https://archive.is/2nQSh

It marks the first long-term, stable operation of the technology, putting China at the forefront of a global race to harness thorium – considered a safer and more abundant alternative to uranium – for nuclear power.

The experimental reactor, located in the Gobi Desert in China’s west, uses molten salt as the fuel carrier and coolant, and thorium – a radioactive element abundant in the Earth’s crust – as the fuel source. The reactor is reportedly designed to sustainably generate 2 megawatts of thermal power.

  • Siegfried@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Good news, mankind should be pushing farther into this technologies… so we finally have our first gen IV reactor? I honestly thought we would never reach them on time.

    Plus Thorium rocks

  • eleitl@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    1 day ago

    Too bad we do not know which exactly thorium salt mixes they are using, what the materials facing the molten salt at high neutron fluxes are and how they fare long term, whether they use on-site constant or batched fuel reprocessing, whether they kickstarted the reactor with enrichened uranium or reactor-grade plutonium waste and other such questions.

    US experiments were broken off because of materials corrosion problem.

    • Atomic@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 hours ago

      US experiments were broken off because it gives no excuse to attain materials for nuclear weapons. Same excuse everyone else use.

    • jumjummy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Sounds like the US should take a page from China’s playbook and steal the design, then claim to have built it on their own.

  • Leeuk@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 day ago

    On most of the fediverse, I find discussions really great with no idiots/trolls… apart from technology. Here it seems some get triggered by any tech from outside the US.

    This announcement would be seen as a massive breakthrough anywhere else. China has its problems, I’m fully aware of the red flags and government influence. But only a fool would question their technological advances at this point. They are moving ahead at lightning speed, especially in energy and battery tech.

    Even on the consumer side, Huawei invested more in R&D last year than Samsung or Intel. Huawei consumer division could have been expected to be dead by now with the chip ban, yet survived and are thriving again. Not because the Chinese were forced to by their phones, Apple still sell in China, but because they innovated like hell. A Chinese buyer has the option today of buying a tri-folding tablet phone with super fast charging or an American designed device with 3 year old tech (chip aside). Americans don’t have that choice.

    Its also the reason why traditional European car brands are tanking in China. VW can no longer expect to sell on prestige alone. Here in Britain, our consumer tech offering is already almost non existent. We no longer have a true British owned car company. Our famous Mini was sold to the Germans. Jaguar/Range Rover to the Indians. MG to the Chinese. Its depressing. But I do feel fortunate to at least have choice (we can buy a BYD or Xiaomi here) and that I’m not subject to only American tech reporting. BYD will later this year have 7 different car models on sale in Britain vs 6 (soon to be 5) from Ford. This is a paradigm shift, considering for almost the last 20 years Ford had at least 2 cars in the top 5 best sellers in the UK.

    Apologies for going off on one. But i’d highly recommend US readers check out Chinese tech sites from time to time (eg carnewschina/huawei central etc) rather than just relying on the verge. Sure not all Chinese tech will be successful, sure some designs may be clones, but the shear scale of investment from China will make them unstoppable. I believe the changing of the guard happened a while ago, where about to see it play out in all industries…

    • futatorius@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      This announcement would be seen as a massive breakthrough anywhere else.

      I don’t trust science (or R&D engineering) that’s not peer reviewed. Anything else is just marketing hype. Show me hard numbers or GTFO.

      China also has a problem with the government lying-- for example, about their claimed reductions in greenhouse emissions. There’s no reason to trust self-serving authoritarians without credible corroboration.

      BYD will later this year have 7 different car models on sale in Britain vs 6 (soon to be 5) from Ford.

      That’s an irrelevant metric. Nobody’s going to buy a car just because the model range is a bit wider than some other company’s. What’s relevant is adoption, and then buyer loyalty. It may be that BYD offers cars that people want to buy, but they’re subsequently found to be of crap quality or aggressively undermining driver privacy (which other non-Chinese manufacturers have also done).

      but the shear scale of investment from China will make them unstoppable

      If appropriately rigorous science and suitably disciplined engineering are part of the process, and regulators do their jobs correctly, then maybe. Otherwise it’s just throwing money at a problem. Investment doesn’t guarantee results. China is certainly capable of getting positive outcomes from tech investment, but it’s not guaranteed.

      • Gigasser@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        15 hours ago

        I mean I thought thorium reactors were figured out already? The economics of it and lobbying by big oil was the problem. It ain’t that surprising that China could make a thorium reactor though.

    • xav@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      1 day ago

      China has its problems, I’m fully aware of the red flags

      I see what you did here

    • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      23 hours ago

      But it’s not a market based solution! It’s centrally planned and it’s possible no one is even making phat profits from this! Highly unethical!

    • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 day ago

      Jaguar Land Rover may be owned by Tata, an Indian financial holding company, but they’re still based in the UK, designed in the UK, built in the UK.

      That was broadly the same for Mini too until the most recent generation, where the EV version is actually a Chinese car.

      • anomnom@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        Mini has been owned by BMW since 2000 and are still made in the UK, Germany and Austria’s Hungary. The EVs are from Great Wall Motors (in China), but they’re going to start assembling them in the UK next year too.

    • Pirata@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      People on Lemmy are really good at seeing past capitalist propaganda, except when it comes to China. At that point it’s just straight up US state department talking points.

      • futatorius@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        People on Lemmy are really good at seeing past capitalist propaganda, except when it comes to China.

        Any information coming to the West from China is state capitalist propaganda.

        • Pirata@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Yeah yeah, keep telling yourself that buddy.

          I’m sure you also used that cope when Harvard university (that well-known Chinese university) found 95.5% of Chinese people are happy with their government, compared to only 38% of USians.

          • gregs_gumption@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 day ago

            “95.5% of people who are forced to say they like their government say they like their government”

            You should be more skeptical, anything that claims to have a 95% approval rating is probably not telling the truth.

            • Pirata@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              24 hours ago

              Forced by Harvard university? :)

              I have no issues believing that number because the Chinese standard of living has been rising substantially as the decades go. That is trivial to confirm.

              You’re the one who should be more skeptical of anything that comes from the US. As it stands you don’t believe anything that comes from China, but believe anything that comes from the US about China.

              Sounds like you should start applying more neutral standards to how you process information. The world isn’t that black or white.

  • sibachian@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    it should perhaps be pointed out that we originally had proposition for both reactors but we ended up with uranium reactors because the US wanted a reason to mine uranium for nuclear bombs and were well aware of the risk difference but didn’t care about the potential lives being lost if something went wrong. later, the cost to develop a thorium reactor had no monetary benefits beyond generating power and keeping people safe so no country wanted to invest in it when the uranium blueprints were available, literally because of capitalism.

    • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Yeah, the title calls this out… “Strategic Stamina”. Something meant countries just don’t have anymore

      • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        All nuclear programs were started for military purposes. “Civilian” nuclear power has always been a fig leaf. While the current Chinese thorium effort is a break from that tradition, it’ll be far too late to make any impact.

        • Jarix@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 hours ago

          Is it actually a break from that tradition? As tech requires more energy, and militaries become more technological, advancing thorium as an energy source that can be done domestically and no longer needing to rely on as much foreign crude, like Canada is gearing up to provide to them, is also a way to support military applications.

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      1 day ago

      Blaming capitalism for every evil in the world is just dumb. Surely Stalin and Mao started their nuclear programs because of capitalism?

  • vortic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    87
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    If true, this is a huge step! Congrats to China!

    “Strategic stamina” is something that the US used to have but which has disappeared as the country just tries to catch its breath.

    • DarkCloud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      If it’s true, China has energy security for the foreseeable future - as Thorium is usually found along side rare earths, and China has the largest deposits of those. More than anywhere else in the world.

      • Ledivin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        1 day ago

        I don’t mean to be a pessimist, but we’ll see how it lasts and scales 😅 it’s certainly promising, but 2MW also isn’t much. I’m curious how large they can scale single reactors, and how close they can safely be to populations - one of the problems with nuclear always ends up being transporting the energy (usually quite far away) once you’ve generated it.

        • Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Isn’t the loint of Thorium reactors that they are small and modular, thus highly scalable by multiplying units. Your comment about scaling a single reactor is a cheap rhetorical device to miss the point entirely.

          • DomeGuy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Scaling small things up is always a logistics and repeatability issue. Always.

            We had.technology to put a capsule of three men on the moon for a week before most humans alive today were born, and yet we haven’t gone back because while both “number of humans” and “length of stay” are fairly simple ideas to scale up, we never had the logistics to create and fuel the one.saturn V launch every other day that a permanent moon base would need.

            Heck, the Internet is full of ground breaking improvements that were “buried” by the challenge of scaling up out of a lab.

        • dubyakay@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 day ago

          one of the problems with nuclear always ends up being transporting the energy (usually quite far away) once you’ve generated it

          I don’t get this part. How is this any different from transporting power from hydro? Quebec transports hydro power from all the way north at the bay to the south and then even sells it to USA.

        • JustAnotherKay@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          2MW also isn’t much

          It’s a proof of concept, they’re not actually trying to power anything with this. They’re just checking their math on a small scale before doing the full scale lol

  • Gork@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    Thorium tarnishes to olive grey when exposed to air. This makes it kinda greenish. Green is the color of stamina, so this checks out.

  • 3DMVR@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    My broke ass stole all my thorium related stocks years ago, im not a holder

  • WhatSay@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    1 day ago

    Scientific advances from China need to have outside confirmation. Because, propaganda and all that

      • pyre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        totally unrelated but did you hear Tesla’s are at MOST two years away from breaking 1000km range? well they were in 2015. so they’ll definitely have a thousand km range in 2017. I guess we need to see if time really is cyclical and this is for the next cycle’s 2017

    • notaviking@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      I cannot speak for this area of science, but in my field China’s research papers, for example rock mass failure response to complex stress states, are like a god send, really quality work. This is my opinion in my field but if I had to extrapolate… Remember the Soviets with all their propaganda had amazing scientists

      • Zapados@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        Huge amounts are found to be faked or inaccurate. It’s a big issue in academia and has been for decades now.