[ExI] Written for another list

BillK pharos at gmail.com
Fri Aug 3 17:31:02 UTC 2012


On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Eugen Leitl  wrote:
> I ordinarily would take you up on the kind offer, but I've already
> spent an inordinary time on the Internet rehashing the thorium
> debate with believers, and the conversion factor was negligible
> as the tendency to follow long, technical debates of some complexity which
> is outside of people's area of expertise is low, so people
> tend to side with an already based opinion.
>
> No, my argument to other readers was to follow up the points
> you made by doing own research. There are plenty of technical
> report on operation experience, or, rather, absence, known
> incidents, breeding factors, kinetics of bootstrap, inventory
> in-core, CANDU and liquid-salt types, proliferation risk of
> U-233, and so on.
>


You don't need to do much research. There is a very optimistic
Wikipedia article -
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor>

Even allowing for the optimistic bias it is clear that LFTRs do not
exist at present.
The Chinese have announced a 20 year development project.

Other research projects are less well funded. (but still optimistic).


BillK



More information about the extropy-chat mailing list