this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2025
839 points (97.2% liked)

Technology

69156 readers
2935 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 273 points 5 days ago (18 children)

For anyone not familiar with thorium...

Thorium is a great nuclear fuel. Much much safer than the uranium we currently use, because the reaction works best only within a narrow temperature band. Unlike uranium which can run away, a thorium reactor would become less efficient as it overheats possibly preventing a huge problem. That means the fuel must be melted into liquid to achieve the right temperature. That also provides a safety mechanism, you simply put a melt plug in the bottom of the reactor so if the reactor overheats the plug melts and all the fuel pours out into some safe containment system. This makes a Chernobyl / Fukushima style meltdown essentially impossible.

There are other benefits to this. The molten fuel can contain other elements as well, meaning a thorium reactor can actually consume nuclear waste from a uranium reactor as part of its fuel mix. The resulting waste from a thorium reactor is radioactive for dozens or hundreds of years not tens of thousands of years so you don't need a giant Yucca Mountain style disposal site.
And thorium is easy to find. Currently it is an undesirable waste product of mining other things, we have enough of it in waste piles to run our whole civilization for like 100 years. And there's plenty more to dig up.

There are challenges though. The molten uranium is usually contained in a molten salt solution, which is corrosive. This creates issues for pipes, pumps, valves, etc. The fuel also needs frequent reprocessing, meaning a truly viable thorium plant would most likely have a fuel processing facility as part of the plant.

The problems however are not unsolvable, Even with current technology. We actually had some research reactors running on thorium in the mid-1900s but uranium got the official endorsement, perhaps because you can't use a thorium reactor to build bombs. So we basically abandoned the technology.

China has been heavily investing in thorium for a while. This appears to be one of the results of that investment. Now this is a tiny baby reactor, basically a lab toy, a proof of concept. Don't expect this to power anybody's house. The point is though, it works. You have a 2 megawatt working reactor today, next you build a 20 megawatt demonstrator, then you start building out 200 megawatt units to attach to the power grid.

Obviously I have no crystal ball. But if this technology works, this is the start of something very big. I am sure China will continue developing this tech full throttle. If they make it work at scale, China becomes the first country in the world that essentially has unlimited energy. And then the rest of the world is buying their thorium reactors from China.

[–] Keineanung@lemmy.world 46 points 5 days ago

Thanks for a thorough explanation.

[–] Litebit@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

interesting, india has 25% of known deposits, thorium reactors would be very useful for them. https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/list-of-countries-by-thorium-reserves.html

[–] Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world 20 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Very nice explanation and only nitpicking, but saying that Thorium is much much safer than uranium implies that uranium nuclear plants are unsafe. In reality uranium nuclear power has one of the best safety records in energy production.

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 33 points 5 days ago

Uranium reactors are for the most part very safe, and I personally think we should consider building more of them. The problem with them is when something goes wrong, it can go very very wrong contaminating a huge area. Now granted more modern reactor designs make that sort of issue much less likely, but the worst case scenario of a uranium reactor, no matter how unlikely, is still a lot worse than the worst case scenario of a thorium reactor.

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 14 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

You absolutely can make a nuke out of thorium-derived material (first in Teapot MET, 1955, then possibly later by India). It's not widely used because plutonium is similar and in some important ways superior material

The tradeoff in using salt as fuel/coolant is that now almost all the fission products are in soluble form, instead of nice ceramic chemically inert pellets, which makes any spill much worse, and i wouldn't say it's safer for this reason - it's different, and it's a tradeoff few thought it is worth making. We have figured out how to make PWRs not explode so it's not that big of a problem. This goes both for uranium or thorium as a fuel

The reason Yucca Mountain is needed is that nuclear waste exists, if US reversed their policy on reprocessing maybe it wouldn't fill up so quickly. It's a matter of political will

At least now, the chemical engineering for reprocessing fuel when reactor is on is not there. Maybe it'll get developed in this project, but this didn't happen yet. It all has to be weighed against existing alternatives, and it's possible to breed 233U in normal water-based reactors, so maybe there's a little reason to make MSRs in the first place. India has some thorium energy projects as well, but they're slowed down by lack of fissile material to bootstrap it (you can't fuel reactor using thorium only, it needs some fissile material)

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 17 points 4 days ago (4 children)

Refreshing not to see the comment section full of anti-nuclear brainlets. For a second I thought Lemmy was a Greenpeace hot-spot.

Anyway...

One good turn deserves another. If others won't follow because of good example, hopefully other countries will instead follow because of competition.

[–] xor@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 4 days ago (17 children)

green peace is cool and all, but nuclear the only way forward, other than asking everyone nicely to use much less energy…
and supposedly the new molten salt thorium reactor design automatically shuts itself off and basically can’t have a meltdown… if that’s real it’s a great way forward….
well, except for all the nuclear waste, but i’m sure they’ll figure that out too….

[–] cdkg@lemm.ee 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, thorium reactors can't meltdown because they need to constantly being powered by thorium, sick you can find anywhere. There's a 2008 or so bill gates Ted talk on nuclear power that talks about it. For better or worse, china is going to lead the world regarding energy (and economy, seeing all those trump tariffs)

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] AI_toothbrush@lemmy.zip 51 points 4 days ago (55 children)

Me opening the comment section knowing that its just gonna be a bunch of racism... like i get it i hate the chinese government as well but give credit to the millions of scientists and people who are actually trying to make life better on this earth. If something isnt american, it can still be nice to have.

load more comments (55 replies)
[–] Leeuk@feddit.uk 78 points 5 days ago (19 children)

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...

[–] xav@programming.dev 40 points 5 days ago

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

I see what you did here

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 27 points 5 days ago (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 13 points 5 days 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!

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] Vorticity@lemmy.world 106 points 5 days ago (5 children)

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.

[–] bricklove@midwest.social 45 points 5 days ago (3 children)

America has been strategically sitting on a couch eating strategic cheeseburgers for the past 50 years

[–] InvertedParallax@lemm.ee 25 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

America has been destroyed by the politics of the southern strategy.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 28 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (8 children)

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.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] eleitl@lemm.ee 49 points 5 days ago (18 children)

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.

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 16 points 4 days ago

Thanks for the archive link, OP. Shit that site was cancerous

[–] sibachian@lemmy.ml 43 points 5 days ago (9 children)

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.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 7 points 4 days ago

Remember when it was all the hype when things just started - crazy to see it actually happen

[–] Siegfried@lemmy.world 15 points 4 days 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

[–] Gork@lemm.ee 32 points 5 days ago (6 children)

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

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] primemagnus@lemmy.ca 11 points 4 days ago

I’d like to thank the thorium. Great job guys! All around, great stuff!

load more comments
view more: next ›