Is THIS the fuel of the FUTURE?

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 23 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 64

  • @marius165
    @marius165 Рік тому +18

    You guys should talk to more big YT channels to talk about it. They live off things like that, and they have huge audiences.

    • @CopenhagenAtomics
      @CopenhagenAtomics  Рік тому +5

      Good thinking! Do you have any particular Channel in mind?

    • @marius165
      @marius165 Рік тому +6

      @CopenhagenAtomics Just have a Think, Cold Fusion, Two bit Davinci, Real Science, Veritasium, Free Think, Undecided with Matt Farell

    • @gamo-LT-fut
      @gamo-LT-fut Рік тому +2

      @@CopenhagenAtomics Adding to this list, channels with a specific focus on new energy, science, physics and projects (all top tier in their category) :; Tom Scott, B1M, Real Engineering, Practical Engineering. Those guys would be very good platforms to present your projects.

    • @CopenhagenAtomics
      @CopenhagenAtomics  Рік тому +6

      @marius165 @roysooners Thank you, guys! Love some of the channels you mention, and some I've never heard about. Really cool! Great idea to reach out

    • @aadityapatel6752
      @aadityapatel6752 Рік тому

      80% thorium present in India

  • @Kujeful
    @Kujeful Рік тому +3

    Thorium and the molten salt reactor was conceived in 1950 in US. It was sadly pushed aside amidst political moves. There is a rich history on this, and I'd love to see it respected. I do love the push for getting this technology out there.

  • @gregorywills2231
    @gregorywills2231 Рік тому +12

    Thorium makes sense. I hope they get some backing so this can be rolled out.

    • @curtrapp5291
      @curtrapp5291 Рік тому

      Makes sense how? Coal is cheap and plentiful. Let's use it instead.

    • @DrugDealer541
      @DrugDealer541 Рік тому +1

      @@curtrapp5291 Yeah, but so is thorium, and it's zero emissions. You have no point.

    • @richardmccann4815
      @richardmccann4815 Рік тому

      ​@@curtrapp5291Let's use geothermal, new drilling techniques make deep boreholes much cheaper! ZERO RADIOACTIVE WASTE! NO RADIOACTIVE REACTOR VESSELS THAT ARE LEFT TO "VENT" IN THE AIR!

  • @ch1n3du3
    @ch1n3du3 Рік тому +4

    love you guy's work

  • @Ashish-134ll
    @Ashish-134ll 3 місяці тому

    I feel thankful for Indian scientists in 1970's who had contributed their efforts in past to make Thorium nuclear powerplant and now everyone can refine this study more and make it common use in daily life.
    Even Americans scientists gave their efforts in 70's too.

  • @mandarbathkal1996
    @mandarbathkal1996 Рік тому +2

    Copenhagen atomics please do get on the stock market I will invest in your stocks and please make a detailed video on how thorium reactors works❤❤❤❤love from india

  • @chrisjohns9631
    @chrisjohns9631 Рік тому +5

    Bring on thorium micro reactor powered cars!

    • @Joseph1701-A
      @Joseph1701-A Рік тому

      AMEN to that!

    • @triage2962
      @triage2962 Рік тому +1

      Will never happen it is way too dangerous and no country will allow cars with reactors on the streets.

    • @theliam3786
      @theliam3786 Рік тому

      @@triage2962do you know anything about thorium? It is much safer than uranium

    • @richardmccann4815
      @richardmccann4815 Рік тому

      Imagine spewing superheated radioactive steam in an accident!

    • @richardmccann4815
      @richardmccann4815 Рік тому

      ​@@Joseph1701-AThat is satanic! You are a sadly misinformed person. Satan would decieve you to believe that radioactivity is not the destruction of the very atoms that our world is made of! Nuclear reactions, once started, cannot be stopped!! Until the entire energy is released, not just the 0.7% released inside the reactor, once the spent fuel gets too radioactive, it is cooled for decades and releases the isotopes into the cooling water, and by evaporation, the air!

  • @sammy5576
    @sammy5576 Рік тому

    The Americans developed a prototype thorium molten salt reactor decades ago

  • @turkeytrac1
    @turkeytrac1 Рік тому +1

    What he doesn't tell you, and this isn't a bad thing, is that refined uranium is needed to start the reaction process. Making the process radioactive. He's wrong in how thorium can directly heat your house, cook your food, etc..., that is better done by electricity when in earth's atmosphere.

    • @FizzBhaal
      @FizzBhaal 10 місяців тому

      True, but as the process gets going, it can convert the thorium without the need for more uranium. So it is just an initial need. The first years, the company may be limited by how much uranium they can source (but they can use “spent” fuel from traditional powerplants, so there is quite a lot just waiting to be used), but later they will only need thorium.
      Regarding heating and food, he doesn’t say we will use the thorium in our homes, just that this $100 of thorium can supply enough energy for those tasks, for which you today may use other sources than electricity. How this will be done is another subject. Either everything will could be electrified, or we could burn synthetic fuels produced with the power from Thorium reactors (power-to-X). In practice it will be a mix.

  • @ryanleeoakes2015
    @ryanleeoakes2015 Рік тому +2

    20 years from now that ball is gonna cost 3 million. Watch

    • @mrbasfed1948
      @mrbasfed1948 11 місяців тому

      This element is not rare so it can't cost that much.

    • @ireversethings
      @ireversethings 5 місяців тому

      Yes but big corporations and access to it may be restricted leading to price authority. Imagaine businesses and factories using this having the lowest cost on their energy bill but still charging full price on their products.

  • @oleeide9763
    @oleeide9763 10 місяців тому

    I'm in where do I sign up?

    • @CopenhagenAtomics
      @CopenhagenAtomics  10 місяців тому

      You can sign up to our newsletter here: copenhagenatomics.com/contact

  • @soothingmeditationmusic6581
    @soothingmeditationmusic6581 2 місяці тому

    Wat about radioactivity

  • @chelikkakoyta5501
    @chelikkakoyta5501 Рік тому

    I have a couple of questions to viewers more educated than me:
    Does "Entire life mean" actually 75 years or just everything you need to live for (for example) 1 day?
    And also, does Thorium affect the atmosphere worse or not that bad as other fossil fuels?

    • @moltiin
      @moltiin Рік тому +2

      Hey, hopefully I can answer these q's.
      Entire life means exactly that - from the second you're born till the average death. I saw in another short, they include the energy used in transport, roads and Healthcare as well, not just your day to day.
      To the second question, the production of this energy itself has no emissions - it's just using the heat from radiation to heat water and turn a turbine.
      Until this and renewables provide all our energy, there will still be fossil fuels in the production of generation and transmission equipment, sadly. But it's a huge step in the right direction, if they get it working.

    • @chelikkakoyta5501
      @chelikkakoyta5501 Рік тому

      @@moltiin Thank you! Well, it sounds much better than I expected

    • @moltiin
      @moltiin Рік тому

      @@chelikkakoyta5501 it's a great system in theory! We just need to see more investment and some successful pilot plants. And for oil lobbyists not to shut it down.
      Vote in local and national elections!

  • @ulfwestberg2027
    @ulfwestberg2027 Рік тому

    Best luck, check out IF you can provide the electricity for the HYBRIT in Sweden, possibly in cooperation with Topsoe SOEC for hydrogen supply

  • @8bitbender495
    @8bitbender495 Рік тому

    I hope it doesn't end like in the movie chain reaction

  • @ScarbroughIsaiah
    @ScarbroughIsaiah Рік тому +1

    Take that woke anti nuke moralists

  • @Md.Moazzem9743
    @Md.Moazzem9743 Рік тому +2

    thorium is out there many years and design build many years back but the big business people dont want this so why now they come because china building its own thorium , so now they release this cheap energy production mechanism

  • @robertboritzki2772
    @robertboritzki2772 Рік тому

    if that true wow

  • @MotivationKing-hm5no
    @MotivationKing-hm5no Рік тому +3

    Best of luck with thorium plus we really need thorium as our energy source it is the energy source of the future

  • @blocksberg3758
    @blocksberg3758 Рік тому

    The way you just casually say that we will never run out of thorium makes my alarm bells go off. What kind of time span are we talking about, and is that statement considering that our consumption will rise as well?

    • @FizzBhaal
      @FizzBhaal 10 місяців тому

      If the whole world moves to thorium, and energy consumption continues to rise, it may be less than a thousand years… however in a thousand years, we will surely have other options.
      Even uranium could last us more than a hundred years. With current technology and mining techniques maybe just a hundred years with current consumption, but that is because todays reactors only utilise a few percent of the uranium. Copenhagen Atomics technology thorium technology is ~10x more efficient. And there is a lot more thorium than uranium.
      In both cases, if we really went all out on exploration and mining technology, we migt be able to extend that by a factor of ten or more, but that would entail rising prices as well. We will probably do something else in a few hundred years anyway

    • @KensCounselingCouch
      @KensCounselingCouch Місяць тому

      With our current ability to retrieve and process nuclear fuel (not even considering future advancements), we could power the ENTIRE EARTH for 10,000 years.
      That's not including thorium, if I remember correctly.

  • @samsungindia.pvtltd4469
    @samsungindia.pvtltd4469 Рік тому

    Is it true that India has 80% of thorium in the world while Brazil has 20% ??

    • @FizzBhaal
      @FizzBhaal 10 місяців тому

      Thorium is a byproduct (tailing) in a lot of mining operations around the world. Today it is treated like an expensive wasteproduct from mining, because it is slightly radioactive, so you cant just dump it in a pile somewhere.
      That will change in the coming decades :)

  • @curtrapp5291
    @curtrapp5291 Рік тому

    No.

  • @PandemoniumVice
    @PandemoniumVice Рік тому +1

    I mean, technically a glass of water has far more energy in it than a person would use in an entire lifetime. We just can't access it efficiently. Same applies to Thorium. While it's far easier to access than the energy stored in water, it still has to be accessed. Thorium isn't going to be an efficient (or really usable) fuel until we figure out fusion.

    • @FizzBhaal
      @FizzBhaal 10 місяців тому +1

      Thorium is not usable for fusion. Fusion fuses light elements to create energy, fision splits heavy elements to create energy. It turns out that the most stable element is iron, elements significantly heavier can be split, while elements significantly ligher can be fused.
      Both processes are difficult and dont run by themselves, but of the two, fision is orders off magnitude simpler to achieve. We have done thorium fision since the 60’ies, but for political (and military) reasons, the technology favored became the current uranium reactors. However thorium is cheaper and have far less longlived byproducts, so its new popularity makes sense,

  • @yosecretsquirrel
    @yosecretsquirrel Рік тому

    Nice pitch. But if you are looking for investors you might try not lying. Its not new. MSR and LIFTR reactors fueled by Thorium have been around for 80 years. Its unfortunate that the governing bodies didnt choose it as it is much safer and cleaner than currently operating reactors. It is many things but it is not new.

    • @CopenhagenAtomics
      @CopenhagenAtomics  Рік тому +2

      That is completely correct. But it is new to use it with heavy water as a moderator in a molten salt reactor.

  • @Osie1978
    @Osie1978 Рік тому

    It won't change anything. Jp Morgan and Co will suppress this like everything else. Do you think they want cheap or free energy fo us?? :D Think Tesla.

    • @FizzBhaal
      @FizzBhaal 10 місяців тому +1

      Lets make sure they don’t succeed then. Copenhagen Atomics is far removed from US lobbyism, and this technology is being worked on many places around the world. It will succees sooner or later if we don’t give up

  • @supriyochakrabortybme
    @supriyochakrabortybme Рік тому

    Fraud

    • @mrbasfed1948
      @mrbasfed1948 11 місяців тому +1

      Prove it.

    • @FizzBhaal
      @FizzBhaal 10 місяців тому +1

      They do know their stuff, and seem to be making solid progress. Have been working hard on it for many years now too. Fingers crossed they make it, we need it

    • @jofdisonjoson1584
      @jofdisonjoson1584 2 місяці тому

      ​@@FizzBhaal👍🏽