We can produce energy for half the cost of coal. There are no carbon emissions. It is far safer than old nuclear technology, and 99% less radioactive waste.
We built the first advanced are falling behind. Thorium nuclear reactors are already being built in China and India.
Thorium energy can be produced for 1.5-3 cents per kilowatt hour. The average US customer pays around 12 cents/kwh. Worldwide, people in developed countries pay 17 cents/kwh.
The federal government could develop and build reactors, finance them with bonds, and sell the energy at a substantial profit. This would cut your power bill, cut carbon emissions, and enable tax cuts.
But what of the ignorant coal miners who for some reason cannot find new jobs?
Colton Young
The most accessible thorium is in coal. Thorium nuclear makes coal cleaner, by taking out some of the radoactive material.
Jordan Bailey
by coal miners I meant fat fuck coal industry merchants
Ayden Sullivan
what about helium-3? not only would he3 fusion power be cleaner than thorium, but it would create an assblastingly large amount of energy. a single ton of he3 could feed earth's needs for 3 years
Carter Roberts
>Thorium energy can be produced for 1.5-3 cents per kilowatt hour. They also promised super cheap energy in the 50s when fission reactors were being built. Didn't really live up to that. Is your number somewhat serious?
But we don't have fusion technology yet.
Hunter Peterson
>thorium is a great idea >idea has been around for a long time >no one tries it Is is probably because it wouldnt work. Hoping germany can eventaully build a full size fusion reactor. That would be far better than thorium
>implying you still need fuel >perpetual energy generator OP BTFO
Oliver Price
That's a prototype. For a promising design, but still a prototype. It remains to be seen if you can achiev a positive energy bilance from it. And if it takes at least another 10 to 15 years to build such a machine on a productive scale.
Grayson Bailey
They're already being built. India expects to have one online by the end of the year, China within about 4 years.
Ryder Sanders
>Is is probably because it wouldnt work.
Is that why several dozen are being planned right now in India and China?
We had very similar reactors operating in the 1950s without an issue. The only difference would be fuel type.
Aaron Parker
>planned >in china >an actual arguement We will see. Also no, reactors in the 1950s are the same concept as what we have now. Thorium is described to be very similar to conventional reactors, with small changes to overcome it's shortcomings >ie >melt downs >and wasted fuel >and expensive fuel Other than the liquid fuel and using the forzen salt bit, its modeled around a conventional reactor. It's a hypothesis that's never been proven to work.
Carson Jackson
This. We only have one danish party whom are willing to re-open our power plants and sadly they are uncultured cucks. Denmark is doomed.
Alexander Sullivan
>Also no, reactors in the 1950s are the same concept as what we have now. We had a molten salt reactor prototype in 1954
