THORIUM: World's CHEAPEST Energy! [Science Unveiled]

[@_GandalfTheGrey_]

Let us go on record and say that this man DOES NOT exhibit suicidal tendencies.

[@jmckenzie5402]

Thinking the same

[@cam0875]

He also has the sufficient IQ ability not to die a ridiculous death that would have most of us scratching our heads

[@jpsamy_inthezone]

Energy companies only care if something good actually happens, this company is just another competitor who may or may not take a piece off of their pie... TLDR: He is one of them...

[@TurkishZombie]

Google Atlasjet Flight 4203 and Professor Dr. Engin Arik.

[@grayfox_yt]

Found in his hotel room unalived the next day after seen speaking to a man in black the day before.

[@theperl9663]

We have been in an energy crisis for decades. Thank you for your research efforts. My best wishes for your success.

[@grantofat6438]

And we will be in an energy crisis forever. The people who make money from this will make sure of that.

[@theperl9663]

Which is better than what we have now, at least this is a chance, and should not be ignored. All of this runs on someone filling their pockets, that's the incentive. But, there is always...hope. Just have to wait and see.

[@raymondfuqua3992]

The crisis has and will continue to be manufactured/self Inflicted because no one wants to take a pay cut even said pay cut would dramatically improve production capacity/capability in literally every sector overnight.

[@ChrisWijtmans]

If we didnt export industry to china and didnt import the third world we would have abundance and not a energy/housing/wages crisis but then the lords would not be making money.

[@quidproquo3933]

‘We” have not . Oil n gas cheap af

[@jpdominator]

I’m glad there’s a company pursuing this!

[@ellipsisomega9387]

Hydrogen energy needs to be brought into this as well...

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

@ellipsisomega9387 Which is exactly what we along with partners intend. See more here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/m3Wohal5mN2qhKM&ab_channel=CopenhagenAtomics

[@walterrudich2175]

@@ellipsisomega9387there is no such thing as „hydrogen energy“.

[@6Vlad6Tepes6]

​@@walterrudich2175 um what!?!? You don't get out much huh?

[@walterrudich2175]

@@6Vlad6Tepes6 LOL! You aren't a physicist - are you?

[@nathangrimes641]

I’m glad to hear Thorium is moving ahead.

[@BogenmacherD]

It's not. This is 99% PowerPoint and fantasy to rid governments and rich idiots off their money.

[@walterrudich2175]

LOL! Better wait for fusion. Like this thorium nonsense it’s always only 20 years away - at least for the last 60 years…

[@fmac6441]

@@walterrudich2175I’m still waiting for my thorium fusion microreactor in my flying car.

[@harliethomas1378]

Brilliant! I completely agree on all of this, as I did 40 years ago. I hope you will be allowed to see this through to fruition.

[@driverjamescopeland]

If it's a possibility to make it work as they say (which I highly doubt), "allowed" is definitely the issue. I can't see corporations worth 10 times the US national debt just stepping aside from their current station.

[@petunized]

Nah the whole idea is not practical. Was tried several times by way more capable people

[@hamasmillitant1]

this guy is either lying to you or knows nothing about how a thorium reactor works. its called a breeder reactor for a reason, you breed HIGHLY radioactive U233 which is 100s of times more radioactive than U235 with a consequentially 100 times shorter 1/2 life so your only storing it for 300yeears, but you need 10-20 times thicker storage vessels and reactors walls need to be like 8m thick instead of 1-2m thick to contain it. i dont know where people think you could ever get a safe micro reactor from it, the walls would need to be 10x the thickness of a regular 235 reactor/10x bigger than a regular reactor core. of all the nuclear options it takes the most space because of how unstable U233 is. theirs a simple rule in radioscience the more unstable it is, the more reactive it is the shorter its 1/2 life is the more radioactive waves it lets off per second & the more material you need to use to contain its energy

[@MrGottaQuestion]

@@hamasmillitant1 no, the waste doesn't last only 300 years because of the isotope of uranium used. It lasts only 300 years because it has a short half life, being composed of fission products. These are roughly half the size of uranium, a mixture of elements from about atomic number 35 through to atomic number 55. These elements should have about an equal number of protons to neutrons go be stable, whereas heavier elements use more neutrons to be stable. As a result, when heavy uranium (of any type, or plutonium or whatever other heavy element you can get to split) is split, the over-abundance of neutrons makes it highly radioactive, meaning it finds a stable, less radioactive state rather quickly.

[@pace1195]

@@driverjamescopeland That industry won't step aside in the short term. There are still thousands of uses for petrochemicals where the oil and gas industry is involved. Additionally, unless someone finds better energy storage for the transportation sector, I don't see gas powered cars, airplanes, or trucks suddenly disappearing overnight.

[@trifalgarh]

This! I want these power plants to replace at least 80% of all the existing uranium, diesel, coal, and natural gas power plants. The remaining 20% for backup, also, solar plants, wind plants and other remaining power sources for backup electricity and for load balancing. Thorium for the future while scientists figure out fusion. I think this will provide us with a great runway to clean up earth while we figure out fusion. I wish you all the success and I hope your technology brings a revolution of Thorium power plants all over the world.

[@walterrudich2175]

LOL! Thorium and Fusion! If idiots like you had a say we all would have to do without electricity.

[@leoz7193]

Governments won't do anything unless the politicians can make money off of it. How else can anyone explain why politicians retire very rich.

[@arkaroy7531]

Good point try becoming one. No specific education is required.

[@VERUMSINEMENDACIO]

It is true, that is why we are getting technologies like these, main investors into green energy are Eu parliament participants.

[@arkaroy7531]

@@VERUMSINEMENDACIO where? Project name and time frame? 🤔

[@cal4050]

​@@arkaroy7531working beta model by 2025

[@bernardhill1622]

​@@arkaroy7531 Yipp..greed & self enrichment stands in the way..❗

[@beautifulgirl219]

Saying a prayer that Copenhagen Atomics succeeds MASSIVELY and SOON! Humanity needs solutions to the energy / environment dilemma that we face TODAY and that worsens daily. May the FORCE be with you. :)

[@migBdk]

It's not just Copenhagen Atomics that need to succeed with building a great reactor. We all need to support nuclear power so it does not get stuck in politics

[@dodgygoose3054]

In Australia yesterday roof top public solar pannels caused the whole sale energy cost to drop to 'minus' $65 dollars a megajoule, so during the day so much energy was pumped into the network that they had to shut down coal fire plants... Us here in Australia just need more storage like hydro, & heat batteries to store all that energy.

[@migBdk]

@@dodgygoose3054 "just need storage" Yeah but storage of energy is expensive. Especially if you have to store for a few weeks of cloudy weather, or for the dark season (in Australia I guess your summers are the dark season)

[@dodgygoose3054]

Pumped hydro & heat storage is still cheeper & faster which has nothing to do with weather. @@migBdk

[@MrGottaQuestion]

​@@dodgygoose3054you "just" need storage? Like the global lead and lithium reserves times a thousand to store a few minutes of your grid? Maybe Gandalf to conjure up some mountain ranges to dam? Maybe some gas peaker plants to ramp up and down quickly, and keep pumping out carbon for ever? The truth is these nuclear are dispatchable energy, so don't need storage, and molten salt can ramp quickly and even load follow, stabilizing the grid.

[@jooch_exe]

This is the kind of optimism missing in the world. Excellent speech.

[@walterrudich2175]

You mean the optimism Elon Musk spreads during his snake-oil presentations only without the stammering?

[@jooch_exe]

@@walterrudich2175 The kind of optimism that reverse engineers and develops better products. "I am sure that we can produce transistors for radios."

[@walterrudich2175]

@@jooch_exe well - then build a reactor that runs on optimism because this Thorium nonsense will never work.

[@ljwhitmire200]

This will be great when I can buy a "My First Thorium Reactor" at Wally World and run my home without a grid.

[@Scoochie77]

Not scalable.

[@l3lackoutsMedia]

Look up radium tubes

[@maxjames00077]

will take 30 years at least

[@wethepeople_usa]

@@maxjames00077 Im working on a 24kw solid state battery.

[@grantjones8690]

Thorium utilization has been around for a long as well as the advantages with it. However, the use of U235 reactors was picked due to its connection with the parallel development of nuclear weapons. Extracting the 0.7% of U235 from natural uranium is an extremely difficult and expensive process but it is the basis for atomic bombs.

[@lanthanumlanthanium6373]

Ding Ding Ding, correct! Finally someone has a brain in the comments section. We could all have no electricity bill with the amount of energy Thorium produces or at the most maybe 50 dollars a month. Those conniving scheming little hats are always enslaving the planet through suppressing inventions for healthcare advancements, energy production, travel and ect.

[@nellyvuyk]

And that is the reason why Torium was never use - it cannot be used for weapons!!!!

[@SHL-ge3wn]

I know, the story about Former Pres Nixon talking to the Defense guys was an interesting read. We'd be swimming in clean nuke power today with LFTR and Molton Salt reactors had it not been for Nixon knuckling in to the pressure from the MIC. Such a shame.

[@VenturiLife]

Also plutonium production. These are the only reasons really that Uranium was chosen over Thorium for nuclear fission, for weapons production.

[@2tearsinabucket521]

Their was a documentary called thorium I watched about a decade ago now, can’t find it anymore though,it had the scientists in it who actually worked on these programmes and they knew it produced more energy,cheaper to mine, more abundant all over the planet and way safer in terms of heat and meltdowns etc.. of course they were shut down , we are ran by an evil that has no equal.

[@iSoldat]

The reason governments are not adopting nuclear energy (wholesale) is that once plants are created, they make less tax revenue and it promotes freedom.

[@barrettabney]

AMEN!!! It's always about the money trail that leads to the politicians pockets. Just look at DMSO. A fantastic, natural, vital and effective medical solution that has been suppressed for decades. Because nobody can make billions off it like they did the Covid Vaccines.

[@jsonjsoff]

"How is this going to let us put a tax on Carbon!???! We can't scam the population with this! Shut it down!"

[@JACKOFALLFATES]

you also have the issue of being in the crosshairs of foreign governments

[@uncertaintytoworldpeace3650]

Even biology is nuclear powered.

[@jimmyjames5514]

Is disgusting. I do not consent to the national security state!

[@jordonhope3408]

Thanks Tomas! A couple of suggestions for your sales pitch that might help cut through the misinformation: 1) thorium energy will produce less waste than solar (a PV solar panel has a limited lifespan and can't be recycled and is full of toxic heavy meatals). 2) local governments won't have to hire nuclear experts if they enter a supply contract with CoAtom. They won't have to deal with nuclear waste, won't have to transport nuclear material, and will never even be in possession of radioactive material. 3) because a facility can basically be put anywhere, there's reduced need for long-distance transmission & distribution lines (which are expensive to build, dangerous and expensive to maintain, and lose a lot of energy when distances are long). Watching your pregress with great interest!

[@frogmatt33]

Thanks for confirming this is indeed a sales pitch. The hands that hold the waste material is irrelevant. Once you have made it, it's gotta be managed. The ability to separate the material does not diminish the waste - it just converts it. One serious failure in the MANY safety systems required, and your company goes bust... then what? The spin does not stand up to reason.

[@MrGottaQuestion]

​@@frogmatt33I think Copenhagen atomics needed to be clearer on this point. This machine uses nuclear waste (the transuranics part) to start up. Then breeds u233 from the thorium blanket. That means existing and generated waste is dangerous only for 300 years, and the longer-lived transuranics in the current nuclear waste is actually used up to generate much more energy than was generated in the original reactors.

[@MrGottaQuestion]

I'd add to your list that they should emphasize more that it's a waste burner, and gets rid of long-lived nuclear waste (transuranics)

[@JRP3]

That's a lie you told about solar panels. They can and are being recycled and they are not "full of toxic heavy metals", they are mostly aluminum and glass.

[@jordonhope3408]

@@JRP3 Maybe so, I hope so... my info may be a bit out of date and I sure hope I'm wrong about the recycling. While I might accept that the CdTe and CIGS don't contain the cadmium, indium, gallium and selenium that their names suggest, or that the solder used to build them is lead- and tin-free, a consumer-grade solar panel still only produces enough energy in its whole lifespan (something like 30 MWh) to displace about 6g of hypothetical thorium msr fuel. The volume of waste produced would be orders-of-magnitude more miniscule than any other generation technology I've ever seen (except fusion), if it develops to anywhere near its potential.

[@lorendjones]

I’ll be more excited once they actually demonstrate it in operation.

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

Certianly still things to do before we can start our 1MW test reactor in 2026. But stay tuned!

[@petevenuti7355]

What locations?

[@BogenmacherD]

Which they never will. This is a scam.

[@leewanfang4759]

@@BogenmacherD The moment he said nuclear is not dangerous compared to coal, I would like to have him exposed to nuclear material as we were to coal. IT IS DANGEROUS but we are not going to expose it to the untrained hands. but comparing Reactor to coal tells a lot about his presentation logic.

[@xuser48]

@@BogenmacherD - And you know this how?

[@ShamblerDK]

I imagine a LOT of electricity suppliers here in Denmark are going to be doing everything in their power to put a stop to this. They'll definitely do everything in their power (pun intended) to up the nuclear scare.

[@ProblemChild-xk7ix]

No reason to. They can purchase the molten salt and would still be the producer of electricty

[@ShamblerDK]

@@ProblemChild-xk7ix But that would take effort and investment and they're extremely set in their ways. It's like that everywhere, even though thorium reactor technology have existed for literally decades.

[@justinw1765]

@@ShamblerDK From my limited understanding, while this technology has existed for decades, the hard nut to crack was the corrosion issue of the salts, which only recently has been cracked (allegedly).

[@williamgrimberg2510]

The people who will and are fighting against this cheap power source are the existing power suppliers plus the private and government sectors they may have bought off . Remember , without energy absolutely nothing happens ( unless we go back to the horse and buggy days and before oil )including making money and wealth.

[@ShamblerDK]

@@justinw1765 And yet we've had MSRs running for decades at this point. Doubt that the corrosion issue is that big of a deal.

[@bastiansaintgermain1760]

Yes! Thorium based nuclear plants are real green energy. Without wef interference.

[@walterrudich2175]

Ah! A conspiracy moron.

[@Stubones999]

The first thorium power station was in Oak Ridge TN, back in 1950's and ran for about 10 years before politics caused it to be shut down. If our politics were better, they would have used a slow fission reaction rather than the fast fission reaction used in most power plants today. China sent engineers over to the US and were given all the information, designs and plans of what was built years ago. Now they are planning to have Thorium reactors running before 2025... If only America were smart enough to do that ourselves...

[@MrGottaQuestion]

All true, except that I think when you say fast fission you mean unmoderated fast neutron reactor? Most reactors and all commercial reactors are moderated, with neutrons in the thermal spectrum.

[@rheuss1]

We’re smart enough it’s just the corruption and greed that keeps it from happening.

[@chrisjohns38]

@@rheuss1 proliferation concerns used to be much more political. Liquid fueled reactors, especially Th/U233, can provide weapons grade bomb material easier than solid fueled reactors.

[@dennisstaines8005]

Yep good old dumb politicians you can always trust them to cock things up. All they had to was listen and learn but they never do. I also so that the Chinese were working on this over 10 years ago or longer.

[@zvorenergy]

Chinese already built a LFTR in the Gobi desert. But meanwhile Orange man bad and gotta send billions to the Ukraine slaughterhouse.

[@dheluvhann1613]

Watching from the Philippines.Hoping our government will tap your expertise in the development of our nuclear energy facilities here in our country. More power to your team!

[@realgrilledsushi]

Wish you guys all the best! Thorium has massive potential.

[@simonscofield8825]

Sadly the powers that be have all their money and attention in uranium but i agree - go Thorium!! The country that starts these and proves their worth will be made.... but watch your backs guys 'they' wont like others p*ssing in their pond so to speak..... Remember - money talks.....

[@dongshengdi773]

Buy Bitcoin now before it's too late

[@janami-dharmam]

yes, it has a massive potential but is almost as rare as U and equally difficult to extract. The largest deposit is in India in Monazite sands

[@BogenmacherD]

No, is has no potential unless someone has proven that it actually works, which it doesn't, just like nuclear fusion energy.

[@Echidna23Gaming]

​@@janami-dharmamThere's approximately 5.5 million metric tonnes of identified uranium resources which is more than enough fuel for thousands for years, and Thorium is over 3 times more abundant that uranium. The problem isnt quantity by any means

[@mworld]

You forgot to mention that this is a high temperature low pressure reactor which can have it's core dumped very rapidly (if needed). And, run away reactions seem to stabilize on it's own.

[@chapter4travels]

That's the big advantage, not the thorium.

[@quetzalcoatl-pl]

That's the strongest counter-argument for all the cries about nuclear safety problems.

[@maolcogi]

@@chapter4travels those big advantages are pretty much unique to molten thorium salt reactors

[@chapter4travels]

@@maolcogi they have nothing to do with thorium and everything to do with the reactor design. A much cheaper/simpler uranium based MSR has all the same advantages.

[@trenttschirgi1853]

Great presentation Tomas-- I hope that Copenhagen Atomics can finally come up with a commercially viable Thorium power plant (unlike the 40 years of failure that preceded you). Be sure to post an update on your first year of profitable operations that does not include government subsidies.

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

We are not currently, and don't plan on, receiving government subsidies. Nonetheless, profit probably won't be there until the mid 2030s anyway as the first many years after a commercial reactor we will be ramping up production capacity, sort of like Tesla didn't have a profit because they needed to ramp up. But we will be sure to make an update

[@Playingwithproxies]

@@CopenhagenAtomicsif you have a working product you should be seeking government subsidies. If not I could see why you’d avoid it.

[@roywempor8395]

​@@Playingwithproxies once you start depending on the government's money you'll also have to take orders from them

[@marius165]

I am very happy to see this channel grow! Ive seen one of the first videos. I hope you guys can solve a part of our problems.

[@BogenmacherD]

No They can't. And I doubt they actually even mean it. They are looking to acquire venture capital from people with too much money and too little understanding of physics and chemistry and then hope to bail out with a golden chute once that money is burned.

[@AffyBoy]

LOVE your work 0--O --- but you know what you HAVE to do -- getting a COMMERCIAL WORKING PROTOTYPE --- nothing else MATTERS --- more talk and videos don't solve this challenge. --- GO FOR IT BOYS --- [ love your energy {no pun} ] --- GET THE DEMO REACTOR WORKING !!!!!!!

[@AffyBoy]

solve the key problems of demo country + weapons grade byproducts --- and KICK ARSE guys --- WHY IS DENMARK NOT STEPPING UP and being the country ???????? if they don't want to play ball go to the Netherlands -- maybe they are smarter geo-politically ---

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

We are working on it every day! And we are still positive that we will have a 1MW test reactor ready by late 2025. Stay tuned

[@candygarfield1479]

​@@CopenhagenAtomicscan we invest to help move it forward? I think many that haven't filed taxes and owe , would hold filing this year And put the amount into this. If I did, I would

[@tjf2939]

Incredible! I see this becoming really huge in the future!

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

So do we!

[@robfer5370]

OH YEAH BABY!!! LETS GO!!! Thorium and advanced molten salt reactors are the future to help save the planet and give everyone in the world a better life! Gj Copenhagen Atomics keep up the amazing work!!

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

Thanks. We cannot save the planet. People need to embrace love and save each other, we just provide the energy to make it a bit easier.

[@stewartanderson6560]

Designs for thorium reactors have been around for decades, they weren't unable to bring them to market, they were prevented from doing so.

[@gmw3083]

​@@stewartanderson6560What changed?

[@semosesam]

@@gmw3083 Politics and regulation. We have the reactors we have today because Regan funneled the vast majority of federal research money towards that technology, as it was being developed in California labs where he was Governor. That, and it was used in nuclear subs. Because of this, none of the regulation were built for Thorium, so it's incredibly difficult to move forward with it. The generation who originally created that walled garden are either retired or dead now, so things are slowly starting to change.

[@gmw3083]

@@semosesam Sounds good, but that's America. What was everyone else doing? I get that DC has been calling the shots for Europe and many other countries for decades.

[@FirstLast-vr7es]

Thorium holds the potential to bridge the gap to fusion, assuming fusion ever materializes at all. We should have gotten on this decades ago. Many thanks to Copenhagen Atomics (et al) for tackling this extremely serious problem.

[@MrGottaQuestion]

If we accomplish a closed thorium fuel cycle using molten salt reactors, there's very little reason to go to fusion. It offers all the benefits of fusion with none of the problems. Virtually unlimited, co2-free fuel. No possibility of a meltdown, explosion, etc. No nuclear proliferation risk. But it's also an already-proven technology (at least the MSR part, from the 60s), no insane capital costs, and a much more rapid timeline to roll out to commercialization (if fusion even ever could!).

[@jahibono8513]

Di China sudah dibangun di daerah gurun pasir energi Thorium, juga Saudi Arabia juga sedang dibangunin oleh China

[@lanthanumlanthanium6373]

@@MrGottaQuestion They're stalling by using fusion as some excuse for "cleaner" energy, when in reality the powers that be(you all know who they are, they have big noses) want to keep on on a grid that their corporations control and so they can keep pushing the green energy agenda onto the world whilst passing legislation to strip away our freedoms and rights and cutting down all the trees for their wind turbines increasing the co2 further pushing their agenda.

[@BogenmacherD]

No, it doesn't. Thorium reactors have never worked for more than a few days. One key problem is the lack of a material that withstands the insanely corrosive molten salt.

[@patrickd9551]

The main issue with fusion and/or thorium is the same. People were scared into oblivion with the three major accidents, some rational, most irrational. Basically most nuclear research ground to a halt when Chernobyl happened, Fukushima sealed the deal. But we still burn coal, use airplanes and drive cars, which on their own are responsible for soooo many more deaths. But thanks to this halting of research, we did fall behind 20 years, but actually 40 years. All research from the past has been largely invalidated and has to be reinvented again, just to get back to the point we need to be. Nuclear research is also responsible for many many cancer treatments using ever increasing more advanced isotopes. Yet over 90% of all these medical isotopes come from three reactors spread over the entire globe, all of them aged beyond reasonable. Politics doesn't allow for new reactors, because nuclear is bad. We can't decommission them, because which politician wants to be responsible for ending the medical isotope supply? And repairing reactors is cost prohibitive. We need some long term vision on nuclear research and we need it fast. SMRs are a good development, but lack of funding is really holding them back. We basically need a Elon Musk person for nuclear research, because when he came around for space, things really rocketed ahead.

[@MK-ip6eu]

LOVE this! This is absolutely amazing ☺️

[@CartoType]

A brilliant presentation. Informative, fluent, well paced. And bringing very good news.

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

Thank you kindly!

[@walterrudich2175]

A brilliant presentation! Just like Elon’s fever dreams - only without the stammering

[@abdelrahmanmohammed9405]

can't wait for your first pilot reactor

[@gerrtryks2944]

When and where will it happen and costs and construction times

[@MrGottaQuestion]

The construction time should be quick, once the final design is ironed out and tested. They want to put it on an assembly line

[@spacecoyote6646]

And I can't wait for the 100th production reactor

[@BogenmacherD]

that'l be a long wait, pal. Or maybe not, because like all similar projects before, this will fail soon enough. There won't be a single buyer for such a reactor, because it will never be competitive with wind and solar. Besides, they will never get one up and running anyways.

[@walterrudich2175]

It will start operation just one day after Tesla’s fully autonomous car will hit the market.

[@lilliansongs-w2d]

Cool, born in Canada from a Danish family. Thorium is what the world needs, proud of being Danish today.

[@HowievYT]

I'm 1/16 Danish! Maternal Great Grandmother. I still feel pride in Denmark. Of the European Capitals, Copenhagen alone makes me feel like I'm home again. I really hope CA can jump the tough hurdles to release thorium energy. Change the world.

[@tedspens]

_"This is a terrible idea! It'll never work!"_ -- Fossil Fuel Industry

[@amyntazoe9831]

No we still need fossil fuels because we still need plastic but the Government of the world would put a stop to this.

[@MrBoatman46]

Sounds like all talk and hype. If you aren’t allowed to start a chain reaction in Copenhagen, take your rig to somewhere else and prove it works without exploding.

[@tedspens]

@@amyntazoe9831 We don't need to burn fossil fuel for everything. It's just the cheaper option right now and the fossil fuel industry is hellbent on keeping it that way, damn the environment, as long as they can. Most plastic components can be made by recycling what we already have, but it's cheaper to throw used plastics in the garbage and make new.

[@amitbhuriya1561]

India is on working on third stage in thorium nuclear energy, leading the world in thorium nuclear energy and also content 25% of thorium.

[@kirkhersey3059]

India for the win!! Got some bright minds over there. ​@@amitbhuriya1561

[@2handsomeforlaw]

Thomas does an exceptional job of demystifying the complex science behind the Copenhagen Waste Burner's thorium molten salt reactor. His ability to distill the intricacies of nuclear technology into accessible "popular science" terms is a gift that makes this video a must-watch for anyone interested in sustainable energy solutions. The technical details provided on how the reactor operates, particularly in terms of cost-efficiency, are both enlightening and reassuring. It's exciting to see how thorium, an often overlooked resource, along with nuclear waste, can be harnessed for green energy production. This could potentially revolutionize the energy industry by providing a safer, more affordable alternative to fossil fuels. Thomas's clear and concise presentation underscores the viability of this technology in tackling some of the biggest energy challenges we face today. A truly informative piece that sparks hope for a cleaner, more sustainable future!

[@JustNow42]

Actually we see a softening in the acceptance of nuclear energy all over EU . It become more and more clear that we cannot achieve the energy we need by other means.

[@MrGottaQuestion]

As the "green" energy policy fails, it's become a bit more obvious. We need to drive consciousness about not only the cost of renewables, but also how expensive and carbon intensive storage will be to put online, and this will become ever more important with higher rates of grid penetration of renewables. And then 3rd world countries, where the vast majority of future energy demand will be, will have to pay for this? Yeah right, they will burn coal and the earth will cook. Co2-free energy, cheaper than coal, is absolutely a requirement for saving us from excessive levels of climate change.

[@FixItStupid]

@@MrGottaQuestion B.S. The Fluoride Worked Well On You MSM Fooled You .... Earth Cycles Hot Or Cold Its The SUN

[@duroncrush]

France has been running atomic creators safely for decades

[@jeffholman2364]

What is "green policy?" "and this will become ever more important with higher rates of grid penetration of renewables." -@@MrGottaQuestion . See examples in South Australia and Western Australia...no new nuclear needed for "Co2-free energy."

[@InspectahPatio]

WEF doesn't want nuclear energy, so we won't have nuclear energy, simple as that.

[@dodgygoose3054]

In Australia yesterday it was reported that the amount of public roof top solar-pannels caused the whole sale price to drop to 'minus' $65 Dollars a megajoule.... Our problem is energy storage ... but best of luck to you guys in cold climate countries.

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

By Thomas Jam: I was co-founder of an energy storage company many years ago. I did the calculations! If you can make power at $20 / MWh then storage is a bad idea. It is better to make enough base load capacity to cover peak demand. Yes, grids with a lot of wind and solar has a problem. But it is not our problem.

[@dodgygoose3054]

Solar & wind isn't the problem which you know, its the intelligent movement of energy away from the old model of a single energy producer controlling the whole network.... In Australia they are looking at suburb solar networks to a battery for that suburb, so each suburb can work independently but also connected to surrounds to pass energy intelligently to the states network to Australia's network... But hey I understand that your main focus is SELLING!! your own product which makes you totally bias. @@CopenhagenAtomics

[@MrGottaQuestion]

​@@dodgygoose3054so you think the problem isn't intermittency, but that the grid isn't "intelligent" and needs trillons in investments globally to even begin to handle the intermittency of renewables.... and then you think the third world will adopt this? Nope, DOA.

[@jimmybrad156]

​@@dodgygoose3054 Batteries are suitable for small applications eg. single buildings but installing them en masse is a big waste of wealth. Just build some reliable power stations (like these thorium ones) and job done. These western green movements have been another method used for reducing stability and extracting wealth. Another output from the engine of perpetual crises used to sustain global control.

[@darkgalaxy5548]

As long as the sun shines, should work great!

[@markhoffman1922]

Nice summary of the advantages of thorium as a nuclear fuel. Thanks. I had the fortune 20 years ago of working on a thorium reactor design that was gas cooled rather than molten salt. After working in the nuclear industry for 20 years at that time, I was surprised to learn of all the advantages of nuclear power, some of which you did not discuss here. Unfortunately, that reactor project did not pan out for various reasons. My background is in emergency procedure writing, accident analysis, technical writing, and licensed operator training. Your talk left me with questions about the design, specifically what happens in various failure modes. I am also curious how you addressed the corrosion issue, which I see as the biggest drawback of molten salt design. Your onion design is certainly unique. I've never seen such a design before. I must tell you that I enjoy working on projects like this. If you are looking for someone with my background, let me know and I will send you my resume. Thanks again for the presentation. The thorium talks I have watched before generally did not condense the important information as well as you have.

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

Thank you for your kind words. Your background certainly sounds interesting. There is a position that might suit your background. Have a look: copenhagenatomics.com/careers/safety-case-manager/

[@markhoffman1922]

Hi. I sent you my resume and look forward to hearing from you.@@CopenhagenAtomics

[@MKahn84]

Excellent video. I hope we'll be using these reactors soon.

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

Stay tuned!

[@walterrudich2175]

Better wait for fusion. It’s only 20 years away - at least we’re hearing this for the last 60 years

[@nilsdock]

love the video, clear and concise explanation. what I am missing is the time line, or at least A roadmap of the steps that need to be taken, before a working assembly line is built. will it be done any decade now? or will it be done within 3 years.

[@AnalystPrime]

Yes, the problem is not that we don't want nuclear power, the problem is that we need the plant producing electricity by next year. And then more power every year after that so if the permits, surveys and construction take long enough that one plant you are building won't be enough and we are back at square one. It would be nice if we finally get working thorium reactors but that is no reason to stop building renewables and especially energy storage, we needed that back when the grid was all powered by coal and we will need it even if we had fusion. If we were fine with building oversized power plants and wasting base load power then we could just build that base load power with renewables: No need for energy storage if any calm and cloudy day will still produce more power than the grid needs at peak demand hours.

[@00ddub]

@@AnalystPrimewith this logic we would never develop or build anything new. This is also the logic that Hittler used to dismiss the USA as a serious threat to his war plans. They will never be able to manufacture the ships, airplanes and tanks they need to quickly enough, but we did and that type of thinking has already been proven wrong in lots of different examples.

[@bohegelundstergaard9983]

Har Kina ikke lavet Thorium reaktorer? Kan det være rigtigt at jeg hørte om det for ca 3-4 år siden?

[@MrGottaQuestion]

They are working on it. Time for the west to step up to the task.

[@Paul.Gallant]

Very interesting. However, I would be interested to know more about the fuel production technique. You competitor, Moltex’s and its Stable Salt Reactor (SSR) had serious challenges with pyroprocessing which revealed to be extremely costly and unreliable.

[@TheSateef]

awesome if it works. Thorium should have been funded at the same level as ITER 20 years ago

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

Agreed, imagine where we could be then.

[@00ddub]

Considering that the man who developed the first thorium molten salt reactor is the same person who invented the uranium light water reactor, the USA should have continued to develop this technology back in the 70’s. One of the many reasons I feel very disappointed with my country’s history and the choices our politicians have made. Glad to see that other countries are taking advantage of this research that the American people paid for but was ignored for over three decades. Oh, and my grandpa was a Larsen and I still have cousins in Denmark so yay!!! ❤ 🇩🇰

[@johnwood2223]

I thought why aren’t we not rushing to build these reactors, but when I posted something similar on a scientific forum. The answer I got back from a scientist was that to start a thorium reactor it has to be seeded with plutonium. If that is the case then it’s not such a silver bullet. Nevertheless thorium reactors do appear to have big advantages over the reactors used today.

[@nzoomed]

This is awesome news, I didn't think anyone was working on these types of reactors!

[@gilesellis8002]

There was No Money to be made, No Nuclear Potential.

[@BogenmacherD]

And nobody is working on this kind of reactor. All they do is play on their computers and create spreadsheets and sketches and PowerPoint presentations.

[@nzoomed]

​@@BogenmacherDif you actually watch this video it shows the onion core they have built, they are yet to start it up however

[@BogenmacherD]

@@nzoomed Yep, they have built a big funny steel box. I am so exited, the reactor is almost finished, yey, but you know they have to show at least "something" to their investors. And then they have their "Pump" but all they show on their website is a big can with some stuff on. No cutaway, not even an explanation what type of pump it is.

[@nzoomed]

​@@BogenmacherDhe seemed to indicate they are not "allowed" to start it up yet but have been testing the system with molten salt. Wait and see what I guess

[@miinyoo]

That's awesome. Any good engineer would want that job.

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

We are always looking for talented engineers

[@michaelhaney71]

What a wonderful presentation, and I hope worldwide implementation takes place ASAP!

[@jamesknauer540]

Thorium has so much more promise than fusion, which suffers from too much tritium and poor modeling of the sun. If we want to end hydrocarbon dependence, thorium is an important way to go.

[@jimrusch22]

All this is possible when greed and politics are not involved.

[@JesFinkJensen]

Excellent work!!

[@ytpah9823]

🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:02 🌍 Thorium, a small metal ball, can provide a lifetime's worth of energy for just $1 when mined, making it an attractive and cost-effective energy source. 01:25 🌱 Thorium energy is seen as a potential solution to meeting the energy needs of a growing global population, aiming to double the world's energy production. 05:11 ☢️ Nuclear energy, including thorium-based reactors, is statistically safe and compares favorably to other energy sources in terms of safety. 08:20 ♻️ Thorium is considered a renewable energy source due to its abundance, with at least a thousand times more thorium available compared to uranium-235. 11:35 💎 Nuclear waste, including transuranics and plutonium, can be used as valuable fuel in thorium reactors, offering an efficient solution to nuclear waste management. 12:03 💡 Copenhagen Atomics has developed a unique "Onion Core" reactor design, allowing for efficient energy production with heavy water and thorium. 15:14 💰 Copenhagen Atomics offers the promise of low-cost green energy, a new model for nuclear power plant ownership and operation, and a sustainable approach to nuclear waste.

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

Great summary!! Perhaps, you should write them from now on :D

[@watchthe1369]

News flash, the world population is not growing so fast anymore and in about 20 years is actually going to start dropping. This is a great solution for the 1st and 2nd world countries.

[@zbret]

One small correction - he said it was $1/yr, for a total of $100 for the size of the ball to meet your lifetime. Also, while not in the vid, thorium is technically a waste product from rare-earth mining, if anything you could make money by offering to take away their thorium. That $100 is basically the cost to refine the waste into something usable by a reactor, the raw material is free (or less).

[@6downtown9]

India has some of largest thrioum reserves we already working on thorium base lvl1 reactors which will generate energy and the waste will be used in uranium based reactors lvl2

[@samurai-f77]

yep

[@manuelgonzales6483]

Stunning and Brave 😳🙀

[@whatsupbudbud]

Wow, love this! Capitalism strikes as the solution to a difficult problem once again. Thomas really has a gift for explaining complex processes in laymen terms, a fact I enjoyed very much even as a person of technical proclivities.

[@logicdonkey]

If anything has held back cheap, clean energy, it’s also capitalism. “Big Energy” are making some nice money on the energy crisis.

[@fabiodesalles2732]

Wrong, @@logicdonkey . What helds competition is not a company, but a crooked government tied in with a company. Capitalism is God's given gift to Humanity to rise itself from the mud into the skies. Capitalism fosters cooperation, honesty, moral and ethical values and everything good Humanity has. Capitalism is ending poverty at a breakneck speed, being held by only by governments around the world.

[@alexc-ex1cx]

@@fabiodesalles2732 and keeps the have nots boots on the plebs necks. Do ppl really think EVERY person can become a millionaire) billionaire?

[@adamnealis]

You can't say thorium will never run out without clarification as to what that means.

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

Hi! That is a fair point, and he should perhaps have said something else. What is meant is that it is an energy source that can last for the next at least 1000 years, even with significant growth in energy production. So maybe he should have said we won't run out of thorium for the next 1000 years, and a lot can happen before then, we will most likely have an even better energy source that no one can even imagine today by then.

[@InviableTrader]

I’m on board. This is going to be huge.

[@colinmorrison7203]

Very exciting possibilites for our future. The world desperately needs such a thing. Go go go.

[@MrJBA79]

Instant subscriber. The real crime is that you're not permitted to test reactions in Copenhagen. It must be hugely frustrating to be cock-blocked by bureaucracy.

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

It would indeed be nice if we could test it in our home country.

[@AADOUBLE1]

Very interesting, look forward to seeing more to come.

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

⚡Thank you for watching! If you enjoyed this video, consider sharing our videos, subscribe to our channel and turn on the notification bell to stay updated on the latest developments on the Copenhagen Atomics waste burner. ⚡ If you want to learn more about the progress we've made last year, have a look below. Energy's FUTURE! 9 Years of THORIUM Molten Salt Reactor Advancements kzbin.info/www/bejne/m3Wohal5mN2qhKM

[@WmArthur]

After watching a lecture about LFTRs many years ago, I've been waiting to see India and China develop them. Down sized Thorium reactors/generators sound very promising! Electric vehicles are not going to replace current fossil fuel engines without better batteries or small motor generators, hybrids, which could be Thorium and steam engines. The old Stanley Steamer made 1000 ft lbs of torque from (2) 2" diameter cylinders. A 3 stage super steam turbine in a car or truck? lol - could work

[@MBrandtVIP]

Hmmm, i think at this time we are going into antigravity engines direction ;-) IMO this is ecxactly what is needed... with mercury in cooperation? :) idk

[@WmArthur]

@@sparkie996 the Wonder Boy, why didn't I think of that?

[@weekendshermit]

I have a question. Does this means that you managed to eliminate the need of a driver fissile component to generate the chain reaction required to have U-233? You say you can use PU-239 as igniter, but not that it's required(as it used to be) to initiate and maintain the nuclear chain reaction. Thanks in advance.

[@michelhegeraat5430]

I think only Thorium is a source of energy that will be able to make the big industries shift from fossil fuels to something sustainable. This is a vital part of the transition. I fear that the hardest part of a thorium molten salt reactor will be the salt processing plant, where the fission products are separated from the core salt and the protactinium is separated from the blanket salt. Apart from turning U233-F4 salt into U233-F6 gas, (which I still find a lovely surprise,) I heard very little on the difficulties encountered and the progress on solving these, e.g. on separating the protactinium from the blanket salt. While I can understand that Copenhagen Atomics is not allowed to run a reactor in Copenhagen, I do believe that obtaining the knowhow to process the salts coming out of a working reactor, is probably the most difficult part of their journey, so all the luck with obtaining that knowhow . Complexity of this will only increase if they sometimes want to fission U233 and other times some 'nuclear waste' transurans. Same story if they want to breed other materials in the blanked salt. Nevertheless, I'm quite curious about the union reactor design and how Copenhagen Atomics manages the temperature differences inside. Hope they can spill a bit of the 'secret sauce' there. 🙂

[@kayakMike1000]

Well, think of it this way. You really don't need to get the protactinium out of the breeding blanket. Just run that thorium through the blanket, then store that salt for a few months and you can pull U233 for use in your reactor core with a fluorine gas sparge, uranium hexafluoride, Then you have a thorium fluoride salt that has a wee bit of protactinium still in it, just top that off and put it back through the breeder blanket.

[@kayakMike1000]

Though... You're going to get a lot of other junk in your fluoride salt in the core... Fission. Ash is going to build up quickly.

[@michelhegeraat5430]

@@kayakMike1000 Most fission products will react with the fluorine and remain in the salt. Ash? The salts need to circulate to loose some of the heat, needs cleaning, and needs new uranium to keep things going. That is one of the properties keeping this thing safer than a conventional nuclear reactor.

[@michelhegeraat5430]

@@kayakMike1000 I've read protactinium can absorb yet another neutron (undesirable) and it should best not decay in the reactor mantle.

[@scholtenrm]

Keep up the good work 👌We need more people like you guy’s @Coopenhagen Atomics in this world 🙏👏👍🏼

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

Much appreciated!

[@Particulator]

Although you are using a different fissionable Isotope it remains a nuclear fission reactor, a high cost complex system. In the current green energy race geothermal energy has made a giant leap, more specifically with new cheaper drilling technology. Geothermal used to be really efficient near volcanic regions because high heat was closer to the surface. Plasmabit made it possible to drill 10km down(400°C) way easier and much cheaper than conventional drilling. The drilling head is an electrical arc that produce a 6000°C plasma that turns any rock into gas without contact. Suddenly, high efficiency geothermal energy is available anywhere in the world. That's a strong competitor to nuclear energy.

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

hhmmmm... yes we need geotermal. But where is the steel plant, aluminium plant, ammonia plant that run on geothermal? I trust there will be 100 times more ammonia plants running on thorium than on geotermal by 2040.

[@loungelizard836]

Geothermal has massive problems with corrosion, also with changing "hot spots" that could render a geothermal plant useless in a short amount of time. I agree, we should invest in them, but NEW NUCLEAR energy technology is much more reliable and extendible.

[@killingtimeitself]

modern gen iv reactors particularly fast reactors tend to be much simpler than previous gen iii and gen ii reactors

[@martinsaunders2942]

LFTRs are not pressurised reactors, which makes them hugely cheaper and simpler to make.

[@dougaltolan3017]

​@@CopenhagenAtomics400C and you ask how a steel plant runs on geothermal energy?? Ever heard of a steam turbine?

[@GuilhermeOliveirachannel]

Amazing! Looking forward to see it running!

[@robertorober7369]

Thorium maybe exist in all countrys of the world. But not in industrial quantities.

[@chapter4travels]

8:50 the big thorium lie. He is comparing u235 with thorium, but should be comparing it to u238. Both thorium and u238 need a breeder reactor to fission and there is just as much u238 as there is thorium and most of it doesn't need any mining. On top of that we have huge stockpiles of u238 ready to use, again no mining needed.

[@MrRolnicek]

I criticised them on the same misdirection last time. But on the other hand they are building a thermal spectrum breeder reactor. Thorium is a given no matter what if that's the type of reactor you want. I would have preferred a brief overview of thermal vs fast and breeder vs burner types of reactor as context before talking about thorium vs uranium but on a talk like this I guess there's just no time to do that.

[@chapter4travels]

@@MrRolnicek Regardless of whether it's a thermal breeder or fast, the reactor will be more complex, more expensive, and harder to get licensed. In the near term, cost and versatility are the most important factors to consider. For that, a simple once-through MSR makes the most sense to me. Cheap, easy, and versatile due to its high-temperature output. It looks like Terrestrial Energy out of Canada is doing just that and will most likely be first to market. If Copenhagen can be just as cheap as Terrestrial Energy's IMSR and get licensed, I will be their new biggest fan.

[@MrRolnicek]

@@chapter4travels Well not really. fast breeder is EXTREMELY simple if you're doing molten salt. Look at what Elysium is doing for their reactor ... It's a vat of salt with fuel in, large enough vat that it heats up and expands up to a point of equilibrium until you remove the heat. Thermal breeder on the other hand is the complex thing although should be easier to get licensed because it's thermal and as such doesn't have much hard radiation leaking out of the reactor. (although I have not much real idea about licensing) Whether it's more expensive ... well. There's a LOT less material both radioactive and otherwise because it's thermal spectrum and it's small enough it can be made in a factory. That could make it MUCH cheaper potentially, Not something you can realistically do with a fast breeder.

[@chapter4travels]

@@MrRolnicek Any type of breeder is going to be more complex in the eyes of the regulator and take much longer to license if ever. Look how long Elysium (now Exody) has been trying, they are no further along than 5 years ago. They are at a dead end compared to a simple burner MSR like Terrestrial Energy's IMSR.

[@MrRolnicek]

@@chapter4travels Well ... I guess the licensing side of things is something that I REALLY don't understand much of. I am really more on the technical side of things. But on the technical side, you have to admit the Elysium (didn't even know they're Exody now) is litereally the simplest possible nuclear reactor that could ever exist. On the other hand any THERMAL breeder is going to be necesarily complex even on the technology. They freely admit it requires on-line chemical processing. And doing any such thing on a very hot radioactive salt is a nightmare just to think about before you think about fitting it inside the same shipping container as your reactor.

[@everyonexist]

Congratulations!!! Love & Support from Spaceoceans

[@alteans]

Well..I hope these guys are make it.... The world is desperately needed a lot of energy🙄

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

Indeed. If we continue to electrify in the rate we do now, we will need a lot of additional power.

[@pepelegal333]

Sounds almost too good to be true! I thought China and India were furthest advanced in this type of reactor, but now Europe too?

[@PhiloSurfer]

China's world first commercial thorium reactor has already started operations and undergoing tests.

[@walterrudich2175]

If it sounds too good to be true then it actually is.

[@andreemilsen369]

This is very very interesting indeed 😊

[@JoeNielsen44]

I learned about this potential solution a decade ago and have wondered ever since why ot hasnt been developed. Hope it works out and the powers that be dont squash it.

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

The reason why it did not happen yet, is because the people who tried did not get enough support. Over the same 10 years I have met 100 people who work really hard to make it happen and 100.000 people who sit and wait not even offering a few $

[@loungelizard836]

Fossil Fuel companies hate it, so they influence officials and spread lies to the public to prevent it.

[@petercroft9895]

The technical problem is that molten salts are incredibly corrosive, and want to eat whatever they touch. The physics is sound, the materials science to keep the salts contained, not so much.

[@jeffholman2364]

Or, ie, it couldn't compete with wind, solar, hydro, pumped hydro, offshore wind, geothermal, HVDC, biomass, demand management, PWR nuclear which all exist, or even with dirty fossil fuels. Is there something that has changed now? Also, the title should be revised to the "Worlds cheapest fuel," as energy sources which do not use fuel are currently cheaper.@@CopenhagenAtomics

[@Jeremyz0r]

@@jeffholman2364 Everything green is hemorrhaging money while those dirty fossil fuels make out like a bandit. Maybe in another hundred years when material-science gatekeeping patents expire we'll see some progress. The system doesn't want dependents to have cheap & abundant energy, regulations will always be a hinderance.

[@reybis3016]

I think india is leading in thorium energy research.

[@Seraphim190.]

India is not leading in anything. The globe is leading

[@grantchalmers3878]

Well done. Keep up the great work.

[@PINKFL0YD-s2h]

An advertisement. Avoid

[@IAmKrueger]

So Thorium comes from decaying Uranium if i understand correctly and if that's the case, how much decayed Uranium is needed for one of these Thorium spheres?

[@ancapftw9113]

Not sure how thorium is formed, but it is mined from the ground. In most rare earth mines it represents about 40% of the metal content of the ore. I think nits something like 14% of the mass of the rock. One small mine can provide enough thorium to provide all of the Earth's energy needs.

[@PhilipWong55]

Pressurized Water Reactors (PWRs) and Thorium Molten Salt Reactors (TMSRs) differ significantly in fuel utilization and waste production. PWRs convert only about 1-5% of uranium fuel into energy and generate long-lived radioactive waste due to inefficient energy conversion and the use of enriched uranium. In contrast, TMSRs can achieve up to 99% fuel efficiency, primarily by converting thorium-232 eventually into fissile uranium-233, resulting in significantly reduced waste production and more manageable radioactive waste. Uranium Molten Salt Reactors are just as effective as TMSRs. In the Onion Core design, a significant amount of cooling energy is required to prevent the heavy water from reaching its boiling point.

[@kellycollins5442]

It sounds great to me!!! Get on it!!

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

We are on it every day!

[@KavanBahrami]

Copenhagen Atomics, perhaps I missed it, what sort of volume of waste (300 year storage waste) is produced from a plant powering a neighborhood, town, city etc ?

[@hendrikuspostma]

I have been living and working in Indonesia for more than 25 years and have heard that thorium reactors are being built, even on the island where I live, bit couldnt find out where exactly. I am curious about the developments in Indonesia in this field and find it particularly interesting, both from the perspective of the demand for clean energy and from an investment perspective.

[@MrGottaQuestion]

They are a different company, using a fast spectrum reactor. They have a TED talk too.

[@pieterlagemaat611]

I'm an experienced container new build engineer, how can we develop special containers to hold the waste material or other sort of purposes?

[@thatgeezeruk]

My uncle Christopher Monanan was a nuclear physicist, he was working on the theory of thorium energy approximately 30 years ago he wouldn't be given that the funding because the energy companies would have suffered so much, as well as the oil companies and everyone profiteering and scavenging. They literally shut him down.

[@thegram9207]

BRILLIANT. Love the decentral aspect too. Good for the people - everywhere in the world. An other aspect of cleanliness is that it will make lots of people very rich but not FILTHY rich.

[@runedahl1477]

I have seen some KZbin videos by your company and noticed how revolutionary your technology can be. Still there are some questions I wounder about. 1) The whole nuclear reactor with accessories goes into a sealed box similar to a standard 40 feet container. That makes it very compact, but is the weight of the box? 2) Any man made technological device needs regular maintenance and service. What will be the service intervals for your units? I see that Thorcon considers 5 years as a good interval. 3) This inspection will it be done on site or will the whole unit be replaced and inspected where they were made? 4) In case of pump failure is there a backup pump or some other way to safely drain the salt from the reactor. 5) If the inspection is done on site can the salt be drained to a holding tank or an other unit so that you can check the core with an optical instrument and possibly x-ray the area exposed to the salt. 6) After the unit is past it’s safe expired date I presume that the core and pumps are very radioactive and have to be stored for a long time or can it be melted down to make new products? 7) With the potential of your product I see an enormous demand from all over the world even if you double your manufacturing . Is there a plan to meet the demand that may arise.

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

Hi @runedahl1477. 1) It will weigh less than 40 tons and can therefore easily be transported by normal lorries. 2) Once a reactor is started there won't be maintenance. After five years the reactor box will be swapped for a new, the fuel salt, blanket salt and moderator will be reused in a new reactor box. The used reactor box will be decomissioned and subsequently recycled. 3) If you are reffering to maintenace, refer to the previous answer. The decomissioning will happen on site. 4) If the pump stops the fuel will instantly drop into the drain tanks due to gravity. 5) refer to question 2. 6) Yes, after decomission and storage it can be remelted. 7) Yes there is. Nonetheless, we do expect that scaling up supply will for a long period be our main hurdle.

[@runedahl1477]

@@CopenhagenAtomics Thanks for the reply to my questions. The weight of the unit is important because not everywhere in the world have roads that can take heavy loads even if it is on special multi wheel carriers. If the reactor box is swooped ever five years the need for maintenance should be covered. The project looks very promising and realistic and will most likely be a great success once you have your first reactor running and the general public and politicians wakes up. Then there will be a demand that is far more than you are able to cover. Your biggest problem at the moment is slow working regulators and public fear of nuclear power plants. A lot of people here in Scandinavia are not aware of the reactors that were in the towns of Stockholm and in the Norwegian town of Halden. I don’t know but Norway might still be making heavy water.

[@mikeransom1168]

Finally, someone is ignoring the US generals, who chose the atomic path we took when they decided we needed breeder reactors that could supply the raw material for more atomic bombs. In the late 1960's we had a thorium reactor in Oak Ridge Tenn. making electric power, but it didn't provide raw material for military purposes, so it was shut down. Maybe someone now will have peaceful nuclear power goals.

[@MrGottaQuestion]

Sadly true.

[@heyRex]

Exciting!

[@AliMuhammad-ru8hn]

Excellent!

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

Thank you! Cheers!

[@RIOT690]

If we lived in a society run by science and engineering. But we live in a society run by politicians.

[@JJJ-zs5nw]

Does Amazon have prime for thorium?

[@Paul-ik8fm]

How do you weaponise it because war seems quite popular at the moment.

[@kevink9365]

THIS is the future. Its tragic we aren't already using this.

[@manden22]

Kan jeg ikke købe en lille reaktor til husbehov?

[@kgrizzaffi1]

This is really exciting. I’m anxious to learn more about both the pros and cons of thorium reactors but the technology sounds incredibly promising.

[@moomandan]

Fantastic job. ❤

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

Thank you! 😊

[@misterdubity3073]

To compare deaths from different energy sources, you should add a slide where you divide by the amount of energy produced for each source. So like deaths per gigajoule for each type.

[@kaboom083]

It's right there at 5:30 - "measured as deaths per terawatt-hour of electricity production"

[@misterdubity3073]

@@kaboom083 Yes! I stand corrected. Thank you. Good pickup.

[@fireofenergy]

At the ball and large arc graphic, has anyone wondered or figured if it is meant to be 2d or 3d? Since nuclear is abou 6^x greater than hydrocarbons, we can find out - if we could measure the small circles to the large one. Who knows how to do that with what's given in the image? Okay, if the small circle (or the average dia of the circles representing the 3 fossil fuels) was exactly 1/1,000th the dia of the large arc, then the comparison is in a flat 2d format. However, if the ratio was 1/100th (just 10x less than the 2d format) then the graphic means to represent them as actual spheres, which to me me, conveys the awesomeness of nuclear fuel, for energy, even more! 1,000 x 1,000 = 1,000,000 and 100 x 100 x 100 = 1,000,000

[@koukouvania]

this does sound very promising!

[@frankmccann29]

Good for you. 😊

[@Malmardian]

So whats the cost of maintenance, 2000 hour run with the corrosion on the right would mean yearly replacement of all components in that environment for safety compliance, maybe even bi-Annually. I can truly appreciate the efficiency of the design concept but in my experience most engineers refuse to take normal run component longevity and the efficiency in which it can be "running" for extended periods of time past the regular PM intervals or the accessibility of components in to consideration. The Preventative Maintenance plan and replacement parts to fix emergency component failure. Plus the team of techs you'll have to have and the special tools you'll have to get so they can work safely and efficiently. Whats the cost of that? That alone can break your system if Maintenance cost outweighs the benefit.

[@willtor]

Does this have the passive fail-safe systems proposed on speculative Gen IV molten salt reactors? E.g., does the reactor have a melting pin that allows the salt to flow into a basin where it doesn't remain critical, in case the medium gets too hot?

[@CopenhagenAtomics]

It does rely on passive safety yes. Both in terms of if the power is cut, the pumps stop and the core is drained due to gravity. This stops the reaction immediately. In addition, if the salt starts to overheat, the distance between the fissile atoms get bigger, lowering the fission events which in tern lowers the temperature of the salt.

[@willtor]

@@CopenhagenAtomics Thanks! This is exciting work and, IMO, long overdue.

[@bernielomax3635]

I've waited decades to see someone build a thorium reactor. I've always wondered why they haven't, but of course that's obvious when it's money and influence rather than practicality and environmental impact that sway the world.

[@raynekain191]

Sounds wonderful and ive learned much