Chubby, I am too ignorant to speak with any authority but I'm asking: "Is LFTR (Thorium) technology viable at all?" I've seen BUNCHES, pro and con, but nothing that convinces me that LFTR should not be tried. What say you?
Thorium's well and good but uranium works and we mine it domestically. A lot of people think the only way nuclear can work is if we get fusion or other exotic tech to work, but the reality is that we could simply use a modern fission cycle. All the stuff about nuclear waste, radiation leakage, and potential for disasters? MSM lies just like everything else. There are solutions to all of these problems. France has gotten the majority of its grid power from nuclear sources since the oil crisis in the 70s. Ask yourself, why have you never heard a peep about France's dominance in the nuclear power? Because it wouldn't fit the narrative.
Point well taken. MSM has become/has long served [those paying attention] more as an informer of what to avoid than what to receive. Energy independence (through any technology[s]) is the last thing the "controllers" want to happen/continue anywhere on Earth.
Abundant, inexpensive energy did MUCH to transform the S.E. US States back in the '40's, '50's and '60's. The "controllers" just can't let that continue or happen elsewhere. I would not be surprised to discover that the attempts to extend rapid and robust communications into rural areas are also being hindered by those who want to maintain control.
Anyway, THANK YOU for responding and THANK YOU for being here! MAGA!
Not an expert either. But it doesn't seem to be an efficient alternative, only a greener alternative. Most articles agree that it works, but is not practical to power a gigawatt plant without loosing money. Just my take on the technology as I understand it.
I remember reading it would take 10 years just to get the permits to build nuclear. It needs to be done safely, but it is nearly impossible to build one right now. That needs to change, it's the only reliable alternative to fossil fuels.
Nuclear!
Nuclear has been proposed as a solution by the author of "Apocalypse Never".
Per Forbes, if we use brine mining, we would theoretically have enough uranium to last until the sun dies.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2016/07/01/uranium-seawater-extraction-makes-nuclear-power-completely-renewable/?sh=68b872ca159a
Per wikipedia, the Traveling Wave Reactor design could provide power for millions of years by using depleted nuclear fuel as a source of fuel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TerraPower
Small modular reactors being built by companies like NuScale and GE are looking to make the price of nuclear competitive.
https://nuclear.gepower.com/build-a-plant/products/nuclear-power-plants-overview/bwrx-300
This is the way.
Chubby, I am too ignorant to speak with any authority but I'm asking: "Is LFTR (Thorium) technology viable at all?" I've seen BUNCHES, pro and con, but nothing that convinces me that LFTR should not be tried. What say you?
Thorium's well and good but uranium works and we mine it domestically. A lot of people think the only way nuclear can work is if we get fusion or other exotic tech to work, but the reality is that we could simply use a modern fission cycle. All the stuff about nuclear waste, radiation leakage, and potential for disasters? MSM lies just like everything else. There are solutions to all of these problems. France has gotten the majority of its grid power from nuclear sources since the oil crisis in the 70s. Ask yourself, why have you never heard a peep about France's dominance in the nuclear power? Because it wouldn't fit the narrative.
Point well taken. MSM has become/has long served [those paying attention] more as an informer of what to avoid than what to receive. Energy independence (through any technology[s]) is the last thing the "controllers" want to happen/continue anywhere on Earth.
Abundant, inexpensive energy did MUCH to transform the S.E. US States back in the '40's, '50's and '60's. The "controllers" just can't let that continue or happen elsewhere. I would not be surprised to discover that the attempts to extend rapid and robust communications into rural areas are also being hindered by those who want to maintain control.
Anyway, THANK YOU for responding and THANK YOU for being here! MAGA!
Not an expert either. But it doesn't seem to be an efficient alternative, only a greener alternative. Most articles agree that it works, but is not practical to power a gigawatt plant without loosing money. Just my take on the technology as I understand it.
Thanks for responding! And thank you for being here! MAGA!
I remember reading it would take 10 years just to get the permits to build nuclear. It needs to be done safely, but it is nearly impossible to build one right now. That needs to change, it's the only reliable alternative to fossil fuels.