Message from @The Lemon

Discord ID: 524012833109835790


2018-12-16 23:58:13 UTC  

exactly

2018-12-16 23:58:16 UTC  

Yeah

2018-12-16 23:58:16 UTC  

It's stupid

2018-12-16 23:58:22 UTC  

And I fucking hate that sentiment with a passion

2018-12-16 23:58:33 UTC  

I love Nuclear

2018-12-16 23:58:36 UTC  

We could literally solve the energy crisis with thorium

2018-12-16 23:58:36 UTC  

Yeah but just because a couple incidents were really bad everyone hates it

2018-12-16 23:58:40 UTC  

It can't melt down

2018-12-16 23:58:43 UTC  

It's as common as coal

2018-12-16 23:58:49 UTC  

It produces more energy than uranium

2018-12-16 23:58:51 UTC  

In my Science and Geography classes, I'm always advocating Nuclear

2018-12-16 23:58:57 UTC  

but no one cares about ten times as many miners dying from coal

2018-12-16 23:59:07 UTC  

thorium energy would be cool

2018-12-16 23:59:08 UTC  

The biproducts are radioactive for 100 years rather than 2000

2018-12-16 23:59:21 UTC  

It's literally better than uranium in every single way

2018-12-16 23:59:43 UTC  

I want the future they predicted in thr 1950s and 60s

2018-12-16 23:59:43 UTC  

GG @TheBritishGamer ❤🔑 (Meh), you just advanced to level 3!

2018-12-16 23:59:45 UTC  

*fun fact: the first nuclear weapon built by the USSR, had its uranium mined from Estonia*

2018-12-16 23:59:46 UTC  

But you can't use it for nukes

2018-12-16 23:59:52 UTC  

now we have nothing except shale oil

2018-12-16 23:59:55 UTC  

And that is why we don't use throium

2018-12-17 00:00:09 UTC  

Which is soo fucking stupid

2018-12-17 00:04:26 UTC  

@The Lemon Yeah, I don't buy that thorium can't meltdown. I call BS on that claim.

2018-12-17 00:04:41 UTC  

No cos it produces 1-2 neutrons per fission reaction

2018-12-17 00:04:47 UTC  

thorium can melt... but nuclear meltdown?

2018-12-17 00:04:48 UTC  

So it can't escalate like uranium can

2018-12-17 00:05:00 UTC  

and thorium can be used to make bombs

2018-12-17 00:05:01 UTC  

Because uranium releases 2-3 per fission reaction

2018-12-17 00:05:10 UTC  

The bi products can

2018-12-17 00:05:13 UTC  

Thorium can't

2018-12-17 00:05:19 UTC  

wiki says u cant make bombs from thorium

2018-12-17 00:05:36 UTC  

yup, calling bullshit

2018-12-17 00:05:54 UTC  

@McBacoon Wiki says that as a "possible benefit" meaning theoretical

2018-12-17 00:06:53 UTC  

"Proponents also cite the lack of weaponization potential as an advantage of thorium"

2018-12-17 00:07:10 UTC  

yup, claling bullshit on that

2018-12-17 00:07:21 UTC  

u need uranium-235 for weapons

2018-12-17 00:07:29 UTC  

Thorium has 233

2018-12-17 00:07:35 UTC  

u cant weaponize that

2018-12-17 00:07:41 UTC  
2018-12-17 00:07:49 UTC  

Asgard’s fire (The Economist) This article is pretty good in general. But, it has to be on the wall of shame due to this quote: "Thorium, though, is hard to turn into a bomb; not impossible, but sufficiently uninviting a prospect that America axed thorium research in the 1970s. " The MSR program shutdown had nothing to do with MSR’s ability to make weapons. Sigh.

2018-12-17 00:08:47 UTC  

Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry, "This energy source could solve all of our problems — so why is no one talking about it?" Woah this is a really good yarn. Again, hits most misconceptions but even makes up some new ones. Best quote: "If these systems fail, the reactor starts going into meltdown. Thorium, being a lighter element, doesn’t have that problem." Haha! Being a lighter element has nothing to do with it. Having low-pressure coolant is what gives the MSR its safety advantage, dude. SFR, LFR, FHR, etc. are other reactors that can do this with or without Thorium. Crikey!