Thorium: An energy solution - THORIUM REMIX 2011

Thorium is readily available & can be turned into energy without generating transuranic wastes. Thorium's capacity as nuclear fuel was discovered during WW II, but ignored because it was unsuitable for making bombs. A liquid-fluoride thorium reactor (LFTR) is the optimal approach for harvesting energy from Thorium, and has the potential to solve today's energy/climate crisis. LFTR is a type of Thorium Molten Salt Reactor (Th-MSR). This video summarizes over 6 hours worth of thorium talks given by Kirk Sorensen and other thorium technologists.

THORIUM REMIX 2011 starts with a 5 minute TL;WL summary, to hold you over until you find your Ritalin. YouTube Closed Captioning is available in English, and many other languages.

To learn more about the Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor visit: http://energyfromthorium.com/

See http://THORIUMREMIX.com/ for full list of multimedia source material.

Key YouTube video components:

Kirk Sorensen @ TEDxYYC http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2vzot...

Kirk Sorensen @ Protospace - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVSmf_...

Kirk Sorensen @ MRU - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3rL08...

Kirk Sorensen @ TEAC3 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-uxvS...

Kirk Sorensen @ Dr. Kiki Science Hour #84 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEpnpy...

After Fukushima: The Fear Factor - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVQ0Nv...

Robert Hargraves @ TEAC3 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOoBTu...

Alexander Cannara @ TEAC3 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUVq81...

James Kennedy @ TEAC3 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrDeB8...

Q: What is thorium and what makes it special?

A: Thorium is a naturally-occuring mineral that holds large amounts of releasable nuclear energy, similar to uranium. This nuclear energy can be released in a special nuclear reactor designed to use thorium. Thorium is special because it is easier to extract this energy completely than uranium due to some of the chemical and nuclear properties of thorium.

Q: What is a liquid-fluoride reactor?

A: A liquid-fluoride nuclear reactor is different than conventional nuclear reactors that use solid fuel elements. A liquid-fluoride reactor uses a solution of several fluoride salts, typically lithium fluoride, beryllium fluoride, and uranium tetrafluoride, as its basic nuclear fuel. The fluoride salts have a number of advantages over solid fuels. They are impervious to radiation damage, they can be chemically processed in the form that they are in, and they have a high capacity to hold thermal energy (heat). Additional nuclear fuel can be added or withdrawn from the salt solution during normal operation.

Q: Are the salts safe?

A: Very safe. Unlike other coolants considered for high-performance reactors (like liquid sodium) the salts will not react dangerously with air or water. This is because they are already in their most stable chemical form. Their properties do not change even under intense radiation, unlike all solid forms of nuclear fuel.

Q: What is nuclear waste and how does a liquid-fluoride reactor address this issue?

A: So-called "nuclear waste" or spent-nuclear fuel is produced in conventional (solid-core) nuclear reactors because they are unable to extract all of the nuclear energy from their fuel before they have to shutdown. LFTR addresses this issue by using a form of nuclear fuel (liquid-fluoride salts of thorium) that allow complete extraction of nuclear energy from the fuel.

"Fluid Fuel Reactors", James A. Lane, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 1958.
http://moltensalt.org/references/stat...

• Category

  Science & Technology

[CptUndies7]

Someone as re-uploaded the video. I'm not sure if it was with permission or not: youtube.com/watch?v=31HEijtqF5­I

[gordonmcdowell]

Is ok, the video is Creative Commons licensed so people can do this. One fellow posted the first 5m at its own thing and got way more views than this 2h version gets. If it helps more people watch it then that's good.

[CptUndies7]

My only concern is that they are monetizing it. The original link didn't work, this might. Video id is 31HEijtqF5I

[gordonmcdowell]

Tacky. But doesn't really matter.

[Kent Forbes]

Best thing I've watched in a long time.

[gordonmcdowell]

Abiotic Oil Theory has zero bearing on anything in this video, except for you not believing the term "Fossil Fuel" is accurate. You don't like Fluoride? The point of LFTR is not to create a waste stream containing Fluoride. That is chemical form of the nuclear catalyst inside the reactor, it stays in the reactor. Most industrial processes involve toxins, trick is to avoid releasing them into the environment or "water supplies". You know, like the manufacture of your computer? Not all unicorns.

[a24396]

Seriously?.

Asking Mr. Google = 750000 results.

Picking the top ten and excluding favorable results yields no new objections that weren't addressed in the video and some that are just not true. Some examples:

1. Possible long development times

2. Possible high costs to develop

3. Unknown safety risks

4. It's "nuclear," everyone knows that's bad

etc...

Again, addressed in the video, and no mention of alternative energy consequences. Unless you found something new; again what are YOUR objections?

[CrudeDude]

Exactly WHAT was not "reasonable"?

Explain.

[Bat Guano]

0:48:10 - One guy got impaled by a control rod to the roof of a nuclear reactor when the top blew.

- That's gotta be the coolest way to die, ever.

[a24396]

"their objections" weren't reasonable objections... My question to you is what your objections are.

[CrudeDude]

Why? Their objections are exactly the same as mine. Facts are facts.

[a24396]

I did... If the results of this search were supposed to convince me not to support LFTR well it failed... I'm even more convinced this is worth doing.

If someone has the scientific literacy needed to understand the arguments for LFTR then they can understand why the "thorium reactor hype" results are not reasonable arguments. That said, if you personalty have objections to LFTR it seems reasonable that you actually present your objections instead of only referencing someone else's objections.