VT Nuke Education: Thorium Warnings

Thorium is an answer; just not a good answer.

gg_009

By Jeff Smith, Science Editor

There have been recent discussions about thorium as a source of power or for use in weapons systems. I have some experience working with Thorium.

  1. Too costly to use, over 1 million dollars per kilogram to produce. It can only be artificially made like Plutonium and you cant make enough of it to keep up with demand if commercially used.
  2. Radiation safety issues. Too hot to use in standard glove boxes. More toxic.
  3. Used in fast breeder reactors only.
  4. If U-233 is mixed with U-232 it is unstable. Can go bang.
  5. Thorium reduces reactor thermal output by up to 30 % so it is to inefficient for commercial thermal power reactor use as compared with a standard uranium fed light water thermal reactor.
  6. Thorium breads too much U-232/233 causing a toxic waste problem.
  7. U-233 if is used in a reactor it can undergo a positive K fast neutron reaction so it can go bang like Chernobyl did. So you don’t want to use.

The moral of the story; if it worked better everybody would be using it.

Thorium

Uranium 233 by Gordon Duff

Related Posts:



The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT, VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians, or the Veterans Today Network and its assigns. LEGAL NOTICE - COMMENT POLICY

Posted by on January 20, 2015, With 3871 Reads Filed under Education. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Comments Closed

15 Responses to "VT Nuke Education: Thorium Warnings"

  1. ianmacleod  January 21, 2015 at 7:31 pm

    Nuclear power is horrifically expensive; only government subsidies allow it to LOOK at all cost effective on paper. The power plants were only given a working “safe” lifespan of 20 years, and almost all (or maybe it IS ALL) are past that now. They are WEAPONS, folks. Every single one sits on the confluence of two or more tectonic plates, aka “fault lines”! I THINK Fukushima is on something like five – or might be three. Regardless, every single ONE is capable of rendering HUGE areas deadly radioactive.

    There was a huge underground storage area for used fuel rods (and that’s ANOTHER story-the fuel pellets in fuel rods could be used in another type of reactor, going back and forth until they ARE safe. This is called “the full fuel cycle”, and our government refused to allow it to be used!) Anyway, there are a couple of ways to safely (as possible, anyway) store used fuel rods, but instead they are dumped into “cooling pools” that MUST be maintained at the correct levels and temperature lest they melt down, catch fire – not sure if explosion is possible – and send huge plumes of radioactive smoke into the air, much like Fukushima has done. Lastly, our government has “persuaded” the Japanese government to lie to the world, their own people included, about how bad it really is. Radiation levels or much higher than reported and have been all long. The spread of radiation into the air AND the sea is also much worse, and I understand the Pacific Ocean is dying.

  2. ksp  January 21, 2015 at 9:12 am

    Was Galen Winsor correct? Do you know of other physicists who agree with him?

  3. Foci  January 21, 2015 at 8:15 am

    …..might want to read up a bit on how President Nixon screwed up (listened to the MIC) and at a fork in the road regarding which type of Nuke Energy to go with, picked the wrong fork.

  4. methuselah  January 20, 2015 at 11:48 pm

    thorium lines combustors. i spent twenty years close-up, no one got cancer of any sort.

  5. Preston James, Ph.D  January 20, 2015 at 9:18 pm

    Has thorium or its derivatives ever been used to generate anti-gravity effects or bouyancy?

    • Christopher  January 24, 2015 at 5:35 pm

      Mr. Duff was kind enough to pull an article with answers for this(thx Gordon). But now what I am wondering about is, what alternative material(s) might do the trick, minus the debilitating effects?

  6. Christopher  January 20, 2015 at 8:13 pm

    “The moral of the story; if it worked better everybody would be using it”-Jeff Smith

    My questions are then-

    Can you give an example where this material been used in a real life experiment?

    What was the intent that it was utilized for?

    Was it’s unique properties beneficial, or ultimately destructive in terms of the reasons it was used?

    Do we need to give fair use notice to MARVEL for mentioning the topic of Thor?

  7. Martin Maloney  January 20, 2015 at 6:39 pm

    Martin Maloney is a troll.

    • Martin Maloney  January 20, 2015 at 8:26 pm

      I am a fool.

    • Martin Maloney  January 21, 2015 at 8:17 am

      @ John

      It should be obvious that no one would post ad hominem attacks against himself.

      Someone didn’t like the fact that I disputed the statements in the article. Instead of posting a reply or deleting my comments, someone substituted “Martin Maloney is a troll.” and “I am a fool.” for my original texts.

      The same thing will happen to this comment. However, between now and then, a few people will read this comment, and they will figure out what is going on.

      There’s an irony here. I was a fool; I initially believed that VT had been hacked. Instead, it was an inside job.

    • Christopher  January 24, 2015 at 5:40 pm

      Maybe there a typo error during sign up, instead of Baloney, you put Maloney… ?

  8. Allesandro  January 20, 2015 at 6:19 pm

    Key person in Boston Bombing case.

    Came across this update, don’t know how true it is, but worth a check.

    Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 21, was the victim of an “unfortunate accident” yesterday at Ft. Devens Detention Center in Massachusetts, just weeks after his high-profile trial began, according to warden Paul Jacobson. Slipped on a banana peel and got permanent brain damage

  9. Foci  January 20, 2015 at 5:51 pm

    There is more energy in the Thorium found in coal, than burning the coal itself.

  10. ksp  January 20, 2015 at 4:35 pm

    from January 12, 2014 : Is “Radiation” a Scam?

    Is there going to be any follow up on this article?

    Thanks

    • Gordon Duff  January 20, 2015 at 7:13 pm

      put up as notes in answer to an inquiry. if there is more interest, draft questions and leave them here.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login


TOP 50 READ ARTICLES THIS MONTH
From Veterans Today Network