentially are creating incredibly toxic management problems for societies that we have no idea of. I believe it is an unfair burden for future generations to have to deal with, when we do not know what their capacity to deal with it will be, just so we can have more energy now.

no, we don't.  We just need to not be idiots about it.  long lived waste components are fuel for different types of reactors, which then give much shorter term waste, which would only need to be stored 200 years, which is much easier to get right.

[MoonShadow]

The problem with nuclear energy (besides the scale issues, of which I agree with Jaime Frontero on) is that we have to figure out a secure way to store the waste that is beyond any time scale we can reasonably envision.

Waste storage is a red herring.  These issues have been solved, but the US doesn't do these kinds of things, and instead chooses the path of long term storage, because this waste is still reactor fuel in it's own right and the US has no economicly viable uranium mines of it's own, and presently depends upon favorable political relations with Canada and Austrailia to supply both the military and civil needs of the United States.  The long term storage facility concept thus becomes a reserve that could be drawn upon should either of those supply source become cut off indefinately.

[MoonShadow]

The problem with nuclear energy (besides the scale issues, of which I agree with Jaime Frontero on) is that we have to figure out a secure way to store the waste that is beyond any time scale we can reasonably envision. Because of this, we essentially are creating incredibly toxic management problems for societies that we have no idea of. I believe it is an unfair burden for future generations to have to deal with, when we do not know what their capacity to deal with it will be, just so we can have more energy now.

Thorium is wasteless. It uses Uranium as a catalyst.

That's not quite true.  Thorium does have some hazardous waste products, but none that are nearly as long lived or as hazardous as plutonium itself.

[em3rgentOrdr]

Only in a statist society could you have a government build a nuclear reactor directly on the coast of a highly-population region with a history of earthquakes and tsunamis.  No, the inhabitants were not included in the decision.  An anarcho-capitatlist insurance company would never agree to sign off on the construction of that nuclear reactor since there would be 10's of millions of potential claimants.  Governments like to pretend that they are some benevolent insurance force protecting everyone.  But since there is no legal liability for the government, and since all their money is stolen from the people via taxes in the first place, they continue to engage in such risky behavior.  I don't have to point out all those floods in the mississippi river and new orleans, and all those helpless flood victims being "protected" by the army corps of engineers...

[billyjoeallen]

safety records, in order to be meaningful, need to be measured in deaths per terawatthour generated. By that standard, nuclear is much safer than coal. You need to compare indirect deaths which means including uranium miners and coal miners in the mortality calculations. 

[Perof]

More efficient and hotter.

New stuff. Out with the old in with the new.

Also recycling