The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Member Map
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. Non Life Sciences
  3. Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology
  4. Why don't we use Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors?
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Why don't we use Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors?

  • 0 Replies
  • 968 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

David G. Wonnacott

  • Guest
Why don't we use Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors?
« on: 20/12/2016 09:49:43 »
David G. Wonnacott  asked the Naked Scientists:
   
I just listened to the podcast of your "Going Nuclear" episode, and I was surprised not to hear any mention of Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors ("LFTR's"). These were described in the current issue of 'American Scientist' magazine, which has an article describing the "... advantages in design, operation, safety, waste management, cost, and proliferation resistance" of this technology. I enjoyed your discussion of hybrid fusion/fission reactors, but like other other fusion reactors this sounds like something that is still a long way off. In contrast, power from LFTR technology was demonstrated in the early years of the nuclear era. It was passed by in favor of solid-fuel uranium technology for various reasons that no longer seem compelling for the civilian nuclear power industry (suitability for use in submarines, ease of use of spent uranium fuel for weapons).

Why do we not hear more about this? It sounds like a much less challenging way reduce our generation of plutonium by a factor of 3000 (vs. conventional solid fuel uranium fission reactors). Apparently India is looking into full conversion from uranium to thorium over the next five decades, in part due to their short supply of uranium. I would very much like to know whether you think LFTR technology is as promising as it sounds in the American Scientist article.

Sincerely,
    Dave in Ardmore, Pa (currently fully clothed while at work, but willing to state that novel research ideas do occur to me in the shower --- hooray for naked science).
What do you think?
« Last Edit: 20/12/2016 09:49:43 by _system »
Logged
 



  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 

Similar topics (5)

From Liquid goodness to Solid Goodness !!

Started by neilepBoard Physiology & Medicine

Replies: 13
Views: 9513
Last post 05/10/2005 16:37:23
by cruzin4us
Does anything go from solid to liquid to solid when heated?

Started by James Goode Board Chemistry

Replies: 1
Views: 2543
Last post 21/01/2011 06:13:24
by Atomic-S
What Is The Liquid In My Blister and Other Blister Type Questions ?

Started by neilepBoard Physiology & Medicine

Replies: 14
Views: 15851
Last post 02/05/2009 23:19:41
by sHiMmY
What would liquid nitrogen do to metal or hot molten metal?

Started by Karen W.Board General Science

Replies: 5
Views: 14908
Last post 19/04/2009 09:51:01
by Karen W.
Can you turn a liquid into "marbles"?

Started by erickejahBoard Chemistry

Replies: 6
Views: 6359
Last post 15/04/2010 06:17:35
by Shadec
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.077 seconds with 32 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.