and that's still 10 times less pressure that's need for hydrogen fuel cells.

Bobby. wrote on Jun 4^th, 2019 at 5:47am:

any boiler type generator operates at high pressure, to get the steam to do its work, you do realize all of the next generation Nuk plants will have high pressures as well, so all thorium ones will have the same high pressures....

Bobby. wrote on Jun 4^th, 2019 at 11:02am:

But the molten salt then boils water at very high pressure to steam drive the generators, so it will be working under 70 atmosphere's just like ever other steam generator....

Thorium and the Future of Nuclear Energy


Energy too cheap to meter - that was the promise of nuclear power in the 1950s, at least according to Lewis Strauss chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission. That promise has not come to pass - but with some incredible new technologies, perhaps it still could. The question is - should it? Hosted by Matt O'Dowd Written by Matt O'Dowd Graphics by Leonardo Scholzer Directed by Andrew Kornhaber Produced By: Kornhaber Brown If we want to convert mass into energy, fission gives the most bang for our buck. Unfortunately that “bang” can be literal. Use of nuclear energy may risk the proliferation of nuclear weaponry, and there’s also the problem of nuclear waste, and the specter of horrible accidents. This last one was painted in terrifying detail in the recent dramatization of the Chernobyl disaster. Nuclear reactors sound scary because the disasters are pretty epic. However the reality is that far, far more people die from straight up air pollution due to coal-fired power plants than ever died in a nuclear reactor accident. In fact the radioactivity around coal-fired plants is also higher due to the trace but completely uncontained radioactive products of coal burning. But the most compelling attraction is that nuclear power doesn’t directly produce carbon emissions. In fact nuclear power may be our most sure path to reducing carbon emissions and halting climate change. But can we do nuclear power safely enough? There are modern ideas – including the much-hyped thorium reactor – that suggest maybe we can. Before we can understand those we’ll need to review how nuclear reactors work.

BigP wrote on Jul 4^th, 2019 at 4:17pm:



forgiven

namaste

Jump to 14:20.

by Nigel Marks, The Conversation


https://phys.org/news/2015-03-australia-thorium-nuclear-power.html?utm_source=Tr...


New thorium-based reactors under construction in India and China will focus attention once again on the viability of thorium power. However, only time will tell whether thorium can strike a disruptive path forward.

From a national perspective, the development of thorium technology would be a major boost. Australia possesses around 10-15% of the world's thorium reserves, in addition to its 30% share of uranium reserves.


No thorium reactors operate commercially worldwide, whereas 430 operating uranium reactors produce 11% of global electricity. If Australia does eventually decide to build nuclear power plants, the best choice would almost certainly be a proven design based on existing third-generation uranium technology.

Such a decision is, however, a long way down the road. As a nation we haven't even managed to figure out the best way to handle slightly radioactive gloves in hospitals, let alone have a mature conversation about nuclear power.

The real question is whether Australia can find a way forward to have a civilised discussion about how to generate non-fossil baseload power. And so, by all means, we should talk about thorium, but let's not demonise uranium at the same time.