LFTR vs Nuclear Waste - Plutonium, americium, curium (transuranics) can be fissioned / disposed

http://facebook.com/ThoriumRemix - LFTR does not produce transuranic waste. It burns up essentially all of the fuel because we don't remove fuel from the reactor until it's a fission product.

It is these transuranics like plutonium, americium & curium which present the biggest challenge to nuclear waste disposal. They have moderate half-lives (neither decay quickly nor low levels of radiation) and have complicated decay chains.

All of today's pressurized water reactors (every commercial reactor operating in North America) use less than 1% of the energy stored in the nuclear fuel. This is why the spent fuel rods are difficult to manage. LFTR can consume almost all of its fuel. This big increase in efficiency means less nuclear waste to deal with.

And because LFTR (Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor) uses LIQUID fuel, it is far easier to partition the "waste" to extract valuable by-products, such as medical isotopes for cancer treatment.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Plutonium
• nuclear waste
• americium
• curium
• transuranics

[BlenBlen]

@Ye4hBuddy Hrmmmm, sure. I'm sure it's possible, it actually has some advantages (super high temperature is great for energy exchange, as you lose less energy while changing forms. ex: helium turbines are more efficient than steam). It's not something I'll see in my lifetime as a standard. They are scaling up the french fusion program into a utility generator right now, but it's basically a huge research project and we don't have the global infrastructure to roll those out for a few decades.

[Ye4hBuddy]

@BlenBlen Yes, fission is the present. I'm talking about the future. It is possible that we will find ways of controlling fusion in a small environment that is easily mass produced like the LFTR is now.

[BlenBlen]

@Ye4hBuddy Hey I like the idea of fusion as much of the next guy but lets do some thinking. The LFTR concept boasts small reactors with abundant fuel and really basic chemical and physical reactions. It can be mass produced like boeings and shipped out to replace coal plants. Fusion, if it ever nets energy (I am doubtful, maybe in 30 years) is complicated, deals with temperatures on MILLIONS of degrees (engineering nightmare) and produces more neutron radiation than fission. Fission is ready now

[Ye4hBuddy]

@BlenBlen Why wouldn't the future be fusion?

[SevenSixTwoNato]

LFTR is the best energy solution that can be realized with current technology.

[BlenBlen]

People don't understand nuclear energy. LFTR is the future. It's elegant, and efficient. The future is fission. Free power forever.

[chaoinspace2]

I could use some of that plutonium, I need it to power my Delorean.

[johnberrynix]

@rRobertSmith People are very ignorant to the world of nuclear power let alone isotopes and their positive functions.

People hear "radioactive" or "nuclear material" and become hysteric.

[johnberrynix]

@Pallas89juno

What is he lying about? Do you have anything to back that claim up with?

Mass death? Excuse me?

[zetareticuli42]

Awesome!