Nuclear Engineer Reacts to 'Why Thorium Rocks' by Sam O Nella Academy

preview_player
Показать описание
Рекомендации по теме
Комментарии
Автор

3:10 I was quite wrong about this. Thanks so much for pointing this out in the comments! I appreciate you keeping my facts straight!

Uranium does eventually decay into Radon. So does Thorium, but in much lower quantities, and the radon isotope has a much shorter half-life (about a minute compared to about 4 days).

Sam is absolutely right that one of the biggest advantages of mining Thorium is you simply don’t have to do it as much since it is more fuel dense.

Also, mining Thorium and Uranium is far safer than mining coal, simply because you don’t have to do it nearly as much, as you need 20, 000 kg of coal for 1 kg of uranium (and even more coal for 1 kg of thorium with plutonium)

tfolsenuclear
Автор

The future is doing whatever the hell we can that isnt coal or oil

Xnoob
Автор

I suspect the reason Sam mentioned the runaway reaction is that 1) that is what most people DO worry about when it comes to nuclear power, thanks to Chernobyl and 3MI and 2) he's also talking about a situation where absolutely everything goes wrong and containment is breached, like Fukushima.

SavageGreywolf
Автор

One other advantage of Thorium that no one mentions is that it is named after Thor, the god of Might and Thunder. While Uranium is named after Uranus god of the sky and buttholes.

vicnedel
Автор

While not really related to the subject of nuclear energy, I would love to see more reactions to Sam O'Nella's videos, they're reasonably short, and quite entertaining to react to :)

christopherdalle
Автор

8:20 it was reference to rare accidents like Chernobyl or Fukushima when safety is either turned off or damaged and even if you manage to turn it on it's too late. Very unlikely, especially today on modern reactors, but real scenario.

Krokmaniak
Автор

i think that you are one of the few actually good reactors, you give your input in very good detail and you also laugh at jokes, wich is something that surprisingly few people can do at the same time

herosvicentegonzalez
Автор

I'm team "whatever the hell gets us off fossil fuels." A comprehensive approach can offer niche solutions for niche problems where one type of power generation wouldn't work, but another would.

Kirhean
Автор

Currently going thru Nuclear Power School and I gotta say I’m pleasantly surprised at how much he and you both actually managed to explain so simply

LitmusPapyrus
Автор

Something that is important to note is that Plutonium is not the only "helper" usable to do a Thorium reaction chain. U-233 can also be used, for example, as is in a new reactor design I have been working on with a research group at my chosen university to start a U-233 decay chain. Disregarding inaccuracies due to the simplification of the safeties listed in this video, these safeties are, of course, not the only safeties Thorium provides, as Plutonium is absent from the Th-232 OR U-233 decay chain. By using a "helper" other than Plutonium to start a reaction (at least in the case of molten salt reactors, which is what I currently know the most about), you can skip any nuclear fuel reprocessing needed to get that "helper" Plutonium, eliminating Plutonium from all sides of the equation, and thus making new reactors *theoretically* faster to build as the NRC won't be nearly as restrictive when it comes to reactor certification. Additionally, fuel reprocessing from the U-233 chain mentioned can yield really interesting stuff, namely Moly 99 and Bismuth-213...

geyrnauch
Автор

Personally, I'm for thorium, but I would certainly just like to see cleaner plants in general, so uranium isn't bad

syndere
Автор

one of the few reaction channels that could probably make a compelling argument for transformative content, bypassing copyright simply because of how much extra information you pack into these. I like ur style :)

thefailedfoodie
Автор

I think Sam's take on the safety is kinda about what happened in Chernobyl. There the usually effective failsafe of control rods didn't stop the reactor from blowing up and then just keeping up reacting and being a radioactive nuisance. Basically if Chernobyl was a thorium reactor, all of that horrendous aftermath wouldn't have happened

JohnnyGuiltyMan
Автор

11:50
It should be specified that this does not mean the reactor has any chance of spontaneously *becoming* a nuclear weapon. It simply means that the availability of plutonium in general allows relatively easy construction of weapons compared to other elements.

Now this will be obvious to a lot of people, but what should also be obvious is that not everyone has the same education/knowledge.

alansmithee
Автор

Ohh Sam Onella. A good choice, you can get a lot of viewers with him, because he's fucking amazing on it's own but with your knowledge and input, it's awesome squared. Also, this comment is purely made for the algoryhthm, you deserve more views c:

lunariclunestra
Автор

I am really liking the extra level of context, information and detail you give in your videos about videos and concepts already spread on the mainstream consciousness

Really good work

mentalkittyRealOG
Автор

This video had me grinning most of the time at both the original video displayed, and your reaction to it. That must have been one of the most hilarious descriptions of how Thorium vs Uranium works I've ever seen. Would like to see something similar, but then when describing the various reactor types😁

swokatsamsiyu
Автор

7:00
what he's trying to say is- yes you can insert control rods and it'll shut but in an *everything hits the fans* situation, where it all goes wrong, nothing those rods don't drop and uranium just keeps hyping itself up into overload
but Thorium can't without a kick start... so it's a lot easier to just remove the plutonium boost and it'll die off on it's own

Winter_Chill_
Автор

lots of good information! also, i appreciate channels like O'Nella and you endorsing nuclear options, since they've been so heavily demonized, especially to my generation
(they've really stuck since i do not live far from the original Chernobyl fallout zone).

edit: i do actually live within the fallout zone (eastern Finland), of course it is safe now, but our parents and teachers very much were freaked out by it and passed it on.

r.javanainen
Автор

Love the additional info you give in these videos! Thanks! Always love a Sam O Nella video as well.

JimmyjoebobIII