中國是如何贏得釷核能競賽的？

 
 
@Volp24k
The oil industry’s worst nightmare, no wonder this is not funded in the west
 
這正是石油行業(yè)最可怕的噩夢，難怪在西方根本得不到資金支持。
 
@凱杰馮-g8v
The U.S. abandoned its efforts on thorium-based molten salt reactors primarily because they require special heat-resistant alloys capable of withstanding temperatures up to several thousand degrees Celsius, coupled with severe high-temperature fluoride corrosion – issues that existing materials couldn't adequately address. China only recently solved the most challenging issue for these reactors by synthesizing a new nickel-based heat-resistant alloy material on its space station. Even so, frequent inspections and timely replacements are still necessary.
 
美國之所以放棄了對釷基熔鹽反應(yīng)堆的研發(fā)，主要是因為這種反應(yīng)堆需要使用能夠承受幾千攝氏度高溫的特殊耐熱合金材料，同時還要面對嚴(yán)重的高溫氟化物腐蝕問題，而現(xiàn)有材料根本無法勝任。中國直到最近才在空間站上合成出一種全新的鎳基耐熱合金材料，從而解決了這一最棘手的難題。即使如此，也仍然需要頻繁的檢查和及時更換部件。
 
@yuantan9292
As Chinese, I want to say that while China is ahead for now, this race is far from over. (This part is mentioned in the video) The current running reactor on the news, TMSR-LF1 (Thorium Molten Salt Reactor Liquid Fuel #1) is only a tiny (2MW thermal) pilot reactor. (This part slightly differs to the video) The next-step plans were to have two experimental reactors (TMSR-SF2 for "(pebble bed) solid fuel"(100 MW thermal) and TMSR-LF2 (10MW thermal)) operational by 2025. The latter has been delayed to 2029, and the former we don't know. Then there's a 100MW electricity small modular reactor demonstration plant (TMSR-LF3) planned by 2035, followed by a Gigawatt demonstration plant (name/date unknown). According to this timeline, even if everything goes according to plan, we might only see commercial deployment around 2050, and there are plenty of chances for it to get delayed, so Thorium is unlikely to solve any energy crises in the first half of the century. Source: World Nuclear Association - Molten Salt Reactors
 
作為一名中國人，我想說雖然中國目前在這場競賽中領(lǐng)先，但距離真正的勝利還遠得很。（視頻中提到的部分）目前新聞中正在運行的反應(yīng)堆 TMSR-LF1（釷熔鹽液態(tài)燃料反應(yīng)堆1號）其實只是一個非常小的（2兆瓦熱功率）試驗性反應(yīng)堆。（與視頻內(nèi)容略有不同）接下來的計劃是建成兩個實驗性反應(yīng)堆：TMSR-SF2（“球床固體燃料”，熱功率100兆瓦）和 TMSR-LF2（熱功率10兆瓦），目標(biāo)是2025年運行，但后者已推遲至2029年，前者的進展目前不明確。之后，還計劃到2035年建成一個100兆瓦的電力小型模塊化反應(yīng)堆（TMSR-LF3）示范電站，最終目標(biāo)是建設(shè)一座千兆瓦級示范電站（名稱與時間未定）。按照這個時間表，即使一切順利，我們可能也要到2050年左右才能看到商業(yè)化應(yīng)用。而且計劃很有可能再次被推遲，因此釷反應(yīng)堆幾乎不可能在本世紀(jì)上半葉解決任何能源危機。信息來源：世界核能協(xié)會——熔鹽反應(yīng)堆
 
@diogoalmeidavisuals
Chinese researchers- "This is pretty incredible technology, we are going to make it a reality!"
Americans reaction (instead of collaborating and working towards the greater common good) "We need to stop making this publicaly available!"
 
中國研究人員說：“這是極其驚人的技術(shù)，我們要讓它成為現(xiàn)實！”
而美國的反應(yīng)卻是（沒有選擇合作或共同造福人類）：“我們必須停止公開這些信息！”
 
@karlgustav1247
We don't want to do anything with this; publish the research; world is better off.
This is the perfect example of why you should publish your research if you don't see a future in it or don't want to do more research into it yourself.
 
我們根本不打算繼續(xù)研究這個，應(yīng)該把研究成果公開，這對全世界都有好處。
這就是為什么如果你自己不看好這項技術(shù)，或者不想繼續(xù)投入研究，那就應(yīng)該選擇公開，讓別人受益。
 
@devrim-oguz
There is also the accelerator driven thorium reactors. Which a Turkish scientist named Engin Ar?k was working on. But she tragically died in a plane crash with the rest of her team and many other scientists. (It was probably an assassination)
 
還有一種是加速器驅(qū)動的釷反應(yīng)堆，土耳其科學(xué)家 Engin Ar?k 曾致力于這項研究，但她和整個團隊以及許多科學(xué)家在一次空難中不幸遇難（這很可能是一場暗殺）。
 
@jagsahil
Great video! You briefly mentioned India’s efforts, but it would’ve been great if you had expanded on them a bit more—especially given how far along they are compared to most countries. India has been seriously pursuing thorium since the 1950s with its three-stage nuclear program. The KAMINI reactor has been operating for decades using U-233 bred from thorium, and the Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR) is nearing full operation. They’re also developing the AHWR, which is specifically designed to run on thorium. While China’s recent progress is impressive, India’s long-standing and active thorium work definitely deserves more attention.
 
非常棒的視頻！你簡要地提到了印度的努力，不過如果能稍微詳細展開一點就更好了——特別是考慮到印度在這方面相較多數(shù)國家其實進展更快。自上世紀(jì)五十年代以來，印度就一直在認(rèn)真推進其三階段核能計劃中的釷利用。KAMINI反應(yīng)堆已經(jīng)運行數(shù)十年，使用的是從釷轉(zhuǎn)化而來的鈾-233。原型快中子增殖反應(yīng)堆（PFBR）也即將進入全面運行階段。此外，他們還在開發(fā)專門為釷設(shè)計的先進重水反應(yīng)堆（AHWR）。雖然中國最近取得了令人矚目的進展，但印度長期以來對釷的研究和實踐也確實值得更多關(guān)注。
 
@cdanhowell
It's pretty unfortunate that the US didn't ever work on this. I mean, thorium isn't perfect - the salts used are highly corrosive - but the theory works and is significantly safer. The US certainly dropped the ball on this, as many have said for a long time...
Edit: Yes, I know we researched thorium reactors. My point with my comment is that we didn't continue the research, instead focusing on uranium and LWR technology. Thanks.
 
美國從未真正投入到這項技術(shù)上，這確實令人遺憾。我知道釷并不完美——使用的鹽具有極強的腐蝕性——但它的理論是可行的，而且安全性顯著更高。長期以來很多人都指出美國在這一點上確實失誤了。
補充說明：是的，我知道美國曾經(jīng)研究過釷反應(yīng)堆，但我想表達的重點是美國沒有持續(xù)推進，而是選擇集中在鈾和輕水反應(yīng)堆技術(shù)上。謝謝。
 
@fredf888
The number 1 weakness of thorium reactor is the corrosive resistant piping. It is simply not corrosive resistant enough. Imagine that you have to replace the entire molten salt piping once every few years and you can understand why.
 
釷反應(yīng)堆最大的問題就是管道的耐腐蝕性，這些材料根本不夠耐腐蝕。想象一下，如果每隔幾年你就必須更換整套熔鹽管道，你就能理解為什么這項技術(shù)至今還難以推廣了。
 
@cosmoosefarms5440
You know what, thank you bro for putting the ad at the end of this, I watched all the way through and gave you a like and a share because of that. That's nice to not be a victim of these predatory ads.
 
你知道嗎？感謝你把廣告放在視頻結(jié)尾，我因此完整看完并點了贊，還分享了視頻。這種方式真不錯，讓人不至于被那些侵?jǐn)_式廣告折騰。
 
@hippie-io7225
Maybe fusion research should have been put on hold in favor of Thorium reactor problem solving. Then to develop small scale thorium power plants.
 
也許我們當(dāng)初應(yīng)該暫停聚變研究，把資源投入到解決釷反應(yīng)堆的難題上，然后開發(fā)小型釷能電站。
 
@corujariousa
I believe that one of the main advantages of thorium reactors is exactly why it was abandoned in the US: The move towards fossil fuel independence. The model can work in other societies, like China.
 
我認(rèn)為釷反應(yīng)堆最大的優(yōu)勢也正是它在美國被放棄的原因——它有能力擺脫對化石燃料的依賴。而在其他社會制度下，比如中國，這種模式卻能運轉(zhuǎn)起來。
 
@Ostentatiousnessness
I will say that 13 years ago when a classmate and I were doing a project in Year 12 Physics about a theoretical reactor design for our city and what it could be used for we actually went with an MSR for the reasons of safety and the ability to use if for desalination (and to possibly trial recycling the salt into cooling the reactor).
 
我想說的是大約十三年前，我和同學(xué)在高三物理課上做過一個關(guān)于城市用核反應(yīng)堆的理論設(shè)計項目。當(dāng)時我們就選擇了熔鹽反應(yīng)堆，因為它在安全性方面的優(yōu)勢，還有用于海水淡化（甚至可以嘗試把回收的鹽再用于冷卻反應(yīng)堆）的潛力。
 
@arunaschlevickas322
Corect me if I'm wrong but thorium reactors still use pressurised water systems to harvest that power from that molten salt. So steam explosions could still happen and depending on design there could be radiation leaks because molten salt that would be radioactive would still need a fairly direct contact with water to heat it. The main difference that unlike Chernobyl, the reaction producing that heat would stop by itself and there would not be a full blown meltdown. So it is safer and the fuel would last longer than uranium reactors but it would still have its own risks and problems.
 
如果我說錯了請糾正我，但釷反應(yīng)堆依然需要加壓水系統(tǒng)來從熔鹽中提取能量。因此，蒸汽爆炸依然可能發(fā)生。根據(jù)設(shè)計不同，也可能存在輻射泄漏的風(fēng)險，因為帶有放射性的熔鹽必須與水進行相對直接的熱交換。它與切爾諾貝利的主要不同在于釷反應(yīng)堆的核反應(yīng)在事故中會自行停止，不會出現(xiàn)全面失控的熔毀。因此它確實更安全，燃料壽命也比鈾反應(yīng)堆更長，但它仍然存在自己的風(fēng)險與難題。
 
@user-qf6yt3id3w
One issue with Thorium reactors is that you need to separate out the protactinium on site and allow it to decay to uranium 233 which you can put back into the reactor. Unfortunately the U-233 can be used to make nuclear weapons. Contrast this with a PWR using solid uranium. The reactor can be decoupled from the fuel reprocessing which is sensitive because plutonium, which can be used for nuclear weapons, is produced. However the PWR is designed not to be proliferating because it doesn't produce much plutonium. Now the uranium fuel for a PWR needs to be made from enriched plutonium. However, like reprocessing, the enrichment and fuel fabrication can be decoupled from the reactor. There are loads of countries with PWR power reactors which do not do enrichment or reprocessing. They have a contract with a fuel supplier who provides fuel rods and then takes them away to be reprocessed. Now with thorium you can't do this because you need to remove protactinium because it would otherwise poison the reactor. So that means every thorium reactor must remove the protactinium and allow it to decay into U-233 which is proliferating. Far from being proliferation resistant, thorium is a proliferation nightmare. Much worse than PWRs. As the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists put it "Thorium power has a protactinium problem".
 
釷反應(yīng)堆的一個主要問題是必須現(xiàn)場分離原錒元素，讓它衰變?yōu)殁?233，然后再投入反應(yīng)堆中使用，不幸的是鈾-233可以被用來制造核武器。相比之下，壓水堆（PWR）使用的是固態(tài)鈾燃料，反應(yīng)堆與燃料后處理可以分離。雖然壓水堆也會生成可以用于武器的钚，但其設(shè)計目標(biāo)就是盡量不產(chǎn)生大量钚，從而降低擴散的風(fēng)險。而且，壓水堆的鈾燃料需要通過濃縮和制造燃料棒來完成，這些過程也可以在反應(yīng)堆之外進行。許多國家擁有壓水堆電站，但并不具備濃縮或后處理能力，而是通過合同由燃料供應(yīng)商提供燃料棒并回收處理。
但釷反應(yīng)堆無法這樣做，因為必須移除原錒元素，否則會毒害反應(yīng)過程。也就是說，每一個釷反應(yīng)堆都必須提取原錒元素，讓其衰變成具有武器潛力的鈾-233。這種系統(tǒng)遠非“抗擴散”，反而是擴散的噩夢，比壓水堆糟糕得多。正如《原子科學(xué)家公報》所說：“釷能源存在原錒問題?！?br />  
@ReapersRed
Thorium is actually easier to weaponize than traditional uranium fuel cycle reactors. You can get PURE (100% enrichment) U-233 (the second best weapons isotope) with chemical separation alone. I’m fine with that, but it’s something we can’t ignore.
 
釷實際上比傳統(tǒng)的鈾燃料循環(huán)反應(yīng)堆更容易被用于制造武器。僅通過化學(xué)分離，就可以獲得純度高達100%的鈾-233（這是第二優(yōu)秀的核武器裂變同位素）。我個人對此并不反感，但這絕不是可以忽視的問題。
 
@yttean98
Not only China noted the potential of Thorium, India was another country which did lots of research since the 70's but did not get very far, even some of their scientist said Nuclear reactor based on Thorium is dead end.
Most of the materials from this video are available online and repeated here, get new materials e.g. China's Thorium reactor on Hainan island.
 
不僅中國意識到了釷的潛力，印度也是一個自上世紀(jì)七十年代起就在這一領(lǐng)域投入大量研究的國家。不過進展并不理想，甚至有印度科學(xué)家表示基于釷的核反應(yīng)堆是條“死路”。
視頻中的大部分資料在網(wǎng)上都能找到，而且只是重復(fù)了已有內(nèi)容，希望能引入一些更新的材料，例如中國在海南島的釷反應(yīng)堆項目。
 
@sanatanihindu383
India is working on thorium nuclear energy from last 30 years, because India has largest thorium reserves in the world. Three-stage nuclear reactor is under construction, second stage is already achieved. If succeeded, then this will be game changer of India and other countries.
 
印度在過去三十年里一直在推進釷核能研究，因為印度擁有全球最大的釷儲量。三階段核反應(yīng)堆計劃正在建設(shè)中，第二階段已經(jīng)完成。如果最終成功，這將成為印度以及其他國家的重大轉(zhuǎn)折點。
 
@danielhale1
The first half of the video felt very "Oceangate", complaining that the only thing holding back the next leap in innovation is big bad regulations; the comments section has me convinced these people didn't watch the full video. It's really important to fully immerse yourself in the reality check section of the video, and then follow up with other videos that more directly address these issues (e.g. Kyle Hill, who specializes in nuclear topics). The corrosiveness and destructive temperature of the molten salt is a much larger problem than the video makes clear. China is (supposedly) using a new material it invented that can (supposedly) handle this for longer. We didn't have that decades ago, and it's possible the technology just wasn't there to produce it way back when. Thorium wasn't just abandoned because it wasn't as useful for bombs, and it wasn't just killed by economics. The concept of a Thorium reactor is simple and incredibly appealing, but its actual application is immensely difficult. Remember we don't actually have any successful non-toy Thorium reactors. Every chart you see is comparing the practical reality of Uranium reactors with the pie-in-the-sky speculation about Thorium; the reality will be far more muted and nuanced. Thorium is legitimately exciting, but keep a hold of your heart. Hard science is not the place to rely on marketing hype.
 
視頻前半部分看起來就像“Oceangate”事件一樣，總是在抱怨說限制技術(shù)發(fā)展的是“可惡的監(jiān)管”，但評論區(qū)讓我確信很多人其實并沒有完整看完視頻。
大家真的應(yīng)該深入理解視頻中的“現(xiàn)實核查”部分，并繼續(xù)觀看更多專門探討相關(guān)問題的內(nèi)容（比如Kyle Hill的核能頻道）。熔鹽的腐蝕性和高溫破壞性遠比視頻中描述的要嚴(yán)重。
據(jù)說中國使用了一種新開發(fā)的材料，可以在高腐蝕環(huán)境下使用更長時間，但幾十年前我們根本沒有這種材料，技術(shù)也可能還不具備。
釷反應(yīng)堆之所以被放棄，并不僅僅是因為它適合制造核武器，也不僅僅是因為經(jīng)濟因素。釷反應(yīng)堆的概念確實簡單、吸引人，但在實際應(yīng)用中卻極其困難。
我們至今沒有一個真正意義上的、成熟運行的釷反應(yīng)堆。所有那些圖表對比的，都是鈾反應(yīng)堆的現(xiàn)實成果與釷反應(yīng)堆的美好愿景，現(xiàn)實情況會遠遠遜色得多。
釷反應(yīng)堆確實令人激動，但也要保持理性。硬核科學(xué)可不是靠營銷炒作能解決的。
 
@timothyhenry3841
The main issue of molten salt thorium reactors was not highlighted enough in the video:
The molten salt is highly corrosive and no piping material we know of so far can hold up for a longer operational time before needing replacement and becoming a major security risk.
This issue has not been solved yet to my knowledge.
China has not been open towards their solution to this problem or even stating if they have solved the issue at all.
The latter being much more probable as China is building many more conventional nuclear reactors instead of building any further thorium reactors.
 
視頻中對釷熔鹽反應(yīng)堆的主要問題強調(diào)得不夠：
熔鹽具有極強的腐蝕性，目前已知的所有管道材料都無法在長期運行中保持穩(wěn)定，必須頻繁更換，否則會成為重大的安全隱患。
據(jù)我所知，這個問題至今尚未解決。
中國并未公開說明他們是否解決了這一難題，甚至連是否已經(jīng)取得進展都沒有明確表態(tài)。
后者的可能性更高，因為中國正在建設(shè)的是更多傳統(tǒng)核反應(yīng)堆，而不是繼續(xù)推進釷反應(yīng)堆。
 
@brightmal
It's a pedantic point, but I would argue with part of the narrative direction here.
I would suggest that the breakthrough Weinberg came up with wasn't so much the use of Thorium as a fuel, but rather the molten salt reactor idea.
A molten salt reactor can run the thorium-uranium cycle, or the uranium-plutonium cycle.
And they can be designed for thermal spectrum operation, or fast spectrum operation.
Moving away from solid fuel and water moderation, to molten salts is really the key breakthrough that enables all sorts of possibilities.
 
或許這是個吹毛求疵的問題，但我還是想對視頻中的部分?jǐn)⑹龇较蛱岢霾煌囊庖姟?br /> 我認(rèn)為Weinberg提出的真正的突破并不在于使用釷作為燃料，而是熔鹽反應(yīng)堆本身這個構(gòu)想。
熔鹽反應(yīng)堆既可以運行釷-鈾燃料循環(huán)，也可以運行鈾-钚循環(huán)。
而且它既可以設(shè)計成熱中子譜運行，也可以用于快中子譜運行。
從固態(tài)燃料與水冷堆技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)向熔鹽方案才是真正打開無限可能性的核心突破。
 
@misahayase8854
Just like fusion's main issue is containment (caused by materials needing way more development and needing more understanding behind the science of plasma containment), thorium has serious game breaking issues.
Regular nuclear reactors deal with two main issues, intense heat and radiation, and can be countered by metals and concrete.
Thorium rxn adds a third main issue, since it requires molten salt which adds intense corrosion, which like kryptonite to metals.
Oak Ridge exp had lots of shut downs due to pipe clogging, and materials at that time couldn't reliably deal with the corrosion.
Way easier to tackle two issues instead of three or more, so the US went with tried and true nuclear reactors.
Plus making fissile thorium takes more energy into it than it generates, like the hydrogen fuel issue (hydrogen fuel takes more energy to make than it outputs, plus the energy vs mass requires high pressure storage and this brings weight, causing a safety issue and use in small things like vehicles, you know, cuz cars can crash).
Fusion has similar issue, it needs a fissile nuclear reactor to make the type of hydrogen most efficient in fusion rxns.
That said, thor reactors can be viable but have to spend research time and money into it, like materials development and refinement methods.
 
就像核聚變的最大難題是等離子體約束（材料開發(fā)嚴(yán)重不足，而且我們對等離子體約束科學(xué)本身的理解也還很淺），釷反應(yīng)堆同樣面臨嚴(yán)重的“破局級”問題。
傳統(tǒng)核反應(yīng)堆主要面對兩個難題：極高的溫度和強輻射，用金屬和混凝土還可以抵御。
但釷反應(yīng)堆又增加了第三個難題——熔鹽帶來的強腐蝕性，對金屬來說簡直像氪石一樣致命。
奧克里奇實驗反應(yīng)堆就曾因為管道堵塞頻繁停機，當(dāng)時的材料根本無法有效應(yīng)對腐蝕問題。
相比之下，同時對抗兩個問題遠比三個問題更可控，所以美國最后選擇了更成熟的傳統(tǒng)核反應(yīng)堆技術(shù)。
而且讓釷變成可裂變?nèi)剂媳旧硪埠芎哪?，就像氫燃料問題一樣——制造過程比它輸出的能量還高，加上高壓儲存對設(shè)備的重量和安全性提出了更高的要求，這使它難以在像汽車這樣的場景中廣泛應(yīng)用。
核聚變也有類似的問題，它本身還需要通過裂變堆來制造最適合的聚變用氫。
當(dāng)然，釷反應(yīng)堆仍然有前景，但前提是要花大量的時間和資金進行材料研發(fā)與提純技術(shù)的突破。
 
@dan2304
Both generation 4 fast breeder reactors and thorium molten salt reactors have the potential to supply electricity for centuries.
However: Both are facing similar problems, the materials technology to reliably contain the harsh but different conditions in each of these reactors.
Those materials are not yet available and are at least a decade or so away.
 
第四代快中子增殖反應(yīng)堆和釷熔鹽反應(yīng)堆都有能力為人類提供數(shù)百年的電力供應(yīng)。
然而，兩者面臨著相似的問題——如何找到能長期承受各自極端運行環(huán)境的材料。
這種材料目前尚未問世，至少還需要十年甚至更長時間的研究與開發(fā)。
 
@YellowRambler
Just because they’re trying to use Thorium doesn’t make it a Thorium Molten Salt Reactor.
PWR with fuel rods have been known to try to make use of thorium, I think you may have included some of these.
Otherwise it was nice to see some Thorium history thanks.
 
僅僅因為他們試圖使用釷燃料，并不意味著這就是釷熔鹽反應(yīng)堆。
有些配備燃料棒的壓水堆（PWR）也在嘗試?yán)免Q，我覺得你的視頻可能將這類情況也算進來了。
不過，能看到關(guān)于釷的發(fā)展歷史還是挺不錯的，謝謝分享。
 
@domingo2977
I once heard in another video years ago that "Inevitable by-products produced by thorium reactors is creating uranium 232 isotope which would degrade down to thallium 208 which produces 2.6 MeV gamma ray bursts; which is very high energy radiation also being hard shield for power plant staff".
I hope somebody here could dispute this though the video I got it from seemed pretty accurate & knowledgeable.
I’m still looking for it.
 
幾年前我曾在另一個視頻中聽說：“釷反應(yīng)堆不可避免地產(chǎn)生鈾-232的同位素，這種同位素會衰變?yōu)殂B-208，而鉈-208會發(fā)射出2.6兆電子伏的伽馬射線——這是一種極高能量的輻射，對核電站的工作人員來說很難屏蔽?！?br /> 我希望這里有人能反駁這個說法，雖然我當(dāng)時看到的視頻看起來既準(zhǔn)確又專業(yè)。
我現(xiàn)在還在試圖找到那個視頻。
 
@CryptoNewsTV
Make mini at home reactors. Everyone gets unlimited energy for super low cost.
Then once a year you stop by and dispose of the waste and pile it somewhere for 100 years.
Now no solar panels or power lines needed. A clean beautiful future.
 
造些家用微型反應(yīng)堆吧，這樣每個人都能以極低的成本獲取無限的能源。
一年處理一次廢料，然后集中堆放一百年。
這樣就不需要太陽能板和電網(wǎng)了。這是一個干凈而美好的未來。
 
@MrDhalli6500
The half life of the Thorium waste is 30 years.
When radioactive material half life's 10 times it is no longer considered radioactive.
So the Thorium reactor waste half life is 300 years, then it's considered a heavy metal waste.
 
釷反應(yīng)堆廢料的半衰期是30年。
通常來說，放射性物質(zhì)經(jīng)過10個半衰期之后，就不再被視為存在放射性。
因此釷反應(yīng)堆的廢料在300年后就會被歸為重金屬廢料。
 
@oscaryuen311
The issue of thorium is not exactly economical.
It is not that it can't be weaponized, it is because the energy output of thorium is not as great as uranium.
Imagine you need to import a 1000lb of thorium to have the same energy output as a 1lb of uranium.
That is like putting alcohol to run a car vs gasoline to run a car.
Also, imagine how much resources and the transportation is needed to extract thorium and refine it.
 
釷的問題并不在于安全性，而在于經(jīng)濟性。
這不是說釷無法用于制造武器，而是它的能量輸出遠低于鈾。
想象一下，你需要進口一千磅釷才能產(chǎn)生相當(dāng)于一磅鈾的能量。
這就好比用酒精驅(qū)動車子和用汽油驅(qū)動車子的差別。
而且，想象一下開采、運輸與提煉釷所需的資源量與成本，這幾乎難以承受。
 
@frankkolmann4801
Your thumbnail is wrong. Thumbnail is a test fusion reactor. Thorium is a fission reactor.
Problem with Thorium, and also fusion reactors is the Gamma radiation they produce.
In the Sun the gamma rays produced are attenuated to UV visible light and heat by the time the gamma rays get out of the Sun’s core.
The gamma rays in Thorium reactors irradiate everything, and are difficult to convert to usable heat energy.
 
你的視頻縮略圖錯了，那是一個試驗性的聚變反應(yīng)堆，而釷反應(yīng)堆是裂變反應(yīng)堆。
釷反應(yīng)堆和聚變反應(yīng)堆的問題都在于它們產(chǎn)生的伽馬射線。
在太陽中，伽馬射線在穿過太陽內(nèi)部時會逐步衰減，最終變成紫外線、可見光和熱能。
而釷反應(yīng)堆中產(chǎn)生的伽馬射線會照射到所有東西上，而且很難將其有效轉(zhuǎn)換為可用的熱能。