Comprehensive overview of Energy sources - For the future!

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Comprehensive overview of Energy sources - For the future! (Under Construction)
Fusion always seems to be 50 years in the future, and solar panels unfortunately don't produce enough energy compared to what they consume to be useful. [1][2][3] Wind mills and many other "renewable" energy sources possess the same problem, in addition to being dependent on the weather and a secondary energy source that would only, at best, lengthen the life of tertiary sources, until their energy become sufficient to replicate themselves. Fossil fuels are fine, for now, but their dwindling levels and questionable impact on the environment mean they won't be sustainable forever. Some type of powerful, yet cheap, long term energy supply needs to be established for society to function. Without it, most our modern luxuries, and necessities, would cease to function. In the U.S. for instance, water makes up approximately 4% of our energy supply; wood at best could account for, so even if we switched over to steam engines and tried to live in the forests, our ability to survive would be drastically diminished.

Considering we have at most 50 years worth of oil left at our current rate of consumption, the sooner we switched, the better. Luckily, Nuclear power offers a reasonable alternative without most of the drawbacks of other forms of power, and with it's raw capacity, could last us potentially thousands of years, enough to get to fusion, or even black hole generators, assuming they are possible. Furthermore, their ability to produce energy in large volumes and potentially cheaply could provide other benefits as well, such as lowering the price of sophisticated electronics and high strength materials such as carbon fiber, which depend primarily on energy costs. If energy was nearly cheap and free, new opportunities would open up, such as food grown completely indoors in greenhouses with growlights, giving us a nearly infinite food supply, and the production of nearly everything for free; hypothetically, many less desirable elements, such as mercury, can be turned into more desirable elements, such as gold, with the sheer application of energy, electricity specifically. Many more possibilities, such as the widescale production of graphene or buckypaper, materials hundreds of times stronger than steel, become practical with cheap energy.

I like to believe we are constantly trying to approach a post scarcity Utopia, a time in which most of our earthly problems, such as concerns with food, the cold, money, and a general lack of resources will be resolved. People may truly look back and ask what "money" was, when there's such surplus no-one needs to buy anything, and but the smallest percent of society is all that's needed to work to sustain a comfortable lifestyle for everyone. While not all social ills will hypothetically be resolved as a result of a constant surplus, blaming poor job opportunities on immigrants or hurricanes on the gays, that is finding a scapegoat for your problems, will be much harder when there aren't many bad things around, and people aren't constantly tired and frustrated. While I can't promise any of these methods will directly lead to such a world, I can promise a way to sustain society long enough to get us there.

These are chiefly through Uranium, and Thorium power.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Uranium Power
Uranium power already accounts for approximately 20% of the electricity consumed by the U.S., and 9% of it's total energy. [1][2][3] With over 100 active civilian reactors in the U.S., it doesn't take much to actually provide large volumes of energy to people. Uranium power currently has comparable prices to gas or coal electricity costs, and thus can easily be seen as a viable replacement. [1][2] With a large portion of the cost resulting in interest from the enormous downpayment, subsidized loans for uranium reactors could result in considerably less costs, in some cases as much as 70-80%. With potentially hundreds of years worth of fuel supplies left at our current rate of consumption (easily over 600), cheap, low cost fuel is already realistically in our grasp.


Radioactive waste
Radioactive waste has been, for the most part, a primary concern when dealing with Uranium power. The radioactive waste can take millions of years before it completely breaks down, and due to it's extremely high radiotoxicity, minute amounts can contaminate an area for many decades, making it practically unlivable. In terms of a security risk and environmental hazard, it does represent a significant problem.

Not as much as many people might believe, however. While uranium by products can last for millions of years, the dangerous levels of radiotoxicity largely diminish after a few decades, rendering them mostly safe. The radiotoxicity of nuclear waste is predominately determined by actenides [1][2], most of which are short lived, and simply produce decay heat for a short period after the nuclear fuel is spent. Because this nuclear waste heat is utilized to continue warming water, it doesn't need to be stored until largely after most of the dangerous compounds have "burn out", or lost most of their radioactivity (which is converted to heat, and subsequently given to water to be turned into forward motion in a steam turbine). Less than 3% of the waste is considered highly radioactive waste (containing both the most dangerous forms of radiation and over 90% of the total radiation), and most of this is largely neutralized by the end of it's life in the reactor. Water acts as both a heat sink and a radiation shield, making it an ideal way to store the nuclear waste until it is disposed. In addition, waste can be rendered harmless relatively easily, and are not particularly harmful in comparison to other forms of toxic waste.

Safe methods for the final disposal of high-level radioactive waste are technically proven; the international consensus is that this should be geological disposal. As only approximately 3% of waste of uranium power is considered significantly dangerous, it makes waste management less of a concern than with total uranium consumption. However, uranium is already mined from naturally occurring uranium mines; as these are places people generally cannot live in, and that possess a large amount of empty storage space, uranium can be returned to said mines, in lead, depleted uranium, and steel containers, designed to prevent radiation from easily leaking out. Uranium is relatively dense, and not much fuel is used, making storage particularly convenient. World consumption of uranium was at it's peak around 68,000 tonnes of uranium annually; while not all of this is converted to extremely dangerous waste (I.E. only 3%), assuming it all needed to be stored, it would take up a roughly 3600 cubic meter space. This would equal a roughly 15, by 15, by 15 meter block of uranium, or 45 x 45 x 45 feet, for all the uranium consumed in the entire world, assuming a 100% nuclear waste conversion. Even if this continued on for millions of years, we would have more than enough space for the uranium, even in naturally occurring mines and mountains.

Thus, while uranium does not stay particularly dangerous for millions of years, even if it did, there would be more than enough space available for it.


Melt Downs
Melt downs are perhaps the most terrifying aspect of a nuclear reactor

CANDU Reactor

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Thorium Power

[Suicidesoldier#1]

The affordable Electric car

Additional benefits of cheaper electricity

[DarkSohisohi]

Suicidesoldier#1

Uranium Power
Radioactive waste
Radioactive waste has been, for the most part, a primary concern when dealing with Uranium power. The radioactive waste can take millions of years before it completely breaks down, and due to it's extremely high radiotoxicity, minute amounts can contaminate an area for many decades, making it practically unlivable. In terms of a security risk and environmental hazard, it does represent a significant problem.

The only energy crisis we have is storage. . . The world could run on coal/steam power if we just found a way to store all that energy. Perhaps one day we will, but until then I guess this has to be the debate.

Nuclear power, hands down, is the best energy source we have today will stay so in the foreseeable future. Not sure why people don't know this, but we have been able to recycle nuclear waste since gen 3 reactors came out. Effective, nuclear power can run on the the nuclear waste we have accumulated [x]. That being said, there will be some waste can't be recycled (Uranium I think). Thought that only makes up a small percentage of our nuclear waste. If need be, we could always simply dump anything that can't be recycled in the Mariana Trench along the Pacific Rim. We recently had a capsule tested this October (the 5th I believe) which is setting the ground work to a trip to Mars. If our technology continues to advance (in regard to space exploration) we might simply be able to blast that s**t into the space.

*Not sure if your still posting additional content, if so I can always delete this and repost it.

[PureCocainePureCocaine]

Suicidesoldier#1

These are chiefly through Uranium, and Thorium power.

Which global multinational syndicate are you gonna give the power to?

Because, if we're gonna have nuclear reactors running all the time inside our borders, I only trust them to the military. They've proven time and time again that they can sit on top of nuclear power sources and not blow them up.

Yeah, the Navy. Give it to the Navy. ******** a profit, pay the engineers extra.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

DarkSohisohi

Suicidesoldier#1

Uranium Power
Radioactive waste
Radioactive waste has been, for the most part, a primary concern when dealing with Uranium power. The radioactive waste can take millions of years before it completely breaks down, and due to it's extremely high radiotoxicity, minute amounts can contaminate an area for many decades, making it practically unlivable. In terms of a security risk and environmental hazard, it does represent a significant problem.

The only energy crisis we have is storage. . . The world could run on coal/steam power if we just found a way to store all that energy. Perhaps one day we will, but until then I guess this has to be the debate.

Nuclear power, hands down, is the best energy source we have today will stay so in the foreseeable future. Not sure why people don't know this, but we have been able to recycle nuclear waste since gen 3 reactors came out. Effective, nuclear power can run on the the nuclear waste we have accumulated [x]. That being said, there will be some waste can't be recycled (Uranium I think). Thought that only makes up a small percentage of our nuclear waste. If need be, we could always simply dump anything that can't be recycled in the Mariana Trench along the Pacific Rim. We recently had a capsule tested this October (the 5th I believe) which is setting the ground work to a trip to Mars. If our technology continues to advance (in regard to space exploration) we might simply be able to blast that s**t into the space.

*Not sure if your still posting additional content, if so I can always delete this and repost it.

No dude, it's fine, I'm still posting stuff, I just went to bed lol xD

But the general ideas remain the same, and hopefully this will give some information on the right energy sources to pick. blaugh


Although, if storage seems an issue, we could always store it in water.

Like, make an artificial dam and then just let water come out of, spinning turbines, which have like 90%+ efficiency. As long as there's a roof on it, then it wouldn't evaporate or anything, and gravity never runs out, so it could last for many decades with little energy loss, as long as your pump and turbine could keep the water going.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

PureCocainePureCocaine

Suicidesoldier#1

These are chiefly through Uranium, and Thorium power.

Which global multinational syndicate are you gonna give the power to?

Because, if we're gonna have nuclear reactors running all the time inside our borders, I only trust them to the military. They've proven time and time again that they can sit on top of nuclear power sources and not blow them up.

Yeah, the Navy. Give it to the Navy. ******** a profit, pay the engineers extra.

Well, that's not a bad line of reasoning, but CANDU reactors and thorium have little to no threat of a meltdown, so hopefully that's something we can avoid! blaugh

[PureCocainePureCocaine]

Suicidesoldier#1

PureCocainePureCocaine

Suicidesoldier#1

These are chiefly through Uranium, and Thorium power.

Which global multinational syndicate are you gonna give the power to?

Because, if we're gonna have nuclear reactors running all the time inside our borders, I only trust them to the military. They've proven time and time again that they can sit on top of nuclear power sources and not blow them up.

Yeah, the Navy. Give it to the Navy. ******** a profit, pay the engineers extra.

Well, that's not a bad line of reasoning, but CANDU reactors and thorium have little to no threat of a meltdown, so hopefully that's something we can avoid! blaugh

I dunno, man. I dunno. You said "little to", and that's the part that concerns me, because it seems like something out there on the wavelengths doesn't like it when we get too ambitious. Things that have "little chance of going wrong" inevitably find a way, hell, all it takes is one bad day.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

PureCocainePureCocaine

Suicidesoldier#1

PureCocainePureCocaine

Suicidesoldier#1

These are chiefly through Uranium, and Thorium power.

Which global multinational syndicate are you gonna give the power to?

Because, if we're gonna have nuclear reactors running all the time inside our borders, I only trust them to the military. They've proven time and time again that they can sit on top of nuclear power sources and not blow them up.

Yeah, the Navy. Give it to the Navy. ******** a profit, pay the engineers extra.

Well, that's not a bad line of reasoning, but CANDU reactors and thorium have little to no threat of a meltdown, so hopefully that's something we can avoid! blaugh

I dunno, man. I dunno. You said "little to", and that's the part that concerns me, because it seems like something out there on the wavelengths doesn't like it when we get too ambitious. Things that have "little chance of going wrong" inevitably find a way, hell, all it takes is one bad day.

Well, CANDU reactors can't melt down, and if they ever did, they'd shut themselves down immediately. Thorium reactors also can't have a melt down, but if they ever did, Thorium isn't naturally very radioactive and it's waste is fairly clean, so it would just result in a loss of money. There's some potential for other things going wrong, but not melt downs specifically. I mean this is literally something where, Thorium is fertile, but not fissionable. It means it can produce energy, but it can't sustain a reaction itself; thus, there's no chance of a chain reaction, or explosion.

Uranium can at the right concentrations, but since CANDU reactors use less than 1.2% U-235, they also cannot sustain a chain reaction on their own. If someone filled it full of the wrong thing it could possibly melt down, but it wouldn't be catastrophic like an explosion, it would just leak out into it's own containment areas, and just more or less end up costing a lot of money to fix the problem and replace the melted stuff, since it gets REALLY hot. That's technically what a melt down is, lead melts at like 600 degrees and weakens at 400 degrees so it's pretty easy to melt it or weaken the containment fields; these things have so little pressure though that they don't explode.


Nuclear reactors that blow up are just like giant pipe bombs, or microwaving a can of soup.

The pressure builds and KABOOM. The russians were so arrogant as to think failure was impossible, and built the strongest pipes possible (such as with Chernobyl); but you see, no failure points means that when it does go off, it goes off all at once, causing the entire thing to blow up more or less at once. Simple planned failure areas (I.E. if the pressure builds, it explodes in a predesignated area, following the path of least resistance, which won't go off like a pipe bomb) and pressure release valves are generally sufficient to leak off excessive heat. It results in a loss of heat, or energy, and therefore fuel is just wasted by pumping the water into the air rather than using it to turn a steam turbine, but there's no boom. So even modern one's can't go boom, and these definitely cannot.

[PureCocainePureCocaine]

Suicidesoldier#1

PureCocainePureCocaine

Suicidesoldier#1

PureCocainePureCocaine

Suicidesoldier#1

These are chiefly through Uranium, and Thorium power.

Which global multinational syndicate are you gonna give the power to?

Because, if we're gonna have nuclear reactors running all the time inside our borders, I only trust them to the military. They've proven time and time again that they can sit on top of nuclear power sources and not blow them up.

Yeah, the Navy. Give it to the Navy. ******** a profit, pay the engineers extra.

Well, that's not a bad line of reasoning, but CANDU reactors and thorium have little to no threat of a meltdown, so hopefully that's something we can avoid! blaugh

I dunno, man. I dunno. You said "little to", and that's the part that concerns me, because it seems like something out there on the wavelengths doesn't like it when we get too ambitious. Things that have "little chance of going wrong" inevitably find a way, hell, all it takes is one bad day.

Well, CANDU reactors can't melt down, and if they ever did, they'd shut themselves down immediately. Thorium reactors also can't have a melt down, but if they ever did, Thorium isn't naturally very radioactive and it's waste is fairly clean, so it would just result in a loss of money. There's some potential for other things going wrong, but not melt downs specifically. I mean this is literally something where, Thorium is fertile, but not fissionable. It means it can produce energy, but it can't sustain a reaction itself; thus, there's no chance of a chain reaction, or explosion.

Uranium can at the right concentrations, but since CANDU reactors use less than 1.2% U-235, they also cannot sustain a chain reaction on their own. If someone filled it full of the wrong thing it could possibly melt down, but it wouldn't be catastrophic like an explosion, it would just leak out into it's own containment areas, and just more or less end up costing a lot of money to fix the problem and replace the melted stuff, since it gets REALLY hot. That's technically what a melt down is, lead melts at like 600 degrees and weakens at 400 degrees so it's pretty easy to melt it or weaken the containment fields; these things have so little pressure though that they don't explode.


Nuclear reactors that blow up are just like giant pipe bombs, or microwaving a can of soup.

The pressure builds and KABOOM. The russians were so arrogant as to think failure was impossible, and built the strongest pipes possible (such as with Chernobyl); but you see, no failure points means that when it does go off, it goes off all at once, causing the entire thing to blow up more or less at once. Simple planned failure areas (I.E. if the pressure builds, it explodes in a predesignated area, following the path of least resistance, which won't go off like a pipe bomb) and pressure release valves are generally sufficient to leak off excessive heat. It results in a loss of heat, or energy, and therefore fuel is just wasted by pumping the water into the air rather than using it to turn a steam turbine, but there's no boom. So even modern one's can't go boom, and these definitely cannot.

What happens when Thorium covers the earth a la Command and Conquer?

EDIT: Since this is your pet project, you'd probably know this. Is it possible to, once you've fused the thorium to make fusion energy, can you fission the resulting doublethorium element?

oh s**t, we're changing elements into other elements.
THIS is alchemy.

What happens if the pressure release valves fail? What if we get Fukushima'd?

[Suicidesoldier#1]

PureCocainePureCocaine

Suicidesoldier#1

PureCocainePureCocaine

Suicidesoldier#1

PureCocainePureCocaine

Suicidesoldier#1

These are chiefly through Uranium, and Thorium power.

Which global multinational syndicate are you gonna give the power to?

Because, if we're gonna have nuclear reactors running all the time inside our borders, I only trust them to the military. They've proven time and time again that they can sit on top of nuclear power sources and not blow them up.

Yeah, the Navy. Give it to the Navy. ******** a profit, pay the engineers extra.

Well, that's not a bad line of reasoning, but CANDU reactors and thorium have little to no threat of a meltdown, so hopefully that's something we can avoid! blaugh

I dunno, man. I dunno. You said "little to", and that's the part that concerns me, because it seems like something out there on the wavelengths doesn't like it when we get too ambitious. Things that have "little chance of going wrong" inevitably find a way, hell, all it takes is one bad day.

Well, CANDU reactors can't melt down, and if they ever did, they'd shut themselves down immediately. Thorium reactors also can't have a melt down, but if they ever did, Thorium isn't naturally very radioactive and it's waste is fairly clean, so it would just result in a loss of money. There's some potential for other things going wrong, but not melt downs specifically. I mean this is literally something where, Thorium is fertile, but not fissionable. It means it can produce energy, but it can't sustain a reaction itself; thus, there's no chance of a chain reaction, or explosion.

Uranium can at the right concentrations, but since CANDU reactors use less than 1.2% U-235, they also cannot sustain a chain reaction on their own. If someone filled it full of the wrong thing it could possibly melt down, but it wouldn't be catastrophic like an explosion, it would just leak out into it's own containment areas, and just more or less end up costing a lot of money to fix the problem and replace the melted stuff, since it gets REALLY hot. That's technically what a melt down is, lead melts at like 600 degrees and weakens at 400 degrees so it's pretty easy to melt it or weaken the containment fields; these things have so little pressure though that they don't explode.


Nuclear reactors that blow up are just like giant pipe bombs, or microwaving a can of soup.

The pressure builds and KABOOM. The russians were so arrogant as to think failure was impossible, and built the strongest pipes possible (such as with Chernobyl); but you see, no failure points means that when it does go off, it goes off all at once, causing the entire thing to blow up more or less at once. Simple planned failure areas (I.E. if the pressure builds, it explodes in a predesignated area, following the path of least resistance, which won't go off like a pipe bomb) and pressure release valves are generally sufficient to leak off excessive heat. It results in a loss of heat, or energy, and therefore fuel is just wasted by pumping the water into the air rather than using it to turn a steam turbine, but there's no boom. So even modern one's can't go boom, and these definitely cannot.

What happens when Thorium covers the earth a la Command and Conquer?

EDIT: Since this is your pet project, you'd probably know this. Is it possible to, once you've fused the thorium to make fusion energy, can you fission the resulting doublethorium element?

oh s**t, we're changing elements into other elements.
THIS is alchemy.

What happens if the pressure release valves fail? What if we get Fukushima'd?

Once it's taken over? Then we've won. ninja

Fukishima occurred due to a tsunami and an earthquake destroying parts of reactor, most importantly the gas engines. When they were flooded, the emergency back up power, among other things, was taken out, and they couldn't continue flooding the reactor with water to cool it down. Without the coolant, it began to overheat, and almost had a melt down, which would have leaked A LOT of radioactive waste everywhere. So instead, they bombed it and let sea water in, which wasted the reactor, but prevented a melt down. A melt down of that style wouldn't have exploded most likely, either.


If the pressure release valves fail, then the next failure point will be the pipe itself. Basically, it's not strong enough to handle more than a certain amount of pressure; if it goes boom, then it explodes, but not very powerful, it's sort of just a "pop" then it's done. Imagine a pipe that can withstand 10 PSI, and then one that could withstand 600. The 600 one has the potential to build up far more energy, but the 10 PSI one would just sort of fizzle out, rather than turn into a giant explosion. You lose your pipe, but it's a lot better than a giant explosion. So, don't use 3 feet thick reinforced steel walls for your pipes, use like, just a few inches. xp

Have planned failure points that will break the easiest so it will hopefully break there, like make those areas 2 inches or something.


Interestingly enough, Thorium is actually fission, so it releases byproducts. These are from U233, which doesn't form much plutonium, unlike U-235. It breaks down into several elements, such as radon, bismuth, and thallium!

Fusion on the other hand, is where things are fused. Fusion occurs say, in the sun, where hydrogen atoms fuse together to form helium and other elements, but primarily helium. Fusion is where things combine together, and fission is where they break apart. An easy way to remember it is "fuse" means fusion, so those fuse together. Fiss is... idk. Like fizzle, when stuff breaks apart or something. xp But anyways, the Sun has hydrogen in it, it's primarily hydrogen, and hydrogen is the smallest element in existence. It can be said that all other elements are just a combination of varying amounts of hydrogen; so when hydrogen fuses together, it produces bigger elements, in fact virtually all the known elements in the natural world. Several iron cores are produced in the core of a dying sun, so in essence, planets are created when suns die. So, the earth and all the other matter was made from the embers of a dying sun. blaugh


Something to keep in mind is that bigger elements, such as Thorium or uranium, which are super dense, tend to break down easily, but not fuse very easily. So, the big stuff tends to release energy from fission, while the small stuff tends to release energy from fusion. Anything below iron releases energy from fusion, where as anything above iron absorbs energy for fusion, and vice versa. Basically, fusing a big thing takes energy, it doesn't release it. Iron is about neutral, so, iron neither takes energy nor releases it.

There's a lot of speculation what this leads to but, since planets and meteorites are made out of them, it's pretty interesting. Lithium is only about as 1/3rd a common as it's "supposed" to be, so, some weird effects make things like iron otherwise more abundant than they should be, which is why there's so much of it.

[PureCocainePureCocaine]

Suicidesoldier#1

PureCocainePureCocaine

Suicidesoldier#1

PureCocainePureCocaine

Suicidesoldier#1

Well, that's not a bad line of reasoning, but CANDU reactors and thorium have little to no threat of a meltdown, so hopefully that's something we can avoid! blaugh

I dunno, man. I dunno. You said "little to", and that's the part that concerns me, because it seems like something out there on the wavelengths doesn't like it when we get too ambitious. Things that have "little chance of going wrong" inevitably find a way, hell, all it takes is one bad day.

Well, CANDU reactors can't melt down, and if they ever did, they'd shut themselves down immediately. Thorium reactors also can't have a melt down, but if they ever did, Thorium isn't naturally very radioactive and it's waste is fairly clean, so it would just result in a loss of money. There's some potential for other things going wrong, but not melt downs specifically. I mean this is literally something where, Thorium is fertile, but not fissionable. It means it can produce energy, but it can't sustain a reaction itself; thus, there's no chance of a chain reaction, or explosion.

Uranium can at the right concentrations, but since CANDU reactors use less than 1.2% U-235, they also cannot sustain a chain reaction on their own. If someone filled it full of the wrong thing it could possibly melt down, but it wouldn't be catastrophic like an explosion, it would just leak out into it's own containment areas, and just more or less end up costing a lot of money to fix the problem and replace the melted stuff, since it gets REALLY hot. That's technically what a melt down is, lead melts at like 600 degrees and weakens at 400 degrees so it's pretty easy to melt it or weaken the containment fields; these things have so little pressure though that they don't explode.


Nuclear reactors that blow up are just like giant pipe bombs, or microwaving a can of soup.

The pressure builds and KABOOM. The russians were so arrogant as to think failure was impossible, and built the strongest pipes possible (such as with Chernobyl); but you see, no failure points means that when it does go off, it goes off all at once, causing the entire thing to blow up more or less at once. Simple planned failure areas (I.E. if the pressure builds, it explodes in a predesignated area, following the path of least resistance, which won't go off like a pipe bomb) and pressure release valves are generally sufficient to leak off excessive heat. It results in a loss of heat, or energy, and therefore fuel is just wasted by pumping the water into the air rather than using it to turn a steam turbine, but there's no boom. So even modern one's can't go boom, and these definitely cannot.

What happens when Thorium covers the earth a la Command and Conquer?

EDIT: Since this is your pet project, you'd probably know this. Is it possible to, once you've fused the thorium to make fusion energy, can you fission the resulting doublethorium element?

oh s**t, we're changing elements into other elements.
THIS is alchemy.

What happens if the pressure release valves fail? What if we get Fukushima'd?

Once it's taken over? Then we've won. ninja

Fukishima occurred due to a tsunami and an earthquake destroying parts of reactor, most importantly the gas engines. When they were flooded, the emergency back up power, among other things, was taken out, and they couldn't continue flooding the reactor with water to cool it down. Without the coolant, it began to overheat, and almost had a melt down, which would have leaked A LOT of radioactive waste everywhere. So instead, they bombed it and let sea water in, which wasted the reactor, but prevented a melt down. A melt down of that style wouldn't have exploded most likely, either.


If the pressure release valves fail, then the next failure point will be the pipe itself. Basically, it's not strong enough to handle more than a certain amount of pressure; if it goes boom, then it explodes, but not very powerful, it's sort of just a "pop" then it's done. Imagine a pipe that can withstand 10 PSI, and then one that could withstand 600. The 600 one has the potential to build up far more energy, but the 10 PSI one would just sort of fizzle out, rather than turn into a giant explosion. You lose your pipe, but it's a lot better than a giant explosion. So, don't use 3 feet thick reinforced steel walls for your pipes, use like, just a few inches. xp

Have planned failure points that will break the easiest so it will hopefully break there, like make those areas 2 inches or something.


Interestingly enough, Thorium is actually fission, so it releases byproducts. These are from U233, which doesn't form much plutonium, unlike U-235. It breaks down into several elements, such as radon, bismuth, and thallium!

Fusion on the other hand, is where things are fused. Fusion occurs say, in the sun, where hydrogen atoms fuse together to form helium and other elements, but primarily helium. Fusion is where things combine together, and fission is where they break apart. An easy way to remember it is "fuse" means fusion, so those fuse together. Fiss is... idk. Like fizzle, when stuff breaks apart or something. xp But anyways, the Sun has hydrogen in it, it's primarily hydrogen, and hydrogen is the smallest element in existence. It can be said that all other elements are just a combination of varying amounts of hydrogen; so when hydrogen fuses together, it produces bigger elements, in fact virtually all the known elements in the natural world. Several iron cores are produced in the core of a dying sun, so in essence, planets are created when suns die. So, the earth and all the other matter was made from the embers of a dying sun. blaugh


Something to keep in mind is that bigger elements, such as Thorium or uranium, which are super dense, tend to break down easily, but not fuse very easily. So, the big stuff tends to release energy from fission, while the small stuff tends to release energy from fusion. Anything below iron releases energy from fusion, where as anything above iron absorbs energy for fusion, and vice versa. Basically, fusing a big thing takes energy, it doesn't release it. Iron is about neutral, so, iron neither takes energy nor releases it.

There's a lot of speculation what this leads to but, since planets and meteorites are made out of them, it's pretty interesting. Lithium is only about as 1/3rd a common as it's "supposed" to be, so, some weird effects make things like iron otherwise more abundant than they should be, which is why there's so much of it.

Oh, hell. You've gone mad with crystal power.


What kind of nuclear weapons are made out of thorium, I'm just curious. Also, with unlimited free power comes fixed directed energy weapons, and ******** directed energy weapons, it's hard enough fighting with lead. Advanced superweapons are a b***h. You use 'em, you look like the big p***y who couldn't win in a straight-up out-and-out; then, you change the world because everyone else has to have one now or else it isn't fair. Dishonorable victory.


You don't use 'em, now, you end up as that guy from The Last Samurai. Not Tom Cruise, but the actual last samurai dude, kept to his sword in the age of the gun and s**t.
Spoiler alert, he got whacked.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

PureCocainePureCocaine

Suicidesoldier#1

PureCocainePureCocaine

Suicidesoldier#1

PureCocainePureCocaine

Suicidesoldier#1

Well, that's not a bad line of reasoning, but CANDU reactors and thorium have little to no threat of a meltdown, so hopefully that's something we can avoid! blaugh

I dunno, man. I dunno. You said "little to", and that's the part that concerns me, because it seems like something out there on the wavelengths doesn't like it when we get too ambitious. Things that have "little chance of going wrong" inevitably find a way, hell, all it takes is one bad day.

Well, CANDU reactors can't melt down, and if they ever did, they'd shut themselves down immediately. Thorium reactors also can't have a melt down, but if they ever did, Thorium isn't naturally very radioactive and it's waste is fairly clean, so it would just result in a loss of money. There's some potential for other things going wrong, but not melt downs specifically. I mean this is literally something where, Thorium is fertile, but not fissionable. It means it can produce energy, but it can't sustain a reaction itself; thus, there's no chance of a chain reaction, or explosion.

Uranium can at the right concentrations, but since CANDU reactors use less than 1.2% U-235, they also cannot sustain a chain reaction on their own. If someone filled it full of the wrong thing it could possibly melt down, but it wouldn't be catastrophic like an explosion, it would just leak out into it's own containment areas, and just more or less end up costing a lot of money to fix the problem and replace the melted stuff, since it gets REALLY hot. That's technically what a melt down is, lead melts at like 600 degrees and weakens at 400 degrees so it's pretty easy to melt it or weaken the containment fields; these things have so little pressure though that they don't explode.


Nuclear reactors that blow up are just like giant pipe bombs, or microwaving a can of soup.

The pressure builds and KABOOM. The russians were so arrogant as to think failure was impossible, and built the strongest pipes possible (such as with Chernobyl); but you see, no failure points means that when it does go off, it goes off all at once, causing the entire thing to blow up more or less at once. Simple planned failure areas (I.E. if the pressure builds, it explodes in a predesignated area, following the path of least resistance, which won't go off like a pipe bomb) and pressure release valves are generally sufficient to leak off excessive heat. It results in a loss of heat, or energy, and therefore fuel is just wasted by pumping the water into the air rather than using it to turn a steam turbine, but there's no boom. So even modern one's can't go boom, and these definitely cannot.

What happens when Thorium covers the earth a la Command and Conquer?

EDIT: Since this is your pet project, you'd probably know this. Is it possible to, once you've fused the thorium to make fusion energy, can you fission the resulting doublethorium element?

oh s**t, we're changing elements into other elements.
THIS is alchemy.

What happens if the pressure release valves fail? What if we get Fukushima'd?

Once it's taken over? Then we've won. ninja

Fukishima occurred due to a tsunami and an earthquake destroying parts of reactor, most importantly the gas engines. When they were flooded, the emergency back up power, among other things, was taken out, and they couldn't continue flooding the reactor with water to cool it down. Without the coolant, it began to overheat, and almost had a melt down, which would have leaked A LOT of radioactive waste everywhere. So instead, they bombed it and let sea water in, which wasted the reactor, but prevented a melt down. A melt down of that style wouldn't have exploded most likely, either.


If the pressure release valves fail, then the next failure point will be the pipe itself. Basically, it's not strong enough to handle more than a certain amount of pressure; if it goes boom, then it explodes, but not very powerful, it's sort of just a "pop" then it's done. Imagine a pipe that can withstand 10 PSI, and then one that could withstand 600. The 600 one has the potential to build up far more energy, but the 10 PSI one would just sort of fizzle out, rather than turn into a giant explosion. You lose your pipe, but it's a lot better than a giant explosion. So, don't use 3 feet thick reinforced steel walls for your pipes, use like, just a few inches. xp

Have planned failure points that will break the easiest so it will hopefully break there, like make those areas 2 inches or something.


Interestingly enough, Thorium is actually fission, so it releases byproducts. These are from U233, which doesn't form much plutonium, unlike U-235. It breaks down into several elements, such as radon, bismuth, and thallium!

Fusion on the other hand, is where things are fused. Fusion occurs say, in the sun, where hydrogen atoms fuse together to form helium and other elements, but primarily helium. Fusion is where things combine together, and fission is where they break apart. An easy way to remember it is "fuse" means fusion, so those fuse together. Fiss is... idk. Like fizzle, when stuff breaks apart or something. xp But anyways, the Sun has hydrogen in it, it's primarily hydrogen, and hydrogen is the smallest element in existence. It can be said that all other elements are just a combination of varying amounts of hydrogen; so when hydrogen fuses together, it produces bigger elements, in fact virtually all the known elements in the natural world. Several iron cores are produced in the core of a dying sun, so in essence, planets are created when suns die. So, the earth and all the other matter was made from the embers of a dying sun. blaugh


Something to keep in mind is that bigger elements, such as Thorium or uranium, which are super dense, tend to break down easily, but not fuse very easily. So, the big stuff tends to release energy from fission, while the small stuff tends to release energy from fusion. Anything below iron releases energy from fusion, where as anything above iron absorbs energy for fusion, and vice versa. Basically, fusing a big thing takes energy, it doesn't release it. Iron is about neutral, so, iron neither takes energy nor releases it.

There's a lot of speculation what this leads to but, since planets and meteorites are made out of them, it's pretty interesting. Lithium is only about as 1/3rd a common as it's "supposed" to be, so, some weird effects make things like iron otherwise more abundant than they should be, which is why there's so much of it.

Oh, hell. You've gone mad with crystal power.


What kind of nuclear weapons are made out of thorium, I'm just curious. Also, with unlimited free power comes fixed directed energy weapons, and ******** directed energy weapons, it's hard enough fighting with lead. Advanced superweapons are a b***h. You use 'em, you look like the big p***y who couldn't win in a straight-up out-and-out; then, you change the world because everyone else has to have one now or else it isn't fair. Dishonorable victory.


You don't use 'em, now, you end up as that guy from The Last Samurai. Not Tom Cruise, but the actual last samurai dude, kept to his sword in the age of the gun and s**t.
Spoiler alert, he got whacked.

You can't actually make a weapon out of Thorium, it's impossible. No nuclear chain reaction.

In terms of a power source it needs to use a HUGE facility, so it can't be tiny like a submarine power source, and thus isn't very compact. My opinion is for the accelerator driven method, which takes miles of super magnets, and thus isn't very portable, either. It can never go critical, so it can't go boom.

Uranium would be better for portable weapons, but a sort of super battery may be a graphene super capacitor, or some way to use electron avalanche or something to produce a lot of power. Uranium has like, 1.5 million times the energy of oil, and the strongest chemical reaction is hydrogen, which only has 3 times the energy of oil when burned in the air. You can maybe have say a, 60-80% efficient hydrogen fuel cell, compared to a 20-26% fuel efficient car, and get like 8-12 times the power at best, but that's asking for a lot, and hydrogen just doesn't store very well. Graphene/buckypaper/carobn fiber storage tanks, maybe. Firefighters use carbon fiber over aluminum, since it's an 8 pound canister at 4500 PSI instead of a 32 pound one at 3000. Maybe that could carry the hydrogen. But there's a HUGE gap between chemical energy and nuclear.


What would be neat is something like, 20,000 times more powerful than gasoline, but non-nuclear, like a super crystal or something. Maybe something that stores an enormous amount of electrons in it, like in a vacuum, but they aren't stored on an atom, like in chemical energy. Between two sheets of material. Maybe super dense like a graphene capacitor; maybe some type of crystal, idk.

With an extremely complex structure. But, it really wouldn't be a fuel source, just a battery. And if it did explode, it would just produce a huge spark. Directed energy weapons kind of aren't very useful, since electricity travels the path of least resistance, and doesn't really travel in a straight line ,but railguns, or railguns designed to fire plasma could be interesting.

[Avgvsto]

I didn't read this yet but are there any that we get to do space mining for? Cause I really want to do that.