LFTR vs Nuclear Waste - Plutonium, americium, curium (transuranics) can be fissioned / disposed
Sign the petition! http://ThoriumPetition.com - 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: Tech
Author: thoriumremix
Published (on YouTube): 2011-10-08
Published (here): 2012-05-23
Rating: 4.891892; Votes:37
Views: 3822; Favorites: 14
Video duration: 8 min.
«LFTR vs Nuclear Wast...» screenshots:
00:03:54
|
00:01:57
|
00:03:54
|
00:05:51
|
You need Flash player 8+ and JavaScript enabled to view this video.
Comments on «LFTR vs Nuclear Waste - Plutonium, americium, curium (transuranics) can be fissioned / disposed»:
OfficeThug on 2012-03-30
The current nuclear ...
The current nuclear industry does NOT like the LFTR. It is a disruptive technology and threatens their fuel sales model and their inferior pressurized water reactors.
0445567186 on 2012-03-28
Nuclear waste is ...
Nuclear waste is far more dangerous than this guy make sit sound like. The nuclear industry has bought this guy and his opinions!
PeterWebful on 2012-03-16
At last, a useful ...
At last, a useful overview of near-term viable nuclear based on Thorium. Go for it!
dennismstamps on 2012-03-15
excellent question. ...
excellent question. wish i knew the answer, but i dont
exenrontexas on 2012-03-15
Let me ask you this ...
Let me ask you this. WHY is it necessary to transport the Alberta oil tar all the way to Texas to refine it? Why cannot Canada refine it there and then sell the refined product to anyone they wish? Why is it needed to transport this dirty oil across the Oglala Aquifer which is the largest source of underground clean water in the US and across the breadbasket of the world? That should be asked before considering the Keystone XL pipeline.
dennismstamps on 2012-03-15
ask the oil execs ...
ask the oil execs here in Alberta...
exenrontexas on 2012-03-15
Why have ONLY three ...
Why have ONLY three thousand people seen this? If ANYONE complains about high energy prices or says "drill, baby, drill" then send THIS to them.
gordonmcdowell on 2012-03-15
As @OryxconLara ...
As @OryxconLara says, there is a THORIUM PETITION for USA citizens. Google THORIUM PETITION and ye shall find a friendly URL landing page.
OryxconLara on 2012-03-15
Please! Sign the ...
Please! Sign the petition to support reform of the Thorium/REE Regulations: Let our Energy and High-Tech Manufacturing THRIVE. Search "American Energy Independence: Retake the lead in Thorium and Molten Salts, let High-Tech Manufacturing thrive in USA."
OryxconLara on 2012-03-15
Or your Cadillac - ...
Or your Cadillac - search "Thorium lasers could make nuclear cars a reality"
BlenBlen on 2012-02-07
Hrmmmm, sure. I'm ...
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 on 2012-02-07
Yes, fission is the ...
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 on 2012-02-07
Hey I like the idea ...
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 on 2012-02-07
Why wouldn't the ...
Why wouldn't the future be fusion?
SevenSixTwoNato on 2012-01-11
LFTR is the best ...
LFTR is the best energy solution that can be realized with current technology.
BlenBlen on 2012-01-03
People don't ...
People don't understand nuclear energy. LFTR is the future. It's elegant, and efficient. The future is fission. Free power forever.
chaoinspace2 on 2011-12-28
I could use some of ...
I could use some of that plutonium, I need it to power my Delorean.
johnberrynix on 2011-12-22
People are very ...
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 on 2011-12-22
What is he lying ...
What is he lying about? Do you have anything to back that claim up with? Mass death? Excuse me?
zetareticuli42 on 2011-12-19
Awesome!
Awesome!
Pallas89juno on 2011-12-13
This guy is a lying ...
This guy is a lying scumbag. Fast talking masse death. What a moron.
blingmow101 on 2011-11-27
Go Back to the ...
Go Back to the drawing bored
rRobertSmith on 2011-11-02
LFTR ...it burns up ...
LFTR ...it burns up nuclear waste and does not blow up (and small foot print) got to love a guy that dresses down his lecture sooo much he calls Pu 238 ,,Stuff
deneicy on 2011-10-24
So ENCOURAGING to ...
So ENCOURAGING to see YOUNG people addressing a BETTER future. Thank you.