this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2024
628 points (69.1% liked)

Memes

44944 readers
2399 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LemmyHead@lemmy.ml -3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

The problem with these arguments and the focus of debates is that they are based on nuclear energy from uranium, not thorium. Thorium is ubiquitous in nature, power centers are much easier to set up and can be small and the waste, while initially (a bit) more radioactive than uranium waste, loses it's radiation level much faster

Edit:typo

[–] BlueMagma@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Where are the thorium reactor ? We currently have none. Are we allowed to throw speculative energy source in the debate ?

[–] intoverflow@feddit.de 6 points 1 month ago

ILL THROW FUSION!!!!!

[–] LemmyHead@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Already India and chine have had working ones for many years. It's not speculative and I recommend you to research the tech. It's unfortunately not very present in western nuclear energy debates. Could be a political reason but that's just a dirty guess

[–] BlueMagma@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

I thought all thorium based reactor were still at the research stage. I made a quick search to see if there was any in actual use but couldn't find a source. If you have one please send it I'm really interested.

If they are still at the research stage then I'll wait until one is built at scale to decide whether they are a better alternative.