TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Thorium nuclear reactor trial begins in Norway

419 点作者 sasoon将近 12 年前

18 条评论

Tuna-Fish将近 12 年前
&gt; While the safety of nuclear power plants is hotly contested, no one is arguing the nastiness of plutonium.<p>Except everyone who knows anything about it. Plutonium is a hot topic because it&#x27;s what you need to build a nuke, but the public perception that it is a significant as nuclear waste is simply completely misguided.<p>Because it&#x27;s half-life is so long, it&#x27;s only mildly radioactive. It&#x27;s an alpha emitter, so plutonium not in your body is not a risk to you. It oxidizes easily, and it&#x27;s oxides are heavy and non-soluble, so when it is released to the environment, it just tends to fall down and stay there. There is negligible biological uptake through eating, and while there is some uptake through breathing, plutonium does not tend to stay airborne.<p>Various people have denounced environmental plutonium as something capable of killing billions. The toxicity of plutonium in humans is not known, simply because not enough people have died of it. There is no-one in the world who has died of plutonium exposure who did not have it injected into his body (and that&#x27;s a long and horrible story), and there were a lot of people who worked coated in plutonium dust for a long time. Of the people who were injected with plutonium, most died of other causes. Suffice to say, plutonium is sufficiently non-radioactive that it&#x27;s <i>chemical toxicity</i> is considered significant in it&#x27;s lethality. Or, in other words, it&#x27;s fine to consider toxicity of environmental plutonium as you would consider lead or other heavy metals.<p>To put it short, plutonium being toxic is simply not a concern as far as nuclear waste is concerned. <i>If all the plutonium produced by civilian nuclear power was pulverized and spread in populated areas, it would not make nuclear reactors as dangerous to people as wind power.</i> (Somewhat ironically, because of the thorium that is released into the environment while separating the REE for the magnets.) Taking all the plutonium produced in a plant and dumping it in one spot doesn&#x27;t make that spot as dangerous as the ground near a typical fuel station that was in use for the period leaded gas was used.<p>Nuclear waste is really bad, but that&#x27;s because of <i>short-lived</i> isotopes, which decay more often, and thus are more radioactive, and <i>light</i> radioactive materials, which are often soluble in water, have high biological uptake, and can stay in the atmosphere.<p>Plutonium needs to be tracked really closely, but that is not because it&#x27;s toxic, it&#x27;s because it can be used to make a bomb.<p>The more you know.
评论 #5996662 未加载
评论 #5996725 未加载
评论 #5997300 未加载
评论 #5996557 未加载
评论 #6000066 未加载
评论 #5997100 未加载
评论 #5997885 未加载
评论 #5998533 未加载
apendleton将近 12 年前
I&#x27;m super-interested in thorium reactor research, but this author seems to lack even a cursory understanding of the issues at play. This reactor differs from what lots of thorium advocates are aiming for because it&#x27;s a solid-fueled, high-pressure, water-cooled reactor, instead of the proposed LFTR designs, which involve a reaction taking place in a liquid at very high temperature, but at atmospheric pressure, and thus have a different set of tradeoffs as far as efficiency, safety, proliferation resistance, etc.<p>This article discusses none of that, and instead suggests that this reactor is sub-optimal because it&#x27;s not a cold fusion reactor -- what? Thorium atoms are big and somewhat-unstable, which is what you want for fission. For fusion, you want little atoms you can ram together to make slightly-bigger little atoms. They&#x27;re totally separate.
评论 #5996659 未加载
评论 #5996352 未加载
_delirium将近 12 年前
Considering Norway is already a net exporter of both oil and hydroelectric power, if they add cutting-edge nuclear to the portfolio, they will really be all-around energy kingpins!<p>Incidentally, this is the project site, which the article irritatingly doesn&#x27;t bother to link: <a href="http://www.thorenergy.no/en.aspx" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.thorenergy.no&#x2F;en.aspx</a>
评论 #5997763 未加载
merraksh将近 12 年前
<i>(And yes, just in case you were wondering, the element thorium really is named after Thor, the Norse god of thunder. And yes, Norse mythology originated from Norway, where Thor Energy is based. Coincidence, I think not!)</i><p>The first sample of Thorium was found in Norway:<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium#History" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Thorium#History</a><p><i>Morten Thrane Esmark found a black mineral on Løvøya island, Norway and gave a sample to his father Jens Esmark, a noted mineralogist. The elder Esmark was not able to identify it and sent a sample to Swedish chemist Jöns Jakob Berzelius for examination in 1828. Berzelius determined that it contained a new element, which he named thorium after Thor, the Norse god of thunder.[17] He published his findings in 1829.[50][51][52]</i><p>The fact that Thor Energy is Norwegian might just be due to the country being at the same time very wealthy and environment-minded. The Norwegian reserves of thorium are far smaller than those of other countries.
评论 #5996618 未加载
danmaz74将近 12 年前
&quot;but not in the sense that most people think of when they hear the word thorium [...] they haven’t created a cold fusion thorium reactor&quot;<p>What is this supposed to mean? Who ever talked about cold fusion thorium reactor? Was the author thinking about toroidal fields in Tokamak (which is very hot fusion)??
评论 #5996438 未加载
评论 #5996475 未加载
iSnow将近 12 年前
Well, Germany got burned by Thorium reactors back in the 80s: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/THTR-300" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;THTR-300</a><p>Let&#x27;s see if this performs any better.
评论 #5997703 未加载
评论 #5996801 未加载
scrumper将近 12 年前
This is interesting and encouraging stuff. I&#x27;m a big believer in fission power as our best option for a clean source of huge amounts of electricity (which we&#x27;ll only need more of as electric cars start to become popular).<p>My main reason for commenting is to congratulate Thor Energy on coming up with a trebly relevant name.
评论 #5996737 未加载
tehabe将近 12 年前
&quot;[Thorium reactor] could provide cleaner, safer, almost-waste-free energy&quot; Always when somebody claims this, it almost never works that way.
评论 #5996277 未加载
评论 #5996205 未加载
oal将近 12 年前
Here are some slides containing more details about the Norwegian thorium initiative and Thor Energy: <a href="http://www.statkraft.no/Images/Thorium%20power%20abundant%20climate_tcm10-1682.pdf" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.statkraft.no&#x2F;Images&#x2F;Thorium%20power%20abundant%20...</a>
jshen将近 12 年前
How long can we continue to believe our energy needs can rise at the level we&#x27;ve become accustomed too?<p>This is scary: <a href="http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/07/galactic-scale-energy/" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;physics.ucsd.edu&#x2F;do-the-math&#x2F;2011&#x2F;07&#x2F;galactic-scale-e...</a>
评论 #5996510 未加载
评论 #5996591 未加载
评论 #5996512 未加载
评论 #5996461 未加载
ommunist将近 12 年前
This may be the beginning of new era. Thorium is easy to get for developed nations in the 3rd world.
评论 #5997091 未加载
btilly将近 12 年前
The &quot;not prone to nuclear weapons proliferation&quot; bit is critical, and unfortunately wrong. As <a href="http://phys.org/news/2012-12-thorium-proliferation-nuclear-wonder-fuel.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;phys.org&#x2F;news&#x2F;2012-12-thorium-proliferation-nuclear-w...</a> points out, thorium produces protactinium-233 which can be chemically separated out. In around a month that turns into uranium-233 at sufficient purity to make nuclear bombs.<p>This process is much easier to do in secret than the centrifuges that are required to separate isotopes of uranium. Thus thorium is worse for proliferation, not better.
评论 #5999159 未加载
kmfrk将近 12 年前
Interesting contrast to the German reaction to Fukushima.
gweinberg将近 12 年前
<i>At a test site in Norway, Thor Energy has successfully created a thorium nuclear reactor — but not in the sense that most people think of when they hear the word thorium. The Norwegians haven’t solved the energy crisis and global warming in one fell swoop — they haven’t created a cold fusion thorium reactor.</i><p>Who the hell thinks &quot;cold fusion&quot; when they hear thorium?
Expez将近 12 年前
The key thing here is that these pellets are designed to work with existing reactors. If you want to start using thorium it is a very hard sell (given the popularity of nuclear power atm) to build new reactors&#x2F;plants, but changing the fuel in existing plants to something that can be said to be &#x27;cleaner&#x27; or &#x27;safer&#x27; might be doable.
andor将近 12 年前
<i>The rod in the middle of the picture contains thorium-MOX pellets, and is being inserted into the reactor (which is underground).</i><p>So these guys are standing right next to a fuel rod radioactive enough to start a nuclear chain reaction? [0] Can anybody elaborate on how dangerous this is?<p>[0] only if close to lots of other fuel rods, I guess...
评论 #5998098 未加载
jackfoxy将近 12 年前
Wait a minute...plutonium is a waste product? I thought the supply of plutonium (that is not used in weapons) was running so low there would not be enough to fuel deep space missions.
评论 #5997664 未加载
评论 #5997718 未加载
Ashuu将近 12 年前
I hope such technology comees to India soon!
评论 #5996496 未加载