MSRE

>which is by and large the most expensive part of a new PWR plant.

most expensive part is the actual reactor vessel itself, which is all extremely high quality expensive metal alloys with more quality control on it than anything else ever in human history.

They had one at ORNL. Doesn't seem like magic since they did it >40 years ago.

The primary cost is still concrete, and construction costs on the dome. The vessel might also be cheaper, without having to hold much in the way of pressure, but the temp and corrosion concerns would both be insane for molten salt.

I was told by a graduate in nuclear physics that in order to reach economically feasible efficiency a thorium reactor would be no more stable than a conventional one.
He tried to explain the technicalities but it was beyond me.
Basically the principle is sound on paper only.
That doesn't mean it's not an interesting alternative, but it's no silver bullet.

Wonder what he meant by stable.

A lot of folks end up looking at fast molten or solid reactors, and end up dismissing thorium since in those cases doesn't make much sense. It really only shines as thermal and molten.

I've never heard an argument that it wouldn't be economically feasible due to some sort of instability. Then again, criticality won't happen if things are stable.

>solar storm
>all electronics break
>societal collapse
>people go back to living in nature
>muh epic nuclear reactor eventually leaks from lack of maintenance
>humanity is fucked
checkmate, nuclear autists.

>mfw retards really still trust humans to run nuclear reactors

>Build one 10 km underground
>noone will ever care

It solves one issue.
Dispersion under critical malfunction.

Yeah nuclear produces insane amounts of power and is clean but nobody likes it and you just can't convince an entire population to suddenly stop being ignorant and not fear them anymore. And I would say that some of their fears are grounded, because humans have demonstrated that they're fucking irresponsible retards with maintaining plants, even within the last few years. People love renewable energy though, it's really where we should focus our resources. Also consider that it's a lot more difficult (read: impossible) to monopolize an energy source literally all around us all the time than it is to monopolize nuclear.

You forget...Lots of people played fallout 3... Can we use videogames to aid the propaganda? The people seem to have no problem blasting photons at their eyes these days...what is a little gamma radiation?
:3

Oh and don't forget we can bring up how the sun is infinitely more carcinogenic than living near a nuclear power plant... Do we really want to use the leading cause of skin cancer as an ENERGY source?

In this case the reactor would turn into a salt block, and your premise is that humanity was already fucked. Not even an argument.

I trust the US Navy to run reactors all day every day for decades using a much less safe technology. You'd be stupid if you didn't

Sure, the political realities are very serious and it's easy to get money for one vs. the other, regardless so how much better the other is. However, solar isn't very good most places, and making it into base load power is currently a pipe dream if we want it to compete with coal and gas.

Nice, both of these might help for the unwashed masses, though Fallout could scare off the nongamers.

>humans
>posts a pic from the Soviet Bloc

It is well established that commies are not human

No because the green fags are batshit malthusians that hate God, humanity, technology, themselves and their mothers too. And the whole "green energy" is just a facade and public image marketing. If someone made meme reactor that ran on shitposts they'll be against that because it implies growth - both in people and machinery that consume said energy.

OP here. I agree. Was hoping someone could change my mind but as an ideology environmentalism doesn't seem to be getting any better and is poison for MSRE even if it is a silver bullet as some claim.

I was hoping they'd pick up on the differences of the MSRE to the point where the average enviro wouldn't cry loud enough to prevent the average person from seeing the benefits of nuclear power.

There have been one or two public rabid enviros that have gone pro-nuclear, from logic; They're probably outcasts now. Malthusian is right.

>Can a molten thorium reactor avoid the pointless, brainless, stupid knee-jerk anti-nuclear reactions of hardcore enviros, popsci writers, and unwashed masses of the world?
No.

>Or do we have to wait for fusion?
No.

We need to convince the Greens that their fear are unfounded and/or manageable, and we need to convince them that their solar and wind dreams are pipe-dreams.

>it's still frighteningly expensive to build
No.
euanmearns.com/nuclear-capital-costs-three-mile-island-and-chernobyl/
Nuclear is expensive because society has chosen to make it needlessly expensive through government regulations.

> and it still causes alarming environmental disasters if horribly mismanaged.
Chernobyl killed like 300 people. That's absolutely nothing. People have been living in the so-called exclusion zone since the accident.
pri.org/stories/2016-04-26/30-years-after-chernobyl-these-ukrainian-babushkas-are-still-living-their-toxic
The radiation levels in Fukushima are, AFAICT, around 10 mSv / year or less right now, and that's entirely safe for human habitation.

The worst dam accident killed a hundred thousand plus and displaced ten million plus.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banqiao_Dam

Perspective is needed.

This x1000

More importantly it's that same government regulation that is stifling innovation and entrepreneurship in nuclear energy. It frustrates me so much that i almost can't have civil discourse with people who are vehemently against this IRL.

>We don't need regulations on nuclear plants!!!!

>oh, but ignore weak regulation accidents like Chernobyl and Fukushima.. and ignore the US has avoided several incidents due to regulation and planning

>it's the ebil gubermet

>it's not the coal lobby at all!

Who do you think they are lobbying to?

Donald "more coal" Trump and similar people in the past

> steam is so 1900
no, this is why humanity won't survive

Im not saying it isnt. I'm also not implying the gubment is malicious, or even pernicious by design - it's doing what the "people want". The problem is the people are too fucking stupid to handle this decision lmao.

If you had that kind of access to 10 km depths, you wouldn't need nuclear, you could just burn the hydrogen that's down there.

There's enough to burn all the oxygen out of the atmosphere, it wouldn't run out any time soon.

>it's doing what the "people want"
no it isn't

what were they lobyteing before le drumpf ruined the world

Heh, i chuckled hard when i watched the scared look on the face of some old-time miner who voted Trump.
Poor fucker had developed coal-lung or whatever, and the only thing keeping him alive were oxygen bottles in a small cart. That he only could afford due to ACA.

in phys1110 i asked my prof how fusion would make steam and he looked confused. i explained myself and he looked amused. he was a cambridge educated nuclear physicist and explained steam wont be used when there are so many better methods.

consider the fact that the energy is contained in a charged, vibrating plasma. you can use electromagnetism to extract the energy.

Man..that people cry over a bit of lead on solar panels...I'm sorry to tell you, but these fags will bitch a lot louder for this.

No. It is unfortunately. That's why people get re-elected. They don't make decisions that make environmental sense, or economic sense,m - they make decisions that make political sense.

"Politics" basically means, pertaining to the people of the state. We also happen to have a representative democracy, a republic. In a republic, representatives are elected based on the decisions they make or promise to make. Those decisions do NOT require making sense in practical application terms. They only require that the majority of people like the idea. And to put I bluntly, most people will support things that don't make sense in the big picture if they see themselves benefiting from it. Or, will oppose things that do, if they see themselves being harmed by it.

It's comical and sad. The culture war in America has the potential to bring our downfall, in my opinion. Can't say if it will or won't, but i believe it has all the right ingredients.

Interesting, but my gut tells me the first reactors will still drive heat engines. Perfect the fusion, then move on to alternative energy extraction methods.

There will still be a heat engine in fusion reactors. As the reactor will need cooling. So why let free energy go to waste?

That's an additional good point. Let's say [magic thermoelectric magnet box] hits 50% efficiency - there's still going to be an additional 10-20% efficiency to be grabbed by a steam rankine or SC CO2 Brayton cycle. More if you want to take the reject heat from that process towards combined heat and power