Daily reminder oil solar gas wind not needed: throium atomic magic is here

youtube.com/watch?v=bbyr7jZOllI
www.flibe.com

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=568iDYn8pjc
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor#Chinese_thorium_MSR_project
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor
youtube.com/watch?v=N2vzotsvvkw
rt.com/news/367821-coal-gold-technology-russia/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

too long didn't watch
Wtf is Thorium?

>mfw can't tell if retarded or trolling

that really neutralized my ions

basically atomic reactor with out waste or safety problems based on throium which is super plentiful
no need for israel or oil

It is Sudo since
youtube.com/watch?v=568iDYn8pjc

white people do good magic

You retard. That method doesn't work, but thorium salt reactors are legit.

this was proven to be fake like 2 years ago. throium reactors will never be a thing. it takes energy to heat up the throium sodium composite. any contact with anything even sharing space with stuff thats not the same tempurature will decrease its temperature and soon its no longer in a liquid state

thorium isnt going to achieve any where near what uranium or plutonium can

But the molten salt technology or even the pebble bed tech is still way better than what we have.

We don't actually have LFTR reactors yet.

yes we do faggot

bro lets build a nice glass basement so my cars can get a good view

>this was proven to be fake like 2 years ago. throium reactors will never be a thing. it takes energy to heat up the throium sodium composite. any contact with anything even sharing space with stuff thats not the same tempurature will decrease its temperature and soon its no longer in a liquid state
>thorium isnt going to achieve any where near what uranium or plutonium can
whiloe thorium reactors are far from viable at the moment this post is so dumb that it's actually hazardous to everyone's mental health

Link me to a working LFTR that is used commercially and not for research.

yep

oh now you change the variables
faggot
eat shit

no you are a retarded democrat
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor#Chinese_thorium_MSR_project

I said NOT for research. If it is for research, then it is most likely not a viable way of making power.

>We don't actually have LFTR reactors yet.
no you said that AFTER I challenged you
"We don't actually have LFTR reactors yet."
is your quote I responded to
FAGGGOT
BTFO!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor

When did you challenge me? and you gave the same link as last time, and I was referring to commercially viable LFTRs when I said we don't have them.

Wait, i might have done an autism...

no you didnt
you said we dont have reactors
which is stupid statement
you then tried to back fill by adding statements about research or non
:)

dude anyone can just scroll up
you fucking retaard

MSBR all got cancelled in like the 70s/80s because they were not the cool and hip thing and the people working on them didn't bribe the nuclear commission. There is no hope for it ever recovering as they have been let behind for nearly 4 decades now.

nope
its on the way
greens n democrat will try n stop it
but better tek is beter tek
we really need to dismantle the regulatory state
and export all greens and democrats
youtube.com/watch?v=N2vzotsvvkw

I don't see where you challenged and, in your words, anyone can scroll up (except you apparently)
>Link me to a working LFTR that is used commercially and not for research.

04/19/17(Wed)23:47:36 No.121947433 ▶ We don't actually have LFTR reactors yet.

>>
Anonymous (ID: 2EU9470o) 04/19/17(Wed)23:50:04 No.121947705 ▶ yes we do faggot

You did not challenge me, I challenged you, and you did not provide.

04/20/17(Thu)00:19:13 No.121950897 ▶ 04/19/17(Wed)23:47:36 No.121947433 ▶ (You)

We don't actually have LFTR reactors yet.

>>
Anonymous (ID: 2EU9470o) 04/19/17(Wed)23:50:04 No.121947705 ▶ yes we do faggot

lol

Holy fuck dude... Please stop, you are embarrassing yourself now.

>mfw can't tell if retarded or trolling

no dude you are

You said we dont have reactors
we DO
you then tried to backtrack and add the qualification of research....
you stupid ape
LOL

without the actinide waste; other products are still toxic and radioactive, but a lot less so than uranium reactions.

I was implying that we don't have commercially viable ones...

With new tech, don't you have to walk before you run? If they are only at the stage of research, and it's proving to be commercially viable, yet haven't constructed one yet, isn't asking for one a bit silly? I know it's been worked on for quite some time now, and they should have had a model up and running proving commercial success, but if they have their math in order, it should hold up without having to physically build it. However, if it's still in the process "well, in theory it should" then you have the means to challenge no success in model.

I get people jump onto new tech like those SOLAR FREAKING ROADWAYS, where as they just full on dove head first into pseudo science hearsay. Yet most of what I have seen, not being a nuclear chemist scifag, they seem adamant to prove everything before jumping to construction. To me that seems like it has a chance given more experimentation. Then again, working models need to, ya know, work.

That is the point. you can't throw out other forms of green energy and place it all on an unproven source of power such as thormiun.

Well a lot of money is being dumped into solar, which is very shitty tradeoff of cost vs power in large commercial applications. At best, the smaller panels for houses are the route they should have been pushing, not those desert mirrors. Parabolic mirror water heating is also somewhat neat for small housing units, but alas, this tech is soiled by areas with low light. Next is wind, which is being placed in rather bad spots, and imo, not being used correctly. Geothermal is somewhat rare imo, though somewhat good price vs power. Hydroelectric is in the same boat, very good, but limited to water access. Natural gas is very, very bad in terms of longevity. Coal is amazing for power vs price, but waste is disastrous.

Out of the long term sources, nuclear is clamored as the best option in large scale operations. A major factor of it's decaying support to improve the sector comes from older generations looking at past plant failures and fearing another one happening. Those plants were built with 1950's tech. Fuki in jap was the most recent failure, and even they had numerous cut corners on safety for their plant, not to mention location was complete shit, and azns aren't well know for safety to begin with. As always, there is the shadow aspect to new energies, where as the existing giants of power try to sabotage new sources to remain in power. You'll see millions dumped into "renewables" that hardly put anything out, or go out of business within a couple months. These energies aren't expected to survive, but be a short payoff and smear. Real techs get bought and buried, or simply just "taken out".

In all, I think there is a larger shift in finding more reliable ways to charge and store energy, than there is a way to generate it. Super super capacitors are becoming a thing, where as they take fractions of time to charge, and hold a charge much longer than conventional storage. Dunno, it's all kinda a thing we're only allowed to use, and not help work with.

>Coal is amazing for power vs price, but waste is disastrous
Yeah, FREE GOLD is very disastrous.
rt.com/news/367821-coal-gold-technology-russia/

>buy 1 tonn of coal
>get 0.5g of gold
>coal tonn costs avg 2k RUB, going up to 3k and higher in the coming years
>0.5g of gold is about 1.5k RUB
AYYYY VLADIMIR