Energy Crisis Solution?

[Anonymous No.4961890]

I just checked out a YT video which was about a design for nuclear reactors called WAMSR. I won't bother detailing it since you can just watch the video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAFWeIp8JT0&feature=relmfu

My question is if this is so fucking great, why isn't it a thing yet? I realize the date that this video was posted, but this is the type of discovery that should be the table talk of homes around the world. What's the caveat?

I've read various blogs/comment sections trying to figure this out, and I can't seem to find anything beyond "these kids think they got it HUHEH" or some utterance about the cost efficiency of burying this stuff and then not following up with anything else.

Thoughts?

[Anonymous No.4961913]

bump

[Anonymous No.4961921]

The most obvious answer is the same as why OTHER obviously superior alternative energy sources have never gotten a foothold beyond token acknowledgement of their existence - the oil companies actively lobby against their implementation because they don't want to lose hold on their monopoly.

[Anonymous No.4961924]

It's probably expensive as all fuck.
We're in a global depression.
Do your part and help to make nuclear reactors cheaper.

[Anonymous No.4961933]

>>4961921
I'm all for conspiracy theories and what not, but this is the type of discovery that interest players bigger than oil companies; namely countries.

Someone, whether it be the U.S, China, Russia, France, India, or South Korea (not to mention existing nuclear firms), will want to do this, and once the cats out of the bag, that's it.

This discovery is such that it should be verifiable one way or the other, and they shouldn't have any problem proving their claim to these "big players". Anyone else?

[Anonymous No.4961943]

>>4961924
It probably is a more expensive setup to make, but is it expensive enough to outweigh being able to use 98% of the remaining energy in nuclear waste? That's such a huge margin, not to mention the subsidies that would come for using this shit.

[Anonymous No.4961950]

>>4961943
>subsidies
but see
>We're in a global depression.

[Anonymous No.4961956]

>>4961950
"and not to mention...". What about my other point, though? That's the one I care about being disproved/iterated on.

[Anonymous No.4961985]

Oil companies are lobbying right now to make sure this question remains unanswered. ykaensosi

[Anonymous No.4962003]

Bump for interest.

[Anonymous No.4962009]

Hint OP: China isn't stupid. They aren't making "ghost" cities for a reason. They aren't going to be empty forever. Maybe not this generation, but it will happen.
You're going to need lots of clean energy for all that population...

[Anonymous No.4962023]

>>4962009
I don't think he was implying they're stupid, just the opposite. Also, if the claims are true, then WAMSER would not only be safe, but would be environmentally beneficial.

[Anonymous No.4962030]

OP here: is there no one on /sci/ tonight who's willing to submit some actual fucking science in this thread on why or why not this method is viable/true to it's claims (which would also serve as a better answer than the one's we've received as to why this isn't widely adopted yet).

[Anonymous No.4962057]

>>4962030
The reason it isn't widely adopted is because they are still figuring it all out.

[Anonymous No.4962074]

Well, I'm gonna peace out for the night -- no angst towards you guys. I just guess subjective threads about the existence of love and whether lesbians should be parents are more interesting than... you know... science.

[Anonymous No.4962087]

I just finished watching the video and I find this in some ways better than LFTR. The two technologies could work together very well.
Its sad that the western world has such a bad attitude about nuclear energy.

[Anonymous No.4962091]

Too bad nuclear energy is a bad word these days. What happened?

[Anonymous No.4962093]

>>4962087
This is the thing that I've always wondered about - WHY are people against nuclear power?

I mean, FFS, Germany turned off 16 of their nuclear power plants because some 40 years old old-type plant malfunctioned because of a fucking earthquake/tsunami (both of which do not happen in Germany, and most of their plants are of a different type anyways).


Nuclear energy is the single best option that is available to humans at the moment (and safest to boot - there is no risk of another Chernobyl as the tech is far more mature), and the average Joe seems to vehemently oppose it.

WTF?

[Anonymous No.4962107]

>>4962093
Why? Mostly fear and ignorance, on an almost dogmatic level. I've found few things that stir up so much flame than nuclear power. People apparently think that you can power a country on breeze and sunshine.

[Anonymous No.4962112]

>>4962107
"Sunshine" will be there in a decade or 2. I'm with OP, why hasn't this received more attention? It's perfect for a news story.

[Anonymous No.4962118]

>open video
>nothing but general nuclear power plant information that everyone and their mother already knows
>don't even see OP's device anywhere in the video thumbnails
>20min video, OP too much of a lazy piece of shit to say exactly where in the video the relevant portion is.

Why should I do all the work filtering out the useless junk in the video just to find what you're talking about.
Screw you OP.

[Anonymous No.4962119]

>>4962118
I'm not OP but its near the end of the video. It's a molten salt reactor that burns nuclear waste.

[Anonymous No.4962161]

bump

[Anonymous No.4962196]

Its a variant of the molten salt reactor (like LFTR) tailored to burn current nuclear waste. Pretty promising tech (as all MSRs).

[Anonymous No.4962201]

>>4961890
No thorium ? OP, i'm am disappointed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lG1YjDdI_c8..

[Anonymous No.4962259]

>>4962201

FUCK OFF THIS THREAD ISN'T ABOUT YOUR STUPID BULLSHIT

STAY ON TOPIC

[Anonymous No.4962268]

Because OP is a douchebag I googled WAMSR and will dump a few links.

http://transatomicpower.com/ - Official website

http://thegwpf.org/energy-news/5371-wamsr-too-good-to-be-true.html - Some blog post that other blogs like to link to apparently.

[Anonymous No.4963395]

>>4962057
I don't think the point of discussion was why we don't have these yet (he acknowledged the very recent date that the video was posted), but about why there isn't more media coverage; this is such a huge discovery if true, and the media usually love blowing things completely out of proportion -- this is ripe for that.

Maybe this will be like the hybrid fusion/fission reactors from 2 years ago which have been completely ignored; they too were supposed to consume waste fuel. /shrug

My question is "are they actually still figuring this out?". It didn't sound like that was the case (otherwise why announce it prematurely; drumming up hype? what hype?), they just need to be in talks with companies/countries about implementation; again, where's the publicity?

[Anonymous No.4963433]

Advanced CANDU reactors (Gen III+ and IV):
- Can use spent fuel from LWR (a large proportion of fuel for nuclear energy in Canada is procured by buying spent fuel from France for next to nothing)
- Can use nuclear weapons material (Canada is overseeing the destruction of a number of American and Russian nuclear weapons by destroying the nuclear material in CANDU reactors)
- Can use natural uranium, without any enrichment
- Can use thorium
- Inherent and passive safety; flawless safety record
- Low proliferation risk (due to fuel types, and other safeguards)

[Anonymous No.4963440]

http://atomicinsights.com/2011/11/tedx-new-england-nuclear-entrepreneurs-aiming-to-use-waste-for-fue
l.html

There are some interesting points raised in the comment section here, especially about competition between WAMSR and already existing LWR's.

[Anonymous No.4963464]

>>4963395 My question is "are they actually still figuring this out?". It didn't sound like that was the case (otherwise why announce it prematurely; drumming up hype? what hype?), they just need to be in talks with companies/countries about implementation; again, where's the publicity?

They have proposed an idea that according to known physical laws has a greenlight to being possible. They are able to give some approximate figures for some parameters but this is still very early in the development process.

A product design requirement list needs compiled, studied, estimated and approved.

Thousands of parts need designed, manufactured, tested, redesigned, approved, assembled, tested as assembly, disassembled, redesigned, assembled, disassembled, approved, remanufactured, tested, approved.

Land needs sourced and vetted, manufacturers need sourced and vetted, local/national/international law and environmental/structural/construction/manufacturing/health and safety regulations need followed to the letter.

[Anonymous No.4963482]

>>4963464
I appreciate the insight into the process -- it brings into perspective the timescale of things -- but I actually already acknowledged what you said; the core concept is there, it's just about implementation.

My point/question pertains to them being in talks about the design; isn't there usually loads of media coverage on these things (and shouldn't there especially be media coverage for this since the claims are so grand)?

I understand using caution when things that sound too good to be true, but the media throws caution to the wind (in general). It just baffles me.

[Anonymous No.4963891]

>>4962201
I watched some of the video and it's interesting. Why is this person against it >>4962259

Is there something I'm missing?

[Anonymous No.4963919]

>>4961933
>government of any country
>going against what big oil companies want

[Anonymous No.4963923]

>>4962091
Liberals, hippie fags and oil companies.

[Anonymous No.4964107]

OP here. I thought this thread would be dead, but I'm glad to see it's not.

>>4963891
Because it's loosely related but not actually on topic? No need to go diluting a thread.

>>4963919
I can understand this when it comes to a new technology that is only marginally better, but WAMSR (if it's not just smoke being blown) is such that whoever does it will be at a huge advantage, including the oil companies. It's like pandora's box; once opened, it can't be closed.