Thorium: the future of nuclear power?

Oil, gas, coal, nuclear (PWR, EPR, hot fusion, ITER), gas and coal thermal power plants, cogeneration, tri-generation. Peakoil, depletion, economics, technologies and geopolitical strategies. Prices, pollution, economic and social costs ...
User avatar
GuyGadebois
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6532
Registration: 24/07/19, 17:58
Location: 04
x 982

Re: Thorium: the future of nuclear power?




by GuyGadebois » 26/07/19, 21:42

sicetaitsimple wrote:
GuyGadebois wrote:
sicetaitsimple wrote:At bardal,

you are wrong, because a report, a video of Arte or in less intellectual of Cash investigation, it is the true truth, which allows some to have the truth, since they are sourced there.

You're delaying, my Good ... My positions date back to the 70s when "The Savage" and "The Open Mouth" already predicted the present disaster. Keep your easy irony and your ignorance for your uneducated friends with whom you can drink heavy water (not Lourdes water, eh ...).


Yes they delay, indeed!

Except that they were already topical.
0 x
“It is better to mobilize your intelligence on bullshit than to mobilize your bullshit on intelligent things. (J.Rouxel)
"By definition the cause is the product of the effect". (Tryphion)
"360 / 000 / 0,5 is 100 million and not 72 million" (AVC)
sicetaitsimple
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9772
Registration: 31/10/16, 18:51
Location: Lower Normandy
x 2638

Re: Thorium: the future of nuclear power?




by sicetaitsimple » 26/07/19, 21:49

sicetaitsimple wrote:
GuyGadebois wrote:
sicetaitsimple wrote:At bardal,

you are wrong, because a report, a video of Arte or in less intellectual of Cash investigation, it is the true truth, which allows some to have the truth, since they are sourced there.

You're delaying, my Good ... My positions date back to the 70s when "The Savage" and "The Open Mouth" already predicted the present disaster. Keep your easy irony and your ignorance for your uneducated friends with whom you can drink heavy water (not Lourdes water, eh ...).


Yes they delay, indeed!


But as you wrote 2 days ago, hope is allowed, because:

"The real solution for the energy transition is biogas: it is produced from our organic waste (an infinite renewable resource: everyone eats, peels and defecates). It would allow producing countries to free themselves from any external dependence ...... "

Just eat a lot of vegetables and have a good intestinal transit, it's still not complicated.
0 x
User avatar
GuyGadebois
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6532
Registration: 24/07/19, 17:58
Location: 04
x 982

Re: Thorium: the future of nuclear power?




by GuyGadebois » 26/07/19, 21:53

sicetaitsimple wrote:
sicetaitsimple wrote:
GuyGadebois wrote:You're delaying, my Good ... My positions date back to the 70s when "The Savage" and "The Open Mouth" already predicted the present disaster. Keep your easy irony and your ignorance for your uneducated friends with whom you can drink heavy water (not Lourdes water, eh ...).


Yes they delay, indeed!


But as you wrote 2 days ago, hope is allowed, because:

"The real solution for the energy transition is biogas: it is produced from our organic waste (an infinite renewable resource: everyone eats, peels and defecates). It would allow producing countries to free themselves from any external dependence ...... "

Just eat a lot of vegetables and have a good intestinal transit, it's still not complicated.

That's good, continue your taunts, it's quite reassuring ... Well, unless we really think about the future of our kids. But maybe you just have dust mites?
0 x
“It is better to mobilize your intelligence on bullshit than to mobilize your bullshit on intelligent things. (J.Rouxel)
"By definition the cause is the product of the effect". (Tryphion)
"360 / 000 / 0,5 is 100 million and not 72 million" (AVC)
Bardal
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 509
Registration: 01/07/16, 10:41
Location: 56 and 45
x 198

Re: Thorium: the future of nuclear power?




by Bardal » 26/07/19, 21:56

GuyGadebois wrote:EDF has been public for decades, the military choice of this type of power plant that was then imposed on civilians is A FACT, not a fiction. EPR (MDR) does not work really and we don't care about having more plutonium than we already have, seeing that just with our fleet of bombs we can blow up the planet several times. As for your comparisons, you are the only one to make them, I only talked about the real cost of the nuclear KW which is already more expensive than wind and which will become pharaonic.
Ps: In terms of informing me, I've been doing it for 40 years.


Well ... In fact, you have nothing to answer ... I suspected a little ... But it feels good sometimes to have demonstrated the evidence ...
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15992
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5188

Re: Thorium: the future of nuclear power?




by Remundo » 26/07/19, 22:04

Hello Guy,

it is necessary to know that wherever Bardal and Sicétaitsimple pass, they make the union to ridicule their interlocutors with an unfeigned morgue.

therefore the debate is of very poor quality.

They are also 2 convinced nuclear scientists ... they probably do not see the facts well, but they are sure that their opponents are ignoramuses and in error ...

If not to return to the subject,

molten salt reactors are a technique to consider, but it remains fission with a lot of radioactive waste, even if less than the PWR sector.

maybe the fast neutron version
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%A9ac ... ns_rapides

would be interesting to convert long-lived waste into short-lived waste by transmutation.

the breeder side is fascinating, but in my opinion, we should not focus energy policy on nuclear (it gives too much waste, high risks, and costs higher than renewable energies), we must rather use sparingly and nuclear strategy to support the energy transition.

France is in a headlong rush, it has invested too much to slow down and continues to invest by burying itself in the atom. We can see it with the EPR, but it is on a much larger scale, that of its electric mix, of the order of 60 GW.
0 x
Image
sicetaitsimple
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9772
Registration: 31/10/16, 18:51
Location: Lower Normandy
x 2638

Re: Thorium: the future of nuclear power?




by sicetaitsimple » 26/07/19, 22:05

GuyGadebois wrote:
sicetaitsimple wrote:
sicetaitsimple wrote:
Yes they delay, indeed!


But as you wrote 2 days ago, hope is allowed, because:

"The real solution for the energy transition is biogas: it is produced from our organic waste (an infinite renewable resource: everyone eats, peels and defecates). It would allow producing countries to free themselves from any external dependence ...... "

Just eat a lot of vegetables and have a good intestinal transit, it's still not complicated.

That's good, continue your taunts, it's quite reassuring ... Well, unless we really think about the future of our kids. But maybe you just have dust mites?


These are not taunts, it's just a copy of your first post 2 days ago, with a purely technical supplement.

As for ""My positions go back to the 70s when" The wild "and" The open mouth "already predicted the present disaster. ", it turns out that for about 40 years (a little less), nuclear power has provided about 75% of French electricity production. If there is a" present disaster? ", which remains to be described, it perhaps the past should not be ignored ....
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15992
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5188

Re: Thorium: the future of nuclear power?




by Remundo » 26/07/19, 22:06

and if the Blayais had farted in Bordeaux, you would perish a little less today ...
0 x
Image
User avatar
GuyGadebois
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6532
Registration: 24/07/19, 17:58
Location: 04
x 982

Re: Thorium: the future of nuclear power?




by GuyGadebois » 26/07/19, 22:12

sicetaitsimple wrote:
GuyGadebois wrote:
sicetaitsimple wrote:
But as you wrote 2 days ago, hope is allowed, because:

"The real solution for the energy transition is biogas: it is produced from our organic waste (an infinite renewable resource: everyone eats, peels and defecates). It would allow producing countries to free themselves from any external dependence ...... "

Just eat a lot of vegetables and have a good intestinal transit, it's still not complicated.

That's good, continue your taunts, it's quite reassuring ... Well, unless we really think about the future of our kids. But maybe you just have dust mites?


These are not taunts, it's just a copy of your first post 2 days ago, with a purely technical supplement.

As for ""My positions go back to the 70s when" The wild "and" The open mouth "already predicted the present disaster. ", it turns out that for about 40 years (a little less), nuclear power has provided about 75% of French electricity production. If there is a" present disaster? ", which remains to be described, it perhaps the past should not be ignored ....

And more, you purposely seem more silly than you already are. At this level of perversion, I can do nothing more. Basta cosi per me.
0 x
“It is better to mobilize your intelligence on bullshit than to mobilize your bullshit on intelligent things. (J.Rouxel)
"By definition the cause is the product of the effect". (Tryphion)
"360 / 000 / 0,5 is 100 million and not 72 million" (AVC)
sicetaitsimple
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9772
Registration: 31/10/16, 18:51
Location: Lower Normandy
x 2638

Re: Thorium: the future of nuclear power?




by sicetaitsimple » 26/07/19, 22:15

Remundo wrote:it is necessary to know that wherever Bardal and Sicétaitsimple pass, they make the union to ridicule their interlocutors with an unfeigned morgue.
so the debate is of a very poor quality.


I assume to "ridicule" someone who calls to sign a petition in which it is written that methanizing our peelings and our excrements would allow "to producing countries to free themselves from any external dependence ......".

No morgue in there.
0 x
User avatar
GuyGadebois
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6532
Registration: 24/07/19, 17:58
Location: 04
x 982

Re: Thorium: the future of nuclear power?




by GuyGadebois » 26/07/19, 22:16

sicetaitsimple wrote:
Remundo wrote:it is necessary to know that wherever Bardal and Sicétaitsimple pass, they make the union to ridicule their interlocutors with an unfeigned morgue.
so the debate is of a very poor quality.


I assume to "ridicule" someone who calls to sign a petition in which it is written that methanizing our peelings and our excrements would allow "to producing countries to free themselves from any external dependence ......".

No morgue in there.

All the more haughtiness as these are not the only sources of methane. Otherwise, you are the only one to ridicule yourself, being completely irrelevant. "The guy crashes on the consumption of a Solex, I'm going to ridicule him on the reproduction of mosquitoes in the 45th parallel" ... Moreover, your ways of doing things (talking indirectly about someone by talking to another "you know what I mean") is a despicable process.
0 x
“It is better to mobilize your intelligence on bullshit than to mobilize your bullshit on intelligent things. (J.Rouxel)
"By definition the cause is the product of the effect". (Tryphion)
"360 / 000 / 0,5 is 100 million and not 72 million" (AVC)

Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 336 guests