WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

911

(post is archived)

[–] 2 pts

How about using the heat of mixing for solids when they turn into a water solution ?

This usually (but not always, depends on compound) generates heat.

Let salt mix into solution, gather heat created when turning into a solution, turn into electricity...then leave solution made outside to naturally evaporate and recover the salt to go around again ?

[–] 2 pts

I think the energy needed for mixing the compounds and pumping them around offsets the energy from heat.

[–] 0 pt

Use Mexicans.

And their children.

[–] 2 pts
[–] 0 pt

ZPE! The energy of the galaxy!

[–] 1 pt

The US had working molten thorium salt reactors until President Johnson shut them down and everyone opted for uranium. It was idiotic and corrupt... in that the choice for uranium produces way more waste that is difficult to manage and thousands of tons of thorium are cast aside despite being a much safer reaction.

[–] 0 pt

Thorium harnesses the power of THOR!

[–] 0 pt

Article is typical for Popular Mechanics, which was clickbait-tier journalism before the world wide web was even a glint in Tim Berners-Lee's eye. Author leads with statement about Moltex Energy, but never once mentions that their reactor design is a molten chloride (not flouride) type reactor which is significant because it eliminates corrosion issues that would complicate proof testing and regulatory requirements for MSRs. Moltex's SSR is engineered in a way to minimize the other regulatory hurdles that molten salt reactors have in that it doesn't require pumps to circulate 600 C degree fuel salt that in operation would be more radioactive per liter than the corium that produced Chernobyl's infamous "Elephant Foot". Finally, there is no carbon moderator in a Moltex SSR that would limit core life to 5-7 years like the original MSRs. And because it is a fast spectrum reactor, it can be easily adapted to burn virtually everything from spent LWR fuel, to DU, to Thorium.

[–] 0 pt

Thanks for posting this.

The article itself doesn't give much information, the wikipedia entry covers it a bit more.

These aren't new, but I'm curious as to why (apart from environment) they've seen a renewed interest. Is it just because they are "safer"? Or has some other technological development come along that has suddenly made them viable?