Added: 2 years ago
From: IdahoNationalLab
Views: 6,116
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (22)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Nuclear reactors have far less impact on the environment,than coal natural gas any gas burning

    except H.

    The point is Nucs are clean and now a reprocessing plant has NRC go a head to reclaim fuel

    from spent rods.The new AR1000 twins being built.

    If not nucs coal than what to use solar wind ,try hooking up the power grid off that to a steel mill or a hospital with high current needs.

    If you dont want Nucs than FIND SOMETHING THAT WORKS in the real world.

  • As a nuclear engineer myself, I have nothing but respect and admiration for those pioneers of nuclear generated electrical power.

    To all who read this: when's the last time you stood on a reactor?

    My answer: 6 years

  • And very reactor has had major radiation release almost meltdown. look It Up so did one in Detroit 3 mile island and semi valley California and the worlds largest in Washington. 2053 atomic weapons have been detonated in the world. Radiation Depopulation. All these sights are still in cean up phase. Some for over 40 years now. Nuclear energy kills forever.

  • Breeder reactors are the future, there is enough U-238 and TH-239 to power the world for thousands of years. And its all possible with breeder reactors. Nuclear energy dont have to be our demise... Stop building nuke weapons, and worry about our future! Oil will eventually run out, when it does, what is the alternative?

  • can some one explain, this breeder reactor, why its better than a conventional, or is this they use every where?

  • @panzarw

    Wiki Breeder reactor

  • lulz

  • DID ANYONE HEAR THAT!

    "its called a breeder reactor because it actually makes more fuel than the reactor burns!"

    WOW! those people are heros! and this was now 70 yrs ago! WOW!

    what a different future we could have had! combine this with teslas wireless energy system and the whole world would have free energy till the end of time! you scientist are my heros!

  • Very true dear friend BUT the goverment could not run us dry, run Earth dry, screw up our climate and control the world if they ever allowed this technology to actually be used by the 6.5 billion people of Earth. Tesla was a great man, a kind spirit and they made certain to use his equiptment/experiments for their own good and certainly NOT for the betterment of man-kind! If Nikola were alive today, I'm sure the CIA would kill him. Thank you for sharing this with me sweetie :-)

  • You misunderstand. It turns non-useable Uranium into Plutonium. It does -not- make fuel from nothing.

    It is like turning trees into charcoal. You can't just put wood into a BBQ, it works better with charcoal. But you aren't making charcoal from nothing, you are making it from wood.

  • why does it say it can yeild up to 2 times the nuclear fuel than whats put in? thats right on, wiki, and even in nuclear physics books? where is this new material comming from, thats energized enough to make the fuel source for the reactor!

  • Once again, it turns non-useable Uranium 238 into fissionable Plutonium 239. It does NOT create it from nothing. So the supply is as limited as Uranium 238, and of course the fissionable material that is used to breed the Plutonium.

    Just as was commented on the Mad_Scientist Yahoogroup.

  • but some breed reactors make more nuclear fuel than they are using, which means they are making more fuel/more energy than they are using, so that more fuel can be used to further sustain the reactor or even more importantly give more fissle fuel to other reactors.NORMAL reactors make 30% to 80% of fuel before its waste. these breeder reactors make 100%(unity) to 180%(overunity) extra fuel then they are using! thats real overunity!wiki has a great article if u dont understand the extra fuel bred

  • Sigh... it is -not- overunity. You don't understand. Something gets used up that was there before by being changed into something else that has less energy in it.

  • Wow. Really? A negative rating for telling the truth?

  • Well, how dare you tell them they're misunderstanding something! :P

    You're shattering their worlds, man!

    Yeah, I've got a lot of comments with thumbs down on over unity videos for citing the conservation of energy and whatnot.

    The excuse is "YOU KNOW THE SCIENCE YOU'RE TAUGHT BY THE MANNNN, IT IS WRONG!", as if they know what's right. e_e

  • The sad part is that the misunderstanding covers the -real- loss, that of otherwise usable nuclear fuel because of a fear of bombs being made from some of the products.

    Ironically, the information I gave about U238 and Pl238 is from the very Wikipedia article that boxa888 mentions.

  • Well, one obviously cannot be bothered with reading an ENTIRE Wikipedia article!

    :P

    I gave you a thumbs up so you're at 0 now. :3

  • i get the point because plotonium has more energy than uranium they just havent used a plotonium reacor yet.i dont even think one exists

  • @AlienRelics This means that we have enough reserves for 600,000 years with uranium alone and probably four times that if you count thorium.

  • @AlienRelics

    well you could use the newly created plutonium to create plutonium from u-238, or make uranium from thorium.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more