[ExI] Are mini nuclear power stations the way forward?
eugen at leitl.org
Thu Mar 17 11:37:31 UTC 2011
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 02:39:38PM -0700, Ryan Rawson wrote:
> What about thorium liquid salt reactors? No proliferation, and
Any preparative neutron source is useful for proliferation,
even if the fuel cycle directly doesn't provide the weapon
fissibles (if you've done your research you'd knew that
the thorium fuel cycle produces at least one istope that's
usable and in fact was used in US test Operation Teapot --
and, no, don't tell me about glove boxes and radiation
detectors on critical routes into Manhattan).
> thorium has more availability than U.
Less relevant because it's a breeder, and needs no
isotopic enrichment after having been kickstarted, and it
has in situ fuel processing.
> Anyone else know about this?
In order to fit the scheme you forgot to mention
polywell. Or regular, old-fashioned tokamak fusion.
Why don't we start substituting 500 GW annually
with fusion immediately. Or polywell. Or thorium
fuel cycle plants.
I mean, just call up Areva or Siemens and ask them
about a quote for a MSR. Try it.
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
More information about the extropy-chat