this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2023
1143 points (97.9% liked)

World News

39050 readers
2218 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] partizan@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Actually we can make nuclear molten salt reactors (working small scale stuff exist for long decades). Since the medium is liquid, it has much better utilization of the fuel, there is no pressurized radioactive water reservoirs (which is the actual issue with current reactors), to stop the reaction, you drain the fuel circulation into a container and you are done, no need to supply water to prevent criticality.

But since those molten salt reactors could not be used to create plutonium for weapons, the current reactor design was chosen during cold war era.

They have some drawbacks, like slow startup times, but the cons it provide are incredible.

[–] schroedingershat@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

MSRs and LFRs are horribly unreliable and don't last. There hasn't even been a successful demo reactor and the technical issues for running one safely at full power long term don't even have proposed half-solutions.

[–] partizan@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There are a few testing facilities like chinas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Experimental_Fast_Reactor and it was already tested and producing power. And they are planning to start a functional plant connected to the grid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFR-600

So it seems much more than a half-solution...

[–] schroedingershat@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You've now swapped from molten salt reactors to sodium cooled ones while pretending they're the same thing.

CFR has also never run without using U235 as its main fuel source and the chinese program isn't even pretending to do the hard bit of a breeder which is an economically viable separation system and burning transuranics (because it's an even thinner veneer on the usual goal of failed breeder programs than usual).

Mind-boggling stupidity as always.

[–] partizan@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Sodium is in a molten salt form in those reactors...