/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.2894551]

Why the hell don't we use thorium reactors yet?

[Krakengineer !!5XY+x7grkpt No.2894564]

There's a lot more thorium than uranium on Earth, but its not in concentrated deposits, so its hard to extract large quantities.

Also you don't get plutonium from the thorium cycle, and at the time reactors were being researched and constructed governments wanted plutonium for nuclear weapons.

[pascal !n5Z3VuZapw No.2894588]

>>2894564
But don't breeder reactors create more full than they use? so only the small initial amount of thorium is needed.

[снайпер No.2894593]

Because the vast majority of our research into nuclear reactor designs was for reactors that could produce weapons grade isotopes for use in nukes.

They weren't concerned with clean and efficient energy production, they were concerned with making a reactor that can quickly and efficiently create nuclear bombs.

We'll have to build some experimental/prototype thorium reactors before we can get to actually go full out with them. So basically even if we fund those and start today, we're still years, probably decades, away from ubiquitous thorium reactors.

Also, for the above portion of your image - it neglects to show that fuel reprocessing can be used to reduce the amount of "nuclear waste" produced.