Safe Mode: On
There is no energy crisis, just a visson crisis. LFTR, what fusion promised delivered.

The other nuclear energy, the one that doesn't melt down or make weapons or leave intractable waste.

Loading the player ...
Embed Code
Plays: 24802 (Embed: 0)

Added: Jan-7-2013 Occurred On: Jan-7-2013
By: rozza2012
In: Science and Technology
Tags: LFTR, thorium, nuclear, melt down
Location: United States (load item map)
Marked as: approved, featured
Views: 28638 | Comments: 234 | Votes: 32 | Favorites: 38 | Shared: 821 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 1
You need to be registered in order to add comments! Register HERE
Sort by: Newest first | Oldest first | Highest score first
Liveleak opposes racial slurs - if you do spot comments that fall into this category, please report them for us to review.

  • Thorium based nuclear reactors provided a safe, non-polluting and non-weaponizable energy form decades ago, but because the mankind was more interested in war than sustainable development they never got the chance they deserved.

    The US already has a fully developed concept of thorium reactors and India is currently pumping a lot of money in thorium reactor research. Let's hope they succeed.

    Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
    immamoron (151.74)

    (9)

  • and this will never happen because it is not profitable to the big wigs,

    Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
    Kevril (54.60)  

    (6)

    • @Kevril Who cares about energy...I want to hangglide in a dome on the moon? see time 6:01 ;)

      Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
      MajorBS (26.20)  

      (0)

    • @Kevril same like medicine. there's a very cheap substance that can cure cancer and it's been tested on mammals with high rate of success. but until now, no big company interested on continue the research.

      it's all about business. they don't give a fuck about this planet and everyone who stepped on it.

      Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
      Jonnesy (31.80)

      (0)

    • @Jonnesy why would you say "there's a very cheap substance that can cure cancer". Just fucking name it for those who don't know. Educate the masses.

      Posted Jan-8-2013 By 
      maccoretti (130.24)  

      (0)

    • @maccoretti ever heard google? it's called DCA, cheaper than a chocolate bar. someone already upload the video about this drug on LL ; twice..

      Posted Jan-8-2013 By 
      Jonnesy (31.80)

      (0)

    • @Jonnesy I googled "there's a very cheap substance that can cure cancer" but it returns fuck all. I'll try DCA and let you know...

      Posted Jan-8-2013 By 
      maccoretti (130.24)  

      (0)

  • The energy crisis is only a crisis to the oil and gas industry, they've led you to believe it's our main source of energy.

    Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
    jinladen420 (31.20)  

    (6)

  • yeah yeah yeah your plan is real good and all but earth runs on artificial conflict kept alive by politicians for the sake of money, greed, and POWER, and a good idea is not enough to change the hierarchy of greed.

    Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
    ToxicStuff (30.34)  

    (5)

  • Comment of user 'kuriouskatgotkilt' has been deleted by author!

  • oil company does not aprove this

    Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
    my93vr4 (62.94)

    (4)

  • Makes a lot of sense...........they will never do it.

    Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
    pixiesprimecut (327.74)

    (4)

  • Sounds like great idea but do they have lobbyists ? :)

    Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
    soilentgreene (782.20)  

    (3)

  • I happen to be a nuclear engineer...

    The title is incorrect, this video has nothing to do with fusion, it has to do with a different type of fuel and system for fission reactors, which all current nuclear power plants use.

    He is incorrect in stating that 'his' type is safe because it has passive safety features which will shut down the plant without human interaction. Current generation 3+ nuclear plants being built today have these passive safety features. He references the Fukishima incide More..

    Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
    Jman5048 (59.60)  

    (3)

    • @Jman5048

      Good post.

      Isn't his message still just a THEORY, and not yet proven?

      I keep thinking this bandwagon is going down in flames as that whole "Cold Fusion" hype in the 80s

      Posted Jan-8-2013 By 
      adanvjr (139.76)  

      (0)

    • @adanvjr His idea isn't theory, it would work. We know thousands of ways to make fission reactors work. When you add in economics and politics and funding and all those types of things, that's where he has the problem is all. Sure we could build reactors like he wants, just nobody has because aparently there hasn't been a need yet to someone who is willing to fund it and take on a multibillion dollar risk, when we have other designs already that are just as simple and safe.

      Posted Jan-8-2013 By 
      Jman5048 (59.60)  

      (0)

    • @Jman5048

      Makes sense.

      "Why fix what ain't broken?"

      Posted Jan-8-2013 By 
      adanvjr (139.76)  

      (0)

    • @adanvjr no it works. the problem is more of a materials science challenge. the key to viable long term operation of salt reactors is finding a corrosion resistant material to build containment vessel out of.

      Posted Jan-9-2013 By 
      k4m1n4r1 (13.90)  

      (0)

    • @Jman5048 it is a metaphor, thorium achieves similar goals to fusion. One of those goals is a nuclear weapon proliferation free energy which no gen 3 uranium reactor can offer although gen 3 reactors do offer greatly improved melt down free safety.

      Posted Jan-9-2013 By 
      rozza2012 (390.98)  

      (0)

  • Public Speaking 101

    This guy had none.

    Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
    -Capital- (117.00)

    (2)

  • Listen I can see this being the energy of the future but come on now, it's 2013 we should have realised that the only reason this sort of thing is not being installed in my local area, is because it would cripple many industries and put tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of people out of jobs. Don't forget those big shots that really run countries which wouldn't get their gargantuan bonuses every year. As a planet we are all fucked until we get rid of the dodgy fuckers and get some proper leaders More..

    Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
    English_Eagle (26.00)  

    (2)

  • Big Oil is going to buy you out and bury this tech...

    Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
    Dream76 (304.80)  

    (2)

  • One of the reasons why thorium is not used today or even back in the 50's and 60's is that it can not be used to make nuclear weapons.

    Unlike uranium which can be enriched to make weapons.

    Its the same as the EV1, ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car%3F )
    Why was this killed off?
    Because of piss poor marketing and no interest from the public.

    Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
    prankzardos (11.78)

    (2)

  • "doesn't make weapons"....yet.

    Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
    chrisadamley (98.20)  

    (2)

  • I'm sure if this is true it will be the emerging economies like China and India that will take the lead leaving the rest of the west far behind.

    Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
    viol999 (219.70)  

    (2)

    • @viol999 European countries are already gearing up for sustainable energy. Germany just lately called off nuclear energy and are switching to many renewable resources. I have no doubt that Europe will be able to keep up to standards.

      Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
      47 (304.36)  

      (0)

    • @47 You are wrong on this the Germans will now use coal to fill the gap left by neuclear power. It not about saving the planet it is all about money and at the oil industry holds sway. You have to wonder how many other alternative energies have been buried by them.

      Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
      bampy (11.10)  

      (0)

    • @47 That's a crock. Germany doesn't have access to enough so-called renewable resources and without paying dearly for them. When coal plants offer the only real solution to nuclear power, something is wrong. Stick with nuclear. Consider this: how many people died in the recent meltdown in Japan? The answer is zero. Chernobyl also has an extremely low, but still unfortunate, death toll due to nuclear radiation. It's simply common sense to go nuclear and provides cheap, abundant energy for everyon More..

      Posted Jan-7-2013 By 
      i8pikachu (26.20)  

      (0)