YT for next: Youtube daily Mar 28 2017

Hello its Kinoshita Yuka (English subs by ~Aphexx~)

so today! tadaa a Korean viewer sent me these Hotteok mix packages so I'll be making them today

tadaa guys look they even sent me the recipe here its written in Japanese Thank you so very much for that

and there is this as well its a tool used for making hotteok

I've had Hotteok when I was in Korea for a gig they were so amazingly delish

I'm so in love with them K, I can't wait lets start making them

tadaa this is the hotteok mix so here is the hotteok mix jam packet and some yeast

first take the yeast and mix with 40 degree water

and then add our mix

mix for 5-10 minutes

these are the jam mix packets

its got an aroma similar to nuts

cover your hands in oil

grab a handful then put some jam into the middle

this is kind tough...

reminds me of making a meat bun

~so fun~

now to make the rest like this

perhaps I'll make them a bit bigger?

heat some oil and fry up the hotteok

random sizes ...

flip when done

then use our tool to press down on it

oh since we're going to press them I wasn't supposed to make them like this lol...

I dun goofed

should I take this guy out?

welll... I've gone and done it haven't I

looks so delish its a pancake sized hotteok

K looks delish !

tadaa they're complete this side is the normal ones and this side is green tea flavored

they all look so delish I've only had these in Korea and Koreatown

you hardly ever get a chance to try these out and it makes me so glad to be able to have them

itadakimasu starting with the normal ones

these are bigger than the ones I've tried in Korea

theres so much in here

this is what they look like

the stuff inside has a bit of a cinnamon flavor to it and its got this yummy graininess to it

the dough is so soft chewy and warm

its so soft and chewy and since its fried its also very crispy as well

the sauce was powdery when we put it in but when its made it transforms into a syrup

that's why when I had these before I thought they put some honey cinnamon sauce inside these

well it appears that, this is not the case its turned into a honey like syrup inside and its so delish

next is.. uhh wait what is this again?

tea flavored

I'll now eat the tea flavored one

mmm the dough has a slight taste of tea it reminds me of a wormwood sort of flavor

the sauce inside is the same

ahhh... nothin' beats warm and sweet treats like these they make me so happy

so when I was frying these things with a bit of oil something happened when I was flipping them over

some oil jumped out and can you guys see? I burnt myself

its starting to blister

take that as a note to be careful when cooking

final mouthful itadakimasu

gochisosamadeshita these hotteok were so amazing delish

I never knew that you could make them on your own they didn't taste any different from when I had them at a store

they were so delish special thanks to the person who sent me these

these were so delish won't you all give them a try? and as always thanks for watching and if you liked

this video please hit the like and subscribe buttons BAI BAI

For more infomation >> 【MUKBANG】 Korean Snacks! CJ Snow White Glutinous Rice Mix Hotteok , 4 Packs, 6240kcal [CC Available] - Duration: 5:19.

-------------------------------------------

Arrest made in killing of delivery driver - Duration: 1:09.

WITH DETAILS

ON AN ARREST IN THE CASE.

SERA?

SERA: ANTOINETTE AND DOUG, THE

SUSPECT IN THIS DEADLY SHOOTING

NOW IN CUSTODY, BEING HELD HERE

AT THE DANVERS STATE POLICE

BARRACKS AND LATER WILL BE

ARRAIGNED IN LYNN DISTRICT

COURT.

POLICE HAVE ALSO RECOVERED A

GRAY AUDI, THE VEHICLE ALLEGEDLY

USED IN THIS SHOOTING.

IT HAPPENED YESTERDAY JUST

BEFORE 6:00 P.M. IN FRONT OF A

SCHOOL ON BOWLER STREET IN LYNN.

THE VICTIM, A 24-YEAR-OLD SALEM

MAN, WAS DELIVERING FOOD FOR A

LOCAL PIZZA RESTAURANT.

POLICE FOUND HIM DEAD IN HIS CAR

WITH MULTIPLE GUNSHOT WOUNDS.

A FRIEND TELLS US SHE JUST SAW

THE VICTIM BEFORE HE LEFT FOR

DELIVERIES.

>> I JUST STARTED CRYING, AND I

WAS LIKE, I JUST SAW HIM A

COUPLE OF HOURS AGO.

ALWAYS HAD A SMILE ON HIS FACE.

ALWAYS SAID, HEY, HOW'S IT

GOING.

A SINCERE HARD-WORKER.

HE DIDN'T DESERVE.

SERA: WITNESSES SAW THE SUSPECT

TAKE OFF AFTER THE SHOOTING.

NO WORD YET, THOUGH, ON WHAT

SPARKED THE INCIDENT.

BUT AGAIN, OVERNIGHT, POLICE

HAVE MADE AN ARREST.

A SUSPECT IS IN CUSTODY AT THIS

For more infomation >> Arrest made in killing of delivery driver - Duration: 1:09.

-------------------------------------------

Surprising Health benefits of musk melon - Reasons Why Muskmelon Is Healthy for You! - Tamil Health - Duration: 3:29.

Surprising Health benefits of musk melon - Reasons Why Muskmelon Is Healthy for You! - Tamil Health Tips

For more infomation >> Surprising Health benefits of musk melon - Reasons Why Muskmelon Is Healthy for You! - Tamil Health - Duration: 3:29.

-------------------------------------------

1100 Frases En Ingles | Learn 1100 English phrases | Aprender Ingles in Spanish for beginners - Duration: 1:50:53.

Learn 1100 English phrases by ifactner.com Hello.

Hello.

Hi.

How do you do?

How are you?

I'm fine.

Good Good Good Thank you!

Thank you!

Thanks!

Thank you very much!

You are welcome.

Here you are!

Please Please Please And how are you?

And how are you?

I am also fine, thank you.

Pardon.

Have we met before?

I don't recall.

What's your name?

My name is...

And, yours?

Nice to meet you.

Pleasure is mine.

What do you do?

I work in a company I work in a company I work in a company

And, what do you do?

I am a student.

Sorry Sorry Sorry I am sorry.

I am sorry.

I have to go.

Good day.

Good morning.

Good afternoon.

Good evening.

Good night.

Bye Bye Bye See you soon.

See you soon.

Until the next time Until the next time Until the next time

See you tomorrow.

I miss you.

Me too.

Take care Take care Take care I am learning English.

I am learning English.

I am learning to speak English.

Do you need help?

I need help.

I don't need help.

I don't feel confident.

Can you please guide me?

Yes, with pleasure.

What are you doing?

What are you thinking?

What do you want from me?

Nothing.

Yes.

No.

Never Never Never Perhaps.

Perhaps.

Maybe.

Sure Sure Sure Indeed Indeed Indeed

It may be possible.

Are you working?

I am working.

Where are you working?

I am working at a university.

I am not working.

I will cooperate with you.

Thanks for your help.

Thanks for the information.

Are you busy?

Yes, I am a little busy.

No, I am free.

Are you free?

Yes, I am free.

Let's go out.

I am hungry.

Are you hungry?

I am thirsty.

Let's eat.

Where is the train station?

Where is the bus stop?

I need to buy a ticket.

You can buy them from that shop.

I need something.

How much?

How much do I owe you?

What are your salary expectations?

I think 30 thousand would be enough.

What do you need?

I need money.

Are you a student?

I am a student.

I have money.

I don't have money.

What time it is?

It's half past five.

You know more.

Do you know?

What do you know?

I don't know.

I know nothing.

Are you tired?

I am tired.

Are you happy?

I am happy.

Are you not tired?

I am not tired.

It's early.

It's late.

We reached there on time.

Excuse me!

Where's the restroom?

Where is the phone?

Where are you?

I am at home.

I am at work.

I will buy something.

Can I help you?

How may I help you?

Can you help me?

I have more.

Where do you live?

I live in ... I live in ... I live in ... Where do you study?

Where do you study?

If you need, I can give you money.

I don't need your sympathy.

I need a job.

I need you.

Where do you play?

What are you cooking?

I am reading.

You are driving.

He is writing.

She is laughing.

It is running.

They are waiting.

We are going.

What are you reading?

What do you want?

It's easy.

It's difficult.

Where do you smoke?

How is your family?

Family is fine.

How are your children?

Superb.

Excellent Excellent Excellent Very good.

Very good.

Very bad.

What's your phone number?

Call me.

I'll call you.

Let's go out.

I am with family.

I am with friends.

What's your mobile number?

I am in Europe.

What?

What is the time?

Who?

Who are you?

When?

When is she coming?

Where?

Where are they going?

Why?

Why are you crying?

How?

How is she doing?

It's sunny.

It's raining.

It's cloudy.

It's snowing.

I like summers.

I don't like winters.

What are you playing?

Are you waiting?

I am waiting.

I am eating.

I like the food.

I like to drive.

I like to ride a bicycle.

What are you learning?

Why are you learning English?

I have a big family.

I have a small family.

What's that?

Do you like it?

It's beautiful.

I like the book.

I am traveling I am traveling I am traveling Have a nice trip!

Have a nice trip!

Where are you?

I am here.

I like it.

I don't like it.

What do you like?

You are beautiful.

Good luck!

Can you see me?

I can see you.

Today.

Today is my birthday.

Morning.

Lets think about it in the morning.

Evening.

I walk in the evening.

Night.

He sleeps at night.

Monday.

Tuesday.

Wednesday.

Thursday.

Friday.

Saturday.

Sunday.

Day before yesterday.

Yesterday.

tomorrow tomorrow tomorrow I understand.

I understand.

I don't understand.

It's a good price.

It's cheap.

It's expensive.

It's fresh.

It's stale.

What do you want to do?

How was your day?

My day was good.

My day was bad.

It's delicious.

It's good.

I want more.

I want less.

It's fine.

Thanks for the food.

May I ask why?

Can you help her?

Could you please help me out?

I'll help you.

Yes please.

No, thanks.

Thank you for your help.

What are you talking about?

Day.

People work during the day.

Afternoon.

I can come in the afternoon.

Evening Evening Evening We can play in the evening.

We can play in the evening.

Night.

I sleep at night.

Early.

I wake up early in the morning.

Late.

Why are you always late?

I arrived early.

I arrived late.

Date.

I'm tired.

I'm enthusiastic.

I'm sleepy.

I'm going to sleep.

I have work to do.

It's hailing.

It's very difficult.

Where's the class room?

Over there.

Here.

Come here.

Go there.

Turn off the TV.

Don't watch that movie.

How many siblings do you have?

I'm sorry.

Excused.

Promise me.

Have a nice day.

You too.

Enjoy your holidays.

How do you say in English...

I understand.

I don't understand.

Do you understand?

What's there to eat?

What's there to drink?

Why are you doing this to me?

I love to go there.

Today.

What did you do today?

What did you do yesterday?

What did you do this morning?

How beautiful!

What are you saying?

Why are you hurting me?

Do you need anything?

Did you like it?

I hate it.

I love it.

Do you want some?

I think so.

I don't think so.

Good idea.

Where are you from?

I'm from...

I need rest.

How cool!

That's hot.

Good job.

I need to go.

I want to go.

I don't want to go.

What a surprise.

I want to go there.

It's a pleasure.

Welcome.

Good luck!

Long time no see.

Please speak more slowly.

Can you please speak slowly?

Do you speak English?

Yes, I speak English.

Yes, a little.

Can you write it down please?

How much is it?

Get well soon.

Happy new year.

Happy birthday.

What happened?

What's happening?

I like you.

What do you do?

Can you believe it?

I can't believe it.

It's a beautiful day.

It's a rainy day.

It's sunny.

It's cloudy.

It's snowing.

It's cool.

Please, sit down.

Come in.

Go out of here.

How may I help you?

How may I serve you?

Do you want something to drink?

Do you want to have tea?

Do you want something to eat?

Again.

Try again.

Do it again.

What type of music do you like?

What type of movies do you like?

I had a fun day.

I had a good day.

I had a busy day.

What will you do later?

I have an exam later.

I'll be free later.

I'll be busy later.

When is your birthday?

Can I tell you later?

Can I call you later?

I need to practice my English.

I need to improve my English speaking.

Do you have Whatsapp?

Do you use Whatsapp?

When are you free?

Message me when you are free.

I'm unemployed.

I'm looking for a job.

Where do you work?

I am cooking dinner.

Is it easy?

Is it difficult?

I'm lost.

I'm confused.

What do you like to do in your free time?

I like watching movies.

I like listening to music.

I like reading books.

I like watching television.

I am with my friends.

I was with my family.

How do you feel?

I feel lazy.

I am lazy I am lazy I am lazy I feel sick.

I feel sick.

I am sick.

I feel okay.

I am okay.

I feel weird.

You are weird.

Thanks for asking.

I was worried.

Are you home?

I am waiting.

I was waiting for you.

You're so nice.

Did you sleep well?

Is it finished?

It's boring.

I can't wait for summer.

I can't wait for school to end.

I like your shirt.

Where did you get it?

How lucky!

How sad!

Where is this place?

Do you have a question?

I have a question.

What's your favorite subject?

Who's your favorite singer?

My favorite singer is...

Who's your favorite band?

My favorite band is...

It's noisy.

Turn the volume down Turn the volume down Turn the volume down

It's very messy.

It's very complicated.

It's smelly.

It's quiet.

Turn the volume up.

It's better.

It's worse.

I'm studying right now.

I just got home.

How did it happen?

How was it?

How is it possible?

I was thinking of you.

I had a dream.

I slept like a baby.

Did you hear the news?

I have a good news.

I got a job.

Congratulations!

Time to celebrate.

You have my support.

I am with you.

Thanks for your support.

It's inspiring.

I'm confident.

Are you ready?

I'm ready.

Are you sure?

I'm sure.

I like how you think.

It's true.

It's a mistake.

It's terrible.

It's awesome.

Who needs help?

I'm here to help.

What are the options?

Are you looking for something?

What do you need?

It's working.

It's not working.

It's very helpful.

It's a miracle.

How do you learn?

I practice by listening.

I practice when I'm free.

English is easy.

English is difficult.

My pronunciation needs practice.

Are you learning English too?

I have problems with pronunciation.

It's normal.

What are good foreign films to watch?

I like learning about different cultures.

I need to rest.

I'm home alone.

Do you want to talk?

Wait for me.

I'll wait for you.

Tell me when you're ready.

I can't right now.

I'm happy for you.

I'll take a shower.

It happens to everyone.

How do you do it?

I'm doing the same.

I have time.

I don't have time.

I have money.

Do you have money?

I don't have money.

I am busy at school.

I'm free this weekend.

What time are you free?

I'll tell you later.

I hope to see you soon.

Can I have one?

Make yourself comfortable.

Thanks for your hospitality.

What's new?

Nothing much.

It's interesting.

You have a beautiful house.

I'm making plans.

It's exciting.

How was your weekend?

Did you hear about what happened?

Tell me more.

I'll write it down.

Explain this.

I'm in trouble.

Take your time.

I can explain.

Did you learn something?

It's funny because it's true.

Today was a crazy day.

It's a secret.

I'm here.

I can hear you.

I can see you.

I want to travel.

It's time to sleep.

I love learning languages.

What did you study?

I hate waking up early.

What are they doing?

I'm bored.

I'm practicing English.

How is your pronunciation?

I need help with English.

You're a good teacher.

I appreciate your help.

Where did you go?

I can't find you.

Are you a university student?

I'm a university student.

I live with my family.

I live alone.

Who's here?

Is it true?

Is it true? is it false? is it false? is it false?

I'm on my bed.

Visit me.

You will like it.

Which is it?

What are you buying?

What's that noise?

It's night here.

It's time for dinner.

For more infomation >> 1100 Frases En Ingles | Learn 1100 English phrases | Aprender Ingles in Spanish for beginners - Duration: 1:50:53.

-------------------------------------------

Ah Les Crocodiles - Chansons et Comptines pour Bébé - Duration: 18:43.

For more infomation >> Ah Les Crocodiles - Chansons et Comptines pour Bébé - Duration: 18:43.

-------------------------------------------

Waterpik vs flossing (Which one is better?) - Duration: 3:47.

what is the best water picks or the flossing

Most people know to brush and floss their teeth regularly

However, many people have questions about whether

water flossing is an alternative to traditional flossing

Brushing the teeth is an effective way of removing food

plaque from the surfaces of the teeth

However, it is not a great way to get

rid of food that is in between the

teeth or below the gum line

The process of flossing uses a thin piece of

strength that is packed in between each

of the teeth. This string gently scrapes

up and down each surface of the tooth

to move plaque and food particles off of

the tooth and out from under the gums

there are several advantages to

traditional flossing it is very

efficient method of removing excess food

off of the teeth, Floss does not cost much

money and it is easily accessible from

any pharmacy or grocery store

Flossing is quick and easy, and can be

done anywhere. Despite the many advantages to

flossing there are several disadvantages

as well, they include difficulty reaching

some areas of the mouth with a floss

flossing can cause minor bleeding

especially if not done regularly

floss can sometimes be difficult to

handle by some people Even with these

negatives, it is still important to floss

regularly. If people find flossing

especially difficult or painful, they should

check in with the dentist to make sure

that there isn't a more serious problem

Water picking is also known as

water flossing and is different to

traditional flossing. Water picking

utilizes a special machine that directs a

stream of water into the mouth and gums

rather than scraping the teeth to

remove plaque, water flossing uses the

pressure of the water to massage the gums

and push the food away from the teeth.

Water picking has many advantages

A waterpik is easy to use, especially for

people with braces, or other types of

dental work like permanent or temporary

bridges. The massage action can also improve

gum health and reach areas that

can't be reached with traditional floss

There are many disadvantages to using

a water flosser as well. A waterpik can be

expensive to purchase, and will need

space for storage. It requires access to

electricity and water, making it difficult to

use outside of the home. now the question

which one is the best? which of these two

techniques is best is an ongoing

question and there really is no right

answer. The most important thing is to

clean between the teeth and under the

gums each day. A study published in

the Journal of Clinical Dentistry

compared the efficacy of a water

flosser to string floss used in

combination with a manual toothbrush

The researchers found that the group who

used the waterpik had a 74.4

percent reduction in plaque as compared

to a 57.7 percent

reduction in the group who used the string floss

Other studies also found that people who

used water picking saw a greater reduction

in gingivitis and gum bleeding as

compared with string floss

However, many dentists and hygienists

still recommend string flossing, either

in addition to or instead of water flossing.

THANK YOU FOR WATCHING

For more infomation >> Waterpik vs flossing (Which one is better?) - Duration: 3:47.

-------------------------------------------

BEST GAMING MUSIC MIX ♫ Dubstep, Electro House, EDM, Trap ♫ Best Music Mix 2017 - Duration: 52:34.

Don't forget to Like & Share the mix if you enjoy it!

For more infomation >> BEST GAMING MUSIC MIX ♫ Dubstep, Electro House, EDM, Trap ♫ Best Music Mix 2017 - Duration: 52:34.

-------------------------------------------

THORIUM DEBUNKED - Duration: 59:58.

There was a recent report done by the Nuclear Energy Agency of the OECD on thorium systems.

Can you make them work?

Yes you can make them work.

Is there an advantage doing it?

I haven't seen it.

A new paper has just come out on thorium powered nuclear reactors.

Not quite so bullish on the case for thorium.

It's from Britain's National Nuclear Laboratory.

So they say that there is about four times more thorium on Earth than there is uranium.

But at the moment uranium is cheap enough that simply doesn't matter.

It's, I think, one of these sort of technological cults.

Melting the fuel rods down in concentrated nitric acid from the thorium reactor.

Extracting [uranium] 233 and then making more fuel rods with that and putting it in another

reactor...

It's economically totally out of the question.

Go to my web page section on thorium reactors written by physicists.

You just heard three different reports cited.

One to a congressional committee on energy.

One to readers of The Economist.

And one to the audience of Russia Today.

All 3 reports overwhelmingly focus on the challenge of consuming thorium in solid fuel

reactors.

Such as Shippingport Atomic Power Station.

This reactor is going to cost something over 55 million dollars, I believe it will produce

about a 100,000 kilowatts of power.

The real object of this reactor is to learn about Pressurized Water Reactors for atomic

power.

It will not be cheap to operate.

It will be no cheaper to operate then Write's Kitty Hawk would have been to carry passengers

around.

At the present time reactor design is an art, not a science.

We are trying to make a science out of it.

Rickover built one of these reactors and put it over here in Shippingport.

A funny-looking submarine shell shaped containment building.

Get Out.

That's funny.

It is the first full-scale nuclear power plant for generation of electricity in the United

States.

Over its 25-year life, Shippingport was powered by various combinations of nuclear fuel including

one fuel load of thorium.

He wanted to prove you can make a light water breeder.

He kind of snuck Radkowsky in there to put the thorium in.

The people in charge now of the AEC were not interested in the breeding.

Only problem is the core turned into a gigantic humongous Swiss watch that had to be that

accurate with a million little springs holding it all together.

He was trying to shoehorn different nuclear physics into an existing system.

It made it very complicated and very difficult to work.

He did that under the Naval Reactor program.

We used to have a separate Naval Reactors division here in this lab.

They developed and built the reactor for the world's first atomic submarine: The Nautilus.

The story of The Nautilus is legend.

Because of its success it was used as a starting point in the development of an advanced design

reactor for shipping port.

Its name: PWR - Pressurized Water Reactor.

The reason we have that as the base for our power reactor technology today is because

The Navy was prepared to pay the first-mover costs to make one work.

And once you've done that it's extraordinarily difficult to compete with it because those

first mover costs are very, very high and have no financial return associated with them.

I became really quite friendly with Rickover and spent better than a year... and that's

where he learned about nuclear power.

Was that about 1947?

It was 1947, yes.

And it was I who urged young Rickover, the way to make nuclear powered submarine was

with the Pressurized Water Reactor.

You know, The Navy had reactors and so The Air Force had to have reactors.

The Navy has built their nuclear submarines and The Army has taken the same technologies

as The Navy, the water-cooled reactor and they're doing their thing.

But The Air Force wants to build a nuclear-powered bomber!

Dirty little secret was that most of the people involved in it knew from the get-go that it

really wasn't practical.

In contrast to a submarine where you've got limited space but you can shield it for the

people on the submarine, it's much harder on an airplane because of the weight.

Most of us did not really think Aircraft Reactor really could work.

But we did feel that there is very interesting technology there that someday could be applied.

And I would maintain that Weinberg was absolutely right in his assessment of the situation back

then.

He knew that to make the nuclear airplane work they couldn't use water cooled reactors.

They couldn't use high-pressure reactors.

They couldn't use complicated solid fuel reactors.

They had to have something that was so slick, that was so safe, that was so simple...

That operated at low pressure, high temperature, had all the features you wanted in it.

They didn't even know what it was.

I think someday this will be looking at as one of the great pivot points of history that

if this program, this Nuclear Airplane program had not been established the Molten-Salt Reactor

would have never been invented because it is simply too radical, too different, too

completely out of the ball field of everything else- for it to be arrived at through an evolutionary

development.

It had to be forced into existence by requirements that were so difficult to achieve and the

nuclear airplane was that.

Well we were young chemical engineers at the time.

God smiles on young chemical engineers they do things that in later years would be regarded

as crazy.

The Navy program that led to the Light Water Reactors we have now was well optimized to

the needs of The Navy.

It actually wasn't very well optimized to the needs of power production.

The reactor category advocated by Alvin Weinberg for civilian power production, the Molten-Salt

Reactor is covered in only two of the three reports dismissing thorium.

Thorium?

But they were very convincing.

Yeah, they are idiots.

These people are mad!

Now, let me tell you about thorium.

To produce electricity you have to reprocess, like, melt the fuel.

Then make the fuel rods with Uranium-233 then put them in the reactor.

It is economically totally out of the question, so these men are mad!

There's some sort of psychotic element in the nuclear industry... ...to do with testosterone

and hormone receptors in the brain.

Behavior and sex comes into it.

E=mc 2 is a substitute probably for male... will I say it?

Erection and ejaculation!

Um, and they like it, and it's the sort of energy that really grabs them.

So let's dismiss that third report by the anti-nuclear organization IEER, and focus

on the NNL and OECD reports.

They do include sections on molten salt.

The United Kingdom's NNL report correctly identifies the advantages offered by Molten

Salt Reactors in its Molten Salt Reactor section.

That is, page 23.

However, the full implications of Molten Salt Reactors are not examined throughout the different

sections.

For example, proliferation risk and reprocessing are covered as if spent fuel containing Uranium-233

will be shuttled between the reactor, a reprocessing facility, and a spent fuel repository.

That is not the case.

Uranium-233 is both created and fissioned into energy inside the reactor itself.

Unlike solid fuel alternatives what emerges from the Molten-Salt Breeder does not represent

a proliferation risk, nor a reprocessing challenge.

A single part of the NNL report illustrates how this should have gone.

Page 18.

Recycling U-233 present some difficult challenges in fuel fabrication because of the daughter

products from U-232.

Problems.

Challenges.

Technological barriers.

Technical risk.

And then, at the bottom- MSR is unique in that it avoids these problems entirely with

no fuel fabrication required.

The NNL report could easily have a caveat carved out in every section regarding Molten

Salt Reactors.

MSR impacts every aspect of the thorium fuel cycle, including proliferation.

From a liquid fuel perspective, there's no meat in this report.

The OECD report is another report focused on solid fuel.

Like the NNL report, every section goes into detail about the challenges of thorium with

solid fuel reactors, but it does offer a fairly meaty section on Molten Salt Reactors.

11 pages.

Does the OECD report evaluate Alvin Weinberg's concept of the molten-salt breeder and identify

technical challenges which may impede development?

Of those 11 pages, in a 133 page report, 1 sentence does so.

This 1 gigawatt design was a thermal reactor with graphite moderated core that required

heavy chemical fuel salt treatment with a removal time of approximately 30 days for

soluble fission products, a drawback that could potentially be eliminated by using a

fast spectrum instead.

The remaining 10 pages of molten salt are then entirely dedicated to a different Molten

Salt Reactor concept.

A fast-spectrum Molten Salt Reactor.

If you don't know the meaning of: moderator, fast spectrum, or fission products, then please

bear with me.

These terms will be explained.

In a fast-spectrum reactor, uranium and thorium perform the same.

In a solid fuel reactor, uranium is a superior choice.

It is only in Alvin Weinberg's thermal-spectrum Molten-Salt Breeder Reactor that thorium's

advantages become clear.

And this is what I think is really worthy of consideration- Right now we have to make

an economic case for why should we consider thorium as a fuel source?

We can go and we can mine uranium and we can enrich it and we can essentially burn out

the small amount of Uranium-235 in that.

And you can put an economic quantification on the value of a gram of fissile material

in the form of LEU [Low Enriched Uranium].

It is on the order of $10 to $15.

Out of the ground that's that's what a gram of of U-235 in that fuel represents.

So if you want to make an economic case for why you're going to use the thorium fuel cycle

you better figure out how to turn a gram of thorium into fissile and fission it for less

money than that.

Otherwise nobody's really going to care from an economic basis and so this is why we want

to pursue radical simplification in the reprocessing.

Want to make it as simple as we possibly can but no simpler.

The OECD report evaluates thorium and based only on solid fuel reactors and fast-spectrum

Molten Salt Reactors.

It does not evaluate thorium based on Alvin Weinberg's Molten-Salt Breeder Reactor.

When the idea of the breeder was first suggested in 1943, the rapid and efficient recycle of

the partially spent core was regarded as the main problem.

Nothing has happened in the ensuing quarter-century that has fundamentally changed this.

And I'll go further- Nothing has happened in the ensuing 40 years that has fundamentally

changed this.

Weinberg nailed the basic idea.

The media overlook this gaping hole in the report.

No mention of Alvin Weinberg, the Molten-Salt Reactor Experiment or of liquid chemistry.

No mention of a buried sentence in the hundred page report.

Let's reword it for clarity.

This one gigawatt design was a thermal reactor with graphite moderated core, that avoided

the drawbacks of fast-spectrum by removing soluble fission products through the use of

chemical fuel salt treatment.

The successful breeder will be the one that can deal with the spent fuel most rationally,

either by the achievement extremely long burn up, or by greatly simplifying the entire recycle

step.

We at Oak Ridge have always been intrigued by this latter possibility.

It explains our long commitment to liquid fuel reactors, first the Aqueous Homogenous,

now the Molten Salt.

The second reactor actually operated very well, that was the Molten Salt Reactor Experiment

There it is this is the place.

These things right over here are the spent probes.

See those things will extend like 60 foot in length, and went down the tank did the

melting, the bubbling and stirring and everything.

One of the things that I've learned from talking to some of the old-timers, people didn't disbelieve

that we could build the machine, they didn't believe that we could maintain it.

Operation of the MSRE was not too difficult.

And the people that I had working for me they all had hound dogs under the porch.

Old cars out in the yard, that didn't run very well.

If anything came up inside the Molten Salt Reactor say hey we can fix that.

And they did.

He felt like despite the challenges of operating high radiation fields that they were able

to operate and maintain that machine over the course of its lifetime.

I started out at the lab in 1957 and got onto the Molten-Salt Reactor Experiment.

The dynamics were not common to reactors because it was molten salt instead of water cooled

solid fuel.

If it heats up it gets less dense and that means it's less critical-

Less reactive- Yeah less reactive-

Yeah.

I was running some tests late at night.

The device that I was using got stuck in the wrong place and pulled the rod out and the

power went went up and up beyond the design power and then controlled itself and went

back down.

Everybody was happy.

After they completed the Molten Salt Reactor Experiment they went to the Atomic Energy

Commission, they said, "Hey G can we have some more money?

We'd like to go now and build the real thing.

We'd like to build the core and we'd like to build the blanket and we'd like to hook

a power conversion system on and make electricity."

They felt like they'd shot the moon.

Well, the Atomic Energy Commission unfortunately did not share their zeal to continue with

the technology.

In addition to being a thorium guru, Weinberg was also the original inventor of the Pressurized

Water Reactor.

He had invented it and gotten his patent for it in 1947.

It was a little bit of a tricky thing to have the inventor of the Light Water Reactor advocating

for something very, very, very different.

He didn't like the fact that it had to run at really high pressure, he just, he saw that

as a risk.

But as long as the reactor was as small as the submarine intermediate reactor which was

only 60 megawatts, then containment shell was absolute.

It was safe.

But when you went to 1,000 megawatt reactors you could not guarantee this.

He figured there would be an accident someday where you were not able to maintain the pressure

or keep cooling.

In some very remote situation conceive of the containment being breached.

Does any of this sound familiar?

He was making enough of a stink about this the Congressional leader named Chet Holifield

told Alvin Weinberg, he said, if you're so concerned about the safety of nuclear energy

it might be time for you to leave the nuclear business.

And Weinberg was really kind of horrified that they would have this response to him

because he wasn't questioning the value or the importance of nuclear energy.

If anything he was far more convinced about that than anyone else.

What he was questioning, was whether the right path been taken in the development of nuclear

reactors.

Do you feel like the program had a sound technical basis or do you feel like technical problems

were the basis for cancellation?

Some of the technical reasoning that I heard for the cancellation was that there was a

corrosion problem.

Tritium was raised as another issue, we made no effort on MSRE to do anything with tritium.

Did the people on the program feel like tritium was an insurmountable problem?

We recognized that tritium would have to be captured but most people thought that that's

something that we should be able to do.

Did the people on the program, particularly the chemists or the material scientists feel

that corrosion was an insurmountable problem on the program?

No.

And some of the subsequent experimental work seem to bode very favorably for an ability

to solve that issue, as well as the tritium issue by the way because we did do some tritium

experiments.

Were either of you present when the molten-salt reactor program was cancelled in the early

seventies?

We were still working here.

We were still working on the system.

We were still finalizing reports on the performance of the MSRE.

I didn't see it coming.

Mr. President?

Since you missed our meeting on breeder reactors, we sent the message today, Craig.

I told Ziegler to tell the press that it was a bipartisan effort.

This has got to be something we play very close to the vest but I am being ruthless

on one thing.

Any activities that we possibly can should be placed in Southern California.

So, on the committee, every time you have a chance, needle them.

Say, where's this going to be?

Let's push the California thing.

Can you do that?

Nixon was from California.

Hosmer was from Southern California.

Chet Holifield, who ran the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, was also from California.

It doesn't lead me to believe that the President was seriously considering alternatives to

the fast breeder reactor and other paths that could be taken.

It was a focus on what can we do right now to get jobs.

Now, don't ask me what a breeder reactor is.

All of this business about breeder reactors and nuclear energy and this stuff is over

my...

That was one of my poorer subjects, science.

I got through it but I had to work too hard.

I gave it up when i was about a sophomore.

But what I do know is this- That here we have the potentiality of a whole new breakthrough

in the development of power for peace.

The fellow on the phone call that we heard earlier said that if cost targets were missed

I for one don't intend to scream and holler about it.

In that same month the Atomic Energy Commission issued Wash-1222.

It almost completely ignored the safety and economic improvements possible through the

use of the Molten-Salt Breeder Reactor technology.

Milton Shaw who was the head of reactor development in Washington called up he says stop that

MSRE Reactor Experiment, fire everybody, just tell them to clear out their desks and go

home.

And send me the money for fast breeders.

In any other place, as an organization you're abandoning this route and going another, well

it just gets lost.

It is amazing how much they documented.

Enormous amounts of detail about the work that had been accomplished and how they had

developed the technology.

Almost all the nuclear power we use on Earth today uses water as the basic coolant.

It's a covalently bonded substance.

The oxygen has a covalent bond with two hydrogens.

Neither one of those bonds is strong enough to survive getting smacked around by a gamma

or a neutron.

And sure enough, they knock the hydrogens clean off.

Now, in a water cooled reactor, you have a system called a recombiner that will take

the hydrogen gas and the oxygen gas that is always being created from the nuclear reaction

and put them back together.

It's a great system as long as it's operating and the system is pumping.

Well, at Fukushima Daiichi, the problem was that the pumping power stopped.

At high temperature H2O can also react with the cladding to release hydrogen.

Or damage the cladding, releasing radioactive isotopes.

These 2 accidents illustrate the need for a coolant which is more chemically stable

than H2O.

Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima were all radically different incidents.

But what all 3 had in common was how poorly water performed as a coolant when things started

to go wrong.

Steam takes up about 1,000 times more volume than liquid water.

If you have liquid water at 300 degrees Celsius and suddenly you depressurize it, it doesn't

stay liquid for very long it flashes into steam.

That's scuba tank, hot scuba tank, full of nuclear material.

At Three Mile Island, water couldn't be pumped into the core because some of the coolant

water had vaporized into steam.

The increased pressure forced coolant water back out, contributing to a partial meltdown.

At Chernobyl, the insertion of poorly designed control rods caused core temperature to skyrocket.

The boiling point of the pressurized water coolant was passed, and it flashed to steam.

It was a steam explosion that tore the 2,000 ton lid off the reactor casing, and shot it

up through the roof of the building.

At Fukushima, loss of pump power allowed the coolant water to get hotter and hotter until

it boiled away.

These 3 accidents illustrate the need for a coolant with a higher boiling point than

water.

When you put water under extreme pressure like anything else it wants to get out of

that extreme pressure.

Almost all of the aspects of our nuclear reactors today that we find the most challenging can

be traced back to the need to have pressurized water.

Water cooled reactors have another challenge.

They need to be near large bodies of water so the steam they generate can be cooled and

condensed.

Otherwise they can't generate electrical power.

You see I had the good fortune to learn about a different form of nuclear power that doesn't

have all these problems for a very simple reason: it's not based on water cooling and

it doesn't use solid fuel.

Surprisingly it's based on salt.

Science allows you to look at everyday objects for what they really are.

Chemically and physically.

And it really makes you look twice at the world around you.

Your table salt is frozen.

That's a really strange thing to think about your table salt on your kitchen table.

It's frozen.

But once they melt they have a 1,000 degrees C [Celsius] of liquid range.

And they have excellent heat transfer properties.

They can carry a large amount of heat per unit volume, just like water.

Water is actually really good from a heat transfer perspective.

Its really good at carrying heat per unit volume.

Salts are just as good carrying heat per unit volume.

But salts don't have to be pressurized.

And that- If you remember nothing else of what I say tonight, remember that one fact.

A nuclear reactor is a rough place for normal matter.

The nice thing about a salt is that it is formed from a positive ion and a negative

ion.

Like sodium is positively charged, and chlorine is negatively charged.

And they go, we're not really going to bond we're just going to associate one with another.

That's what's called an ionic bond.

Yeah, you're kinda friends.

You know, you're-

Facebook friends!

There you go, facebook friends.

Alright, well it turns out this is a really good thing for a reactor because a reactor

is going to take those guys and just smack them all over the place with gammas and neutrons

and everything.

The good news is they don't really care who they particularly are next to.

As long as there are an equal number of positive ions and negative ions, the big picture is

happy.

A salt is composed of the stuff that's in this column the halogens, and the stuff that's

in these columns the alkali and alkaline.

Fluorine is so reactive with everything.

But once it's made a salt, a fluoride, then it's incredibly chemically stable and non-reactive.

Sodium chloride, table salt, or potassium iodide, they have really high melting points.

We like the lower melting points of fluoride salts.

Human mechanical energy is so amazing.

Why can't we use that to create energy?

You will never run out of electricity.

You never generate any pollution.

So half the world is not going to generate pollution.

We call it- Free Electric.

Solar Freakin' Roadways-

-replaces all roadways, parking lots, sidewalks, driveways, tarmacs, bike paths and outdoor

recreation surfaces with smart, microprocessing, interlocking, hexagonal solar units!

Maintaining a nation of solar highways.

Manufacturing bicycle-battery-generators for every home.

An extremely ambitious idea to replace our nation's roads with solar panels.

The Department of Transportation has kicked in $850,000.

People are actually taking this seriously.

Despite the media attention they've received, I think these ideas are flat-out crazy.

But they're par for the course in today's energy landscape.

They Keystone XL Pipeline extension-

For a while, the entire national energy discussion revolved around a single pipeline.

Sometimes it seems the more difficult an energy source is to harness, the more attention it

receives.

If you'll give me a chance to serve, I'll bring the EPA and the Agriculture Department

and all the people together and we'll use ethanol as a part of our nation's energy security

future!

Even Al Gore, who was a key proponent of Corn Ethanol, acknowledges the subsidy was a mistake-

The energy conversion ratios are, at best, very small.

How does Corn's 1.3 times compare against other energy sources?

Solar cells return 7 times.

Natural Gas is 10 times.

Wind is 18 times.

Today's water cooled nuclear is 80 times.

Coal is 80 times.

Hydropower is 100 times.

A thorium powered molten salt reactor can return 2000 times the energy invested in it.

Let's take a peek at a future powered by nuclear!

This is a little weird.

We can radically cut climate change emissions and leave a safe clean world for the future.

We don't need to invent anything new!

We just need to stop wasting time with distractions like nuclear power.

Come on!

Let's build the future we all want to see!

To understand why nuclear power has so much potential requires some effort.

It requires you to exercise a little bit of study.

Which part of this is doable, and could be safe, and could be acceptable in our society,

and which part of this is not?

And there's a collage of images that the anti-nuclear movement will throw you, usually of nuclear

weapons.

I hate nuclear weapons.

I never want to see nuclear weapons used.

I have no interest in that- But I do want to see nuclear power used to make my life,

and my children's lives, and your children's lives safer and better.

Think of the sun's heat on your upturned face on a cloudless summer's day.

From 150,000,000 kilometres away- we recognize its power.

When was the last time you watched Cosmos with Carl Sagan?

Recently actually.

Yeah?

I showed it to my kids a couple years ago.

Empire Strikes Back and Cosmos were probably two of my formative influences of the age

of 6.

The Sun is the nearest star- a glowing sphere of gas.

The surface we see an ordinary visible light is at 6,000 degrees centigrade.

But in its hidden interior- Super hot gas pushes the Sun to expand outward.

At the same time The Sun's own gravity pulls it inward to contract.

A stable equilibrium between gravity and nuclear fire.

Atoms are made in the insides of stars.

The atoms are moving so fast, that when they collide, they fuse.

Helium is the ash of The Sun's nuclear furnace.

The Sun is a medium-sized star, its core is only lukewarm 10,000,000 degrees.

Hot enough to fuse hydrogen, but too cold to fuse helium.

There many stars in the galaxy more massive yet, that live fast and die young in cataclysmic

supernova explosions.

Those explosions are far hotter than the core of the Sun.

Hot enough to transform elements like iron into all the heavier ones, and spew them into

space.

Long before the Earth, our home, was built- stars brought forth its substance.

Our planet, our society, and we ourselves, are built of star stuff.

Now, two of the things that were created in supernova are thorium and uranium.

These were different because they were radioactive and they kept some of that energy from the

supernova explosion stored in their very nuclear structure.

And some of this thorium and uranium was incorporated into our planet.

Sinking to the center of the world, and heating our planet.

Liquid iron circulating around the solid part of the core as Earth rotates- acts like a

wire carrying electric current.

Electric currents produce magnetic fields, and that's a good thing.

Our magnetic field protects us from the onslaught of cosmic rays.

A bigger deal- the magnetic field is deflecting the solar wind.

If you don't have a magnetic field deflecting the solar wind, over billions of years your

planet ends up like Mars.

Because the solar wind will strip off a planet's atmosphere, without the protective nature

of the magnetic field.

So if we didn't have the energy from thorium inside the Earth we would be on a dead planet.

The decay of radioactive elements in the core keeps it moving.

Let's talk about radioactivity.

Because I had an erroneous notion of what radioactivity was.

I thought, that if you had something that had like a half-life of a day, and you had

something had a half-life of a million years, it meant that the dude that was radioactive

for a day is like brr-r-r-r-r-r-r-r for a day and then, ooop, I'm done.

And the dude with the half-life for a million years is like brr-r-r-r-r-r-r-r for a million

years, and then done.

Ok, so you go- Which one of these is more dangerous?

Well definitely the one that's got a half-life of a million years because that's got to be,

like, radioactive forever, and the dudes that's radioactive for a day that's not a big deal,

right?

Completely wrong!

Ok?

Utterly backwards.

The dude who is radioactive for a day is really, really radioactive!

The dude who is radioactive for a million years is hardly radioactive at all.

Which one of those two is more dangerous?

The one that's radioactive for a day.

By a long shot!

Ok?

So you're radioactivity is directly, and inversely proportional to your half-life.

If somebody goes to you here's stuff that's got half-life of a million years- scary huh?

You go, here give it to me, I'm going to put it in my hand.

It's not going to hurt me.

Agghh!

It's not going to hurt me.

Here's stuff with a half-life of a day- you want to hold it?

No!

No, keep it away from me man!

That stuff is hot!

But it's going away fast too, right?

Got a longer half-life?

Less dangerous.

And I want to tear my hair out because what I haven't mentioned is radioactive waste.

With all out radioactive waste?

The main problem is radioactive waste.

Close down all those reactors, now.

With solar and wind and geothermal- Geothermal.

What's green energy?

And they go- Geothermal's green energy.

Okay, do you you know where geothermal comes from?

No.

Comes from the decay of thorium inside the Earth.

Oh.

Is geothermal renewable?

Yes.

Ok, then thorium's renewable.

No it's not you're using it up!

Well, you're using up thorium as it decays inside the Earth.

Any argument for geothermal, if it is rigorously pursued, is an argument for the renewability

of thorium as an energy resource.

The majority of American geothermal is harvested in the state of California, which has most

of its geothermal energy harvested in the Imperial Valley.

A typical Imperial Valley geothermal plant produces 40 tons of radioactive waste, every

day.

And they're saddled with all our radioactive waste, who do we think we are, Bob?

Geothermal is creating 200 times the volume of radioactive waste that nuclear reactors

do, per watt of power.

I don't wanna wear a dosimeter.

Don't want to calculate rems and sieverts.

I don't wanna see no clean-up crew.

Or get zapped before I hear the news.

We can get the heat from Earth and Sun.

And hook the wind to make the engines run.

If common sense could only start- a chain reaction of the human heart-

What a wonderful world this would be!

Coal and gas plants are able to release radioactive material to the environment in much greater

amounts than a nuclear plant would ever possibly be allowed to, because they are considered

what's called N.O.R.M.

- Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials.

For instance, when you go frack a shale and you pull gas out, a lot of radon comes out

with that too.

Burn the gas that radon being released.

Nobody counts that radon against the gas.

If they did, the regulatory commission would shut the gas plant down.

Same with coal.

And they've spent a lot of money to make sure that regulatory agencies do not regulate N.O.R.M.

for a coal or gas plant the way they regulate radioactive emissions from a nuclear plant.

If they did we would be shutting down all our coal and gas plants- based on radioactivity

alone.

A fear of radiation, probably, is the basis of most fear of nuclear power in general.

What is radiation?

It's simply the idea that there are certain nuclei that radiate things from them.

In the process of changing to something else they radiate something.

Modern physics and chemistry have reduced the complexity of the sensible world to an

astonishing simplicity!

Three units put together in different patterns make, essentially, everything.

The proton has a positive electrical charge.

A neutron is electrically neutral.

And an electron an equal negative electrical charge.

Since every atom is electrically neutral, the number of protons in the nucleus must

equal the number of electrons far away in the electron cloud.

The protons and neutrons together make up the nucleus of the atom.

If you're an atom and you have just one proton- You're hydrogen.

2 protons- helium.

3- lithium.

All the way to 92 protons- in which case your name is uranium.

For any given element, the number of protons must remain the same.

But the number of neutrons may vary.

The atomic weight of an atom is the number of protons plus the number of neutrons.

Natural uranium may contain 142, 143 or 146 neutrons.

That means- Uranium has 3 natural isotopes.

U-234, U-235, and U-238.

Some elements, such as tin, have a great number of natural isotopes.

Others, such as aluminum, have only 1.

Most isotopes are stable.

They would never spontaneously change their atomic structure.

But some isotopes are constantly changing.

They're busy being radioactive.

Given enough time, this Radium-88 isotope will shed energy and change.

This is how isotopes in the Earth itself emit radiation.

The geiger counter detects their presence.

A cloud chamber makes these rays visible to the naked eye.

Each new vapor trail shows that another atom has thrown off a fragment from its nucleus.

Each atom does this only once before becoming a different isotope.

This activity appears to go on endlessly.

That's because there's billions of atoms in that tiny sample.

You can't turn decay on and off.

If we can turn radioactive decay on and off we can do all kinds of things be we've never

figured out how to do it, I don't think we ever will.

Because we simply can't influence the state of the nucleus like that.

Hit it with a hammer.

Boil it in oil.

Vaporize it.

The nucleus of an atom is kind of sanctuary.

Immune to the shocks and upheavals of its environment.

The atoms of each unstable element decay to constant rate.

These mouse traps represent atoms that are radioactive.

Every once in a while, a mousetrap's spring breaks down and snaps shut.

A tiny bit of mass is converted into energy, as an atom changes spontaneously into a lighter

isotope.

Thorium has only one isotope, Thorium-232.

It has a 14 billion year half-life.

Ok, so when the universe is twice as old as it is now, thorium will have only decayed

one half-life.

So based on what I just told you about radioactivity, what does that tell you about how radioactive

thorium is?

Not very.

It's hardly at all.

Ok, uranium, two isotopes.

Uranium-235, Uranium-238, both of course the radioactive.

U-238 has a 5 billion year half life.

That's pretty old, that's about how old the Earth is.

That's how old the earth is, that's how old the universe is.

Uranium-235 on the other hand, much shorter half-life, 700 million years.

This is a handful of these uranium-oxide fuel pellets.

You see in the picture, the guy's got gloves on.

And so you think- He's got gloves on to protect him from the uranium oxide?

But now that I've taught you about the true nature of radioactivity, you might go- I dunno

Kirk I'm not so sure that stuff's so dangerous after all...

And you would be correct!

He's not protecting himself from the uranium- He's protecting the uranium from himself.

That stuff has to stay super pure and super clean, and you don't want to get any of your

oils, or grease, or sweat on nuclear fuel that's going to go inside a fuel rods, so,

that's what the gloves are for.

Knowing that some atoms could spontaneously change, in 1939 scientists tried firing a

neutron into the nucleus of a uranium atom, the heaviest and least stable atom found in

nature.

Instead of a minor change, from one isotope into another, the uranium atom split into

two parts.

When an atom is so unstable that it can be split into two by hitting it with a neutron,

we call that "FISSILE".

When the fissile uranium atoms split apart, those two parts combined were lighter than

the original uranium atom.

The missing mass was converted into energy.

Also released were two neutrons.

One free neutron has become two free neutrons.

Now we have two neutrons.

This implied a nuclear chain reaction in uranium.

Somebody wondered one time- Ok, billion years ago that means there's a lot more Uranium-235

and natural nuclear reactors might have been possible.

When you generate electricity from nuclear power you make 200 new elements that never

existed before we fissioned uranium.

We found in Africa, at a place called Oklo, in the Gabon, 2 billion years ago, there were

scores of natural nuclear reactors there.

That were nothing more than uranium ore in the rock and the water would come in and it

would lead to a nuclear reaction.

And these reactors ran for hundreds of millions of years.

So we did not invent nuclear fission, alright?

It was done long, long, long before we were here, and very successfully.

Back when the earth was formed there was a lot more Uranium-235 then there is now.

Uranium-235 is like silver and platinum.

Can you imagine burning platinum for energy?

And that's what we're doing with our nuclear energy sources today, we're burning this extremely

rare stuff, and were not burning the Uranium-238 and the Thorium.

Your uranium in Saskatchewan is so rich you don't even have to enrich it.

It's extremely powerful.

Caldicott is wrong.

There is no natural source of isotopically enriched uranium.

Natural uranium's isotopic ratios are identical- everywhere on Earth.

The amount of uranium in the world finite.

If all electricity today was generated with nuclear power there would only be a 9 year

supply of uranium left in the whole world.

In reality, there is no more a constrained uranium supply, than there is a constrained

seawater supply.

Uranium is water soluble, and it passes from the Earth's mantle, to the crust, to the ocean.

Every year, the ocean contains more uranium than the previous year.

My straw reaches across the room.

We're pretty inventive when it comes to harvesting natural resources.

I drink your milkshake!

I drink it up!

We are never going to run out of uranium.

It is quite literally a renewable resource.

For all the difference that distinction makes.

About 35 years worth of oil left in the whole world.

We're going to run out of oil.

As a natural resource, the appeal of thorium over uranium, is that thorium has zero environmental

cost to acquire.

We can power our civilization on thorium without opening a single thorium mine.

It is already a plentiful byproduct of existing mining operations.

We need thorium and he needs somebody to get rid of Thorium.

It's found in tailings piiles.

It's found in ash piles.

Only one of the materials in nature is naturally fissile, and that's Uranium-235, which is

a very small amount of natural uranium, about 0.7%.

This was the form of uranium that could be utilized directly in a nuclear reactor.

Most of the uranium was Uranium-238.

This had to be transformed into another nuclear fuel called plutonium before it could be used.

And then there was thorium.

And in a similar manner, to Uranium-238, it also had to be transformed into another nuclear

fuel, Uranium-233, before it could be used in a reactor.

How much energy did the neutron have, that you smacked the nuclear fuel with?

Ok how much energy did it have?

And then how many neutrons did you kick out when you smacked it through fission?

Two is a very significant number in breeder reactors.

You need two neutrons.

You've got to have one to keep your process going, and you have to have another one to

convert fertile material into fissile material.

Ok, look at plutonium... eeeehhhhhh.

It's that dip below 2 right there.

That's what makes it so you cannot burn up Uranium-238 in a thermal-spectrum reactor,

like a water-cooled reactor.

You just can't do it.

The physics are against you.

And the reality is, you do lose some neutrons.

You can't build a perfect reactor that doesn't lose any neutrons.

They look at this and they said, man!

We just can't burn Uranium-238 in a thermal reactor.

It just can't be done!

Well, these guys are undeterred, they said well here's what we'll do we'll just built

a fast reactor.

Because, look how good it gets in the fast region.

Wow!

It gets above 2, it gets up to 3!

Wow, this is really good!

Well there's a powerful disincentive to doing it this way and it has to do with what are

called CROSS-SECTIONS.

These are a way of describing how likely it is that a nuclear reaction will proceed.

Look how much bigger the cross sections are in thermal than they are in fast.

How many of these little dots are we going to need to add up to this size?

We're going to a lot!

So this is why it was a big deal to be able to have performance in this region of the

curve.

Those little bitty dots?

They're up here in this part of the curve.

Ok, this is a fast region, this is the thermal region.

Thorium is more abundant than uranium.

All we're consuming now is that very, very, very small sliver of natural uranium- But

this is not the big deal!

No!

It's not a big deal that natural thorium is hundreds of times more abundant than the very

small sliver of fissile uranium.

The big deal about thorium is- that we can consume it in a thermal-spectrum.

That's the big with thorium.

Is it can be consumed in a thermal-spectrum reactor.

When you're talking about a thermal-spectrum reactor- of any kind- you have to have fuel

and you have to have moderator.

And they're both essential to the operation the reactor.

The moderator is slowing down the neutrons.

And when the neutrons have been slowed down, we call them thermal neutrons or a thermal-spectrum.

In a water-cooled reactor we use water, specifically the hydrogen in the water, to slow down the

neutrons through collisions.

The graphite in the Molten Salt Reactors, is that a moderator?

Yes, that's the moderator in the reactor.

Same idea, except we use graphite as the moderator instead of water.

Neutrons going in the graphite, hit the carbon atoms, they lose energy, they slow down.

Now why slow it down?

That's the difference when you're going to into that little bitty dot, to the big dot.

That's why you want to slow it down.

You want the big dot, not the little bitty dot.

A thermal-spectrum Molten Salt Reactor has to have the graphite moderator of the core

in order to sustain criticality.

If the vessel ruptures, recriticality is fundamentally impossible.

The drain tank does not have any graphite in it.

If something happens where that fuel drains away from that graphite, criticality is no

longer possible, the reactor is subcritical- fission stops.

And there's no way to restart it without reloading the fuel back into the core.

This is such a remarkable feature.

And it really is unique to having this liquid fuel form, and to having something to operate

a standard pressure.

You can't do this in solid fuel- you do this in solid fuel it's called a meltdown.

If we had more of today's reactors in operation, 1 cup of uranium oxide would cover a typical

American's yearly energy demand.

Per-capita, that's the equivalent of burning 54 barrels of oil.

Every year, for every single American.

Or, 12 tonnes of coal.

Or, 53 hundred cubic feet of natural gas, to generate the same amount of energy.

4 grams of thorium can power a middle-class American lifestyle for a full year.

That's just 4 grams.

But this can only happen if the reactor is efficiently fueled with chemically homogeneous

liquid fuel, if the reactor runs at high temperature, and the power generator is optimized to take

advantage of the reactor's high temperature operation.

The performance of the carbon dioxide gas turbine is such that it leads to very, very

compact turbomachinery.

The turbo machinery for this entire reactor would easily fit on this stage.

Probably on half this stage.

And if anybody's been to a big reactor before and seen big steam cycle turbomachinery you

can appreciate what a reduction in scale that is.

High efficiency power conversion enabled by the high operating temperature of molten salt.

Complete burnup of nuclear fuel enabled by a combination of homogeneous liquid fuel,

online chemistry, and thermal breeding.

Such as Alvin Weinberg and the team at ORNL intended to build until the molten salt breeder

program was suddenly terminated.

Shaw says, stop that MSRE reactor experiment.

Fire everybody.

Just tell them to clear out their desks and go home.

And send me the money for fast-breeders.

This is the thorium reactor.

Can you tell me what the thinking is on thorium as a fuel?

What the advantages are, what the disadvantages are, what the pros and cons are of thorium?

The first commercial reactor operated in this country at Shippingport was based on thorium

fuel.

My constituents are always asking me about this- Does thorium have a place in our nuclear

future?

Can you make them work?

Yes, you can make them work.

Is there an advantage to doing it?

I haven't seen it.

There's about 4x more thorium on Earth than there is uranium.

But at the moment uranium is cheap enough that simply doesn't matter.

It's, I think, one of these sort of technological cults.

An atom of thorium and an atom of uranium both contain the same amazing millionfold

improvement in energy density over coal.

It isn't that an atom of thorium contains any more energy than an atom of uranium.

Or that natural thorium is much more common than natural uranium.

But we don't consume natural uranium in today's reactors.

There's about 4x more thorium on Earth than there is uranium.

Thorium is 400x as common as Uranium-235.

And we can't harness the full power of natural uranium with the thorium breeder.

That's a bigger challenge.

Just like today's reactors, any one piece of fuel will eventually become too used up

to sustain fission before its energy potential has been fully realized.

It is the semi-fissioned fuel which then must be reprocessed into new fuel, or treated as

waste.

The elimination of fuel fabrication, and the elimination of fuel reprocessing, as a distinct

step, are essential if you want to harvest the smallest amount of natural resources and

produce the smallest amount of nuclear waste.

Because the economics of nuclear power don't favor reprocessing fuel, it will always be

cheaper to simply dig up more uranium, rather than using every atom you've already mined.

The most environmentally friendly way to operate the thorium breeder is the only way to operate

the thorium breeder.

If you stop the chemical kidney, then fission slowly grinds to a halt.

The chemical kidney lets us continually remove used-fuel and keep adding fresh-fuel.

It is how our thorium fuel can be completely converted into energy and fission products.

People recycle cans they recycle papers.

Why not candles?

I say we put a bin out, let people bring back their old drippings at their convenience.

It's like those bags that say I used to be a plastic bottle.

We could have a bin that says- I used to be another candle.

And when they bring in those candles, we'll put them in another bin that say I used to

be another, another candle.

Yeah and then eventually we just have one that says, trust me, I've been another candles.

By weight, a paraffin candle stick and gasoline contain about the same amount of energy.

Why don't cars run on paraffin wax?

Because the inside of your car might need to look like this, or like this.

What process do we run chemically based on solids?

We don't.

Everything we do, we use as liquids or gases, because we can mix them completely.

You can take a liquid you can fully mix it.

You can take a gas you can fully mix it.

You can't take a solid and fully mix it, unless you turn it into a liquid or a gas.

You know, the people build Light Water Reactors are physicists and engineers.

And this is a whole lot of chemistry that they're maybe not so comfortable with.

So it's the chemistry of it that makes it so special, but it's also the bit that existing

nukes kinda go- You know, oooh, we were going into realms I don't, perhaps, feel so comfortable.

In the nuclear space there are other innovators.

You know, we don't know their work as well as we know this one, but the modular people-

that's a different approach.

There's a liquid type reactor which seems little hard but maybe they say all about us,

uh.

And so there are different ones.

Although Bill Gates Traveling Wave Reactor is still advertised to the public as a mechanical

device shuffling natural uranium fuel rods around.

TerraPower sought and received a research grant from the department of energy in 2015.

It is for the study of a uranium fueled fast-spectrum Molten Salt Reactor.

Uh, can you make them work?

Yes, you can make them work.

Is there an advantage to doing it?

I haven't seen.

Unless you're using slowed down, thermal-spectrum neutrons.

Thorium breeding offers no advantage over uranium breeding.

Dr. Lyons report's investigation of Molten Salt only includes fast-spectrum, not thermal-spectrum.

That is why he sees no thorium advantage over uranium.

Alvin Weinberg new the kidney would be required.

His team knew it before they even started constructing the Molten-Salt Reactor Experiment.

So it's a bit disappointing to see Weinberg's chemical kidney dismissed, as-

"a drawback that could be potentially eliminated".

The last operational Molten Salt Reactor shut down in the United States in 1969.

It ran in a remote location.

Research documents were kept in a walk-in closet.

For 3 decades, we didn't even know this was an option.

Then in 2002, ORNL's Molten Salt documentation is scanned into PDF and accessible to some

NASA employees.

2004.

Kirk Sorensen delivers CD-ROMs full of Molten Salt research to policy makers, national labs

and universities.

Dr. Per Peterson at Berkeley receives a copy.

2006.

Kirk moves the scanned research onto his website.

2008.

Molten Salt Reactor lectures begin at the Googleplex, and are hosted on Google's YouTube

channel.

2009.

The very first thorium conference is held.

Wired Magazine runs a feature story on Thorium.

2010.

American Scientist runs a feature on Thorium.

International thorium conferences begin.

Server logs show Chinese students downloading Molten Salt Reactor PDFs from Kirk's website.

2011.

China announces their intention to build a Thorium Molten-Salt Reactor.

In the U.S., Flibe Energy is founded.

Transatomic Power is founded.

2012.

Baroness Bryony Worthington tours ORNL's historic Molten Salt Reactor Experiment, which has

never been made open to the public.

Kun Chen visits Berkeley California, telling us that 300 Chinese are working full-time

on Molten Salt Reactors.

2013.

Terrestrial Energy is Founded.

2014.

ThorCon is Founded.

Moltex is founded.

Seaborg Technologies are founded.

Copenhagen Atomics are founded.

2015.

A flood of technical details and technology assessments are released by molten salt startups.

India reveals their new facility for molten salt preparation and purification.

China announces that now 700 engineers are working on their Molten Salt Reactor program.

Bill Gates' TerraPower receives a grant to investigate Molten Salt.

2016.

Just as this video is about to be released� Myriam Tonelotto releases a feature length

documentary about Molten Salt Reactors called: "Thorium - Far Side of Nuclear Power".

Dr. James Hansen tells Rolling Stone magazine that we should develop Molten-Salt Reactors

And Oak Ridge discovers actual film footage of the Molten Salt Reactor itself.

Produced in 1969, it was forgotten in storage for over 45 years.

It offers up our first and only glimpse of an operating Molten-Salt Reactor.

As a communications asset, this is utterly invaluable- and will be fully incorporated

into future videos.

In 2017 I think just about anything could happen.

The Molten-Salt Reactor Experiment was one of the most important, and I must say, brilliant

achievements of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

And I hope that after I'm gone, people will look at the dusty books that were written

on molten salts and will say, "Hey!

These guys had a pretty good idea, let's go back to it."

Back in the 60s, Alvin Weinberg saw the Molten-Salt Reactor as a means of addressing energy pollution,

and the need for clean water.

Desalination would turn the Middle East into farmland.

Power centers would co-locate energy intensive manufacturing and Small Modular Reactors.

Surplus power would be sold to nearby communities.

He knew- energy was the ultimate raw material... the more energy you have, the easier it is

to recycle, and use virgin materials more efficiently.

Given enough power, we can pull carbon right out of the atmosphere or ocean.

One day, on our path towards such a future, they'll be talking about putting a Molten-Salt

Reactor in your home state.

It will create manufacturing jobs, and produce electricity for your home.

It will charge your electric car- at night.

Give me a martini, straight-up, with two olives.

For the vitamins.

You'll do things with energy that we can't even imagine.

And you'll be kept safe by a chemically stable choice of coolant, and gravity powered passive

safety systems.

I don't know when we'll get to that point.

Everyone's design is different.

Everyone's path to market- different.

I suspect more than one will succeed.

Before they do, I want everyone to know what Molten-Salt Reactors are, and why they are.

For more infomation >> THORIUM DEBUNKED - Duration: 59:58.

-------------------------------------------

How To Know WiFi Password Using Android Phone | HINDI - हिंदी | - Duration: 3:43.

Don't Forget To LIKE & SHARE :)

For more infomation >> How To Know WiFi Password Using Android Phone | HINDI - हिंदी | - Duration: 3:43.

-------------------------------------------

Развивающие мультфильмы. Сборник. Все серии про машинки, грузовик, трактор. Мультики про машинки. - Duration: 46:39.

For more infomation >> Развивающие мультфильмы. Сборник. Все серии про машинки, грузовик, трактор. Мультики про машинки. - Duration: 46:39.

-------------------------------------------

Вкуснейший шоколадный торт ☕ Простой рецепт шоколадного торта - Duration: 2:18.

For more infomation >> Вкуснейший шоколадный торт ☕ Простой рецепт шоколадного торта - Duration: 2:18.

-------------------------------------------

Vợ Quỳ Gối Xin Hàng Trên Giường Vì Cho Chồng Sử Dụng Những Thần Dược Này Thường Xuyên - Duration: 12:02.

For more infomation >> Vợ Quỳ Gối Xin Hàng Trên Giường Vì Cho Chồng Sử Dụng Những Thần Dược Này Thường Xuyên - Duration: 12:02.

-------------------------------------------

Why I ride a Scooter in the City - Duration: 9:18.

Hello girls and guys!

Theme is actually, why a scooter?

I am often asked why I drive with a scooter in the city.

Well done in the city!

Well, that's easy, just because of that!

I do not need that hand.

As you can see, I only have the turn signal

And horns or main beam (if necessary),

Because here I have the gas,

Front brake and down here

You can see the foot brake acting on the rear wheel.

And so it's actually a very stress-free ride

And I always have my left hand free.

It is not alone, it is much easier, of course,

111 kg and at 9.5 hp and 95 km/h peak

Perfectly adequate for the city.

I do not have to switch and that at a vintage car.

So I drive away and have my left hand free

And can do anything with it,

But I do not need them to operate the scooter,

The only when I really need it,

For the blinker or, if necessary, to really have to honk.

But otherwise I drive the scooter with one hand.

And what is still great with modern scooters,

Which have a storage space under the seat

Usually for a complete full-face helmet.

And if you go like I did before on the Honda Vision

Also a topcase has mounted,

Then you can even take 2 helmets

And a 3 at the helmet lock!

This is really a great thing,

I. Give the throttle, brake more you need

In principle not to do and you can go everywhere.

Even if scooters are bored with motorcyclists,

I like to ride with my old Puch scooter.

And a very excellent thing is,

The apron forne.

If you have been traveling in the rain since,

You have the huge advantage,

That it keeps you from the rain

And you remain dry or dryer

Since the apron next to a draft shield as well

Is a weather protection.

Front with the compartment I have here at the Puch still a storage space

With spare oil, raincoat, bandage etc.,

Since my Puch under the seat has no more space,

Since there the tank is installed with about 5 liters.

Yes perfectly adequate for the city,

9,5 hp, 95 km/h fast and much smaller,

Lighter and narrower than motorcycles.

Agile, I also come through the traffic jam.

Of course, I have not now operated filtering,

But you can do that now.

Yes and these are simply the easy benefits

Which only brings a scooter and no motorcycle, here in the city!

And this is something that many overlook.

Of course I would be on a long straight

With a motorcycle a lot faster,

But I do not have to be,

Because even every car with 300 or 400 hp

Is by far slower in a city with a lot of traffic,

As I with 9.5 HP.

This is not the point, but rather the point

That I have a vehicle with which I really

Stress-free

And this is actually the cool thing about it,

Because to sit in the car and get angry not to come forward,

No matter how much PS you have under the hood,

Is just annoying, yes and so just 9.5 hp.

Yes, and that is the reason why many guys in town or in the city

Simply switch to scooters or anything else

As a second vehicle, for me, of course, a second vehicle

And overland then use a motorcycle or for travel.

As a prospect I drive this year ...

... a small tour as preparation,

Because unfortunately I do not have so much time (this year)

But is planned for next year then a really big tour.

Where she leads me remains a little secret,

But it will be funny and lots of filming.

Well, my 3 day trip this year will lead to a place

On a long, long time

Motorcycle meeting,

But at a very unorthodox time,

I. Not in the summer but always when there is snow (Winter).

Yes and then a small round over the Großglockner (highest Mountain), probably.

Round about a few beautiful streets.

Ok, these are my reasons why me

With the scooter in the city

And my oldie can keep up pretty well

And not use my bike and torture the clutch.

That's easy ... ahaaaa that's nice.

A truck, no turn signal and pull out (change lane).

Yes, there is only one thing left to say, as always,

STAY UP!

See you!

For more infomation >> Why I ride a Scooter in the City - Duration: 9:18.

-------------------------------------------

মারা গেলেন অভিনেতা মিজু আহমেদ | কি ভাবে মারা গেলেন মিজু আহাম্মেদ | Latest Bangla News miju ahmed - Duration: 1:20.

Bengali film actor, has died in a powerful mortar miju Ahmed.

He died of heart failure on Monday evening (Innalillahi wa inna ilaihi died).

He was 6 years old.

In addition to the district to train the dream went to the train station at around 8pm hrdayoge

suffered from Dhaka Airport.

This information was confirmed by director and actor Amit Hasan Shahin.

Amit Hasan told this correspondent, we talked to the Airport Police Station.

From there, the news of our death has been confirmed.

Sunny brother Omar and I'm going to the car.

However, the train is miju Ahmed heart attack.

In the meantime, his pulse train doctors did not check his heartbeat.

Miju Ahmed, born on 17 November 1953 in Kushtia.

Parveen Ahmed's wife, two daughters and son harasatake Care and Mou with his family.

Ahmed said Bangladesh film industry mourned the death of miju Association, Bangladesh

Film Directors Association, Bangladesh Film Producers and Distributors Association, Bangladesh

Film of the various institutions of society, including the owner has mourned his death.

For more infomation >> মারা গেলেন অভিনেতা মিজু আহমেদ | কি ভাবে মারা গেলেন মিজু আহাম্মেদ | Latest Bangla News miju ahmed - Duration: 1:20.

-------------------------------------------

Запекаем курицу в тандыре. #тандыр - Duration: 4:37.

For more infomation >> Запекаем курицу в тандыре. #тандыр - Duration: 4:37.

-------------------------------------------

Rap Hot Nhất Tháng 04 2017 | Rap Buồn Tâm Trạng Về Tình Yêu Hay Nhất 2017 | Có Tiền Là Có Quyền - Duration: 1:40:11.

For more infomation >> Rap Hot Nhất Tháng 04 2017 | Rap Buồn Tâm Trạng Về Tình Yêu Hay Nhất 2017 | Có Tiền Là Có Quyền - Duration: 1:40:11.

-------------------------------------------

Phim ngắn hay - Thông điệp cuộc sống - CHIẾC BÁNH MỲ ► Phim ngắn hay nhất 2017 - Duration: 5:27.

For more infomation >> Phim ngắn hay - Thông điệp cuộc sống - CHIẾC BÁNH MỲ ► Phim ngắn hay nhất 2017 - Duration: 5:27.

-------------------------------------------

Quý Ông Dùng Thần Dược Này Đảm Bảo 1000 Phút Không Ra 4H Sáng Vẫn Chữa Xong - Duration: 13:16.

For more infomation >> Quý Ông Dùng Thần Dược Này Đảm Bảo 1000 Phút Không Ra 4H Sáng Vẫn Chữa Xong - Duration: 13:16.

-------------------------------------------

Fun Games For Kids!Lily & Kitty Baby Doll House Game Play !Makeover Toilet Bath Dress Up Kids Games - Duration: 10:42.

Fun Games For Kids!Lily & Kitty Baby Doll House Game Play !Makeover Toilet Bath Dress Up Kids Games

For more infomation >> Fun Games For Kids!Lily & Kitty Baby Doll House Game Play !Makeover Toilet Bath Dress Up Kids Games - Duration: 10:42.

-------------------------------------------

Word of the Day Ep. 3 - Duration: 0:21.

Hi!

Welcome to the word of the day.

Today is day 3 and today's word is germane.

It is an adjective.

Germane means to be congruent to the subject.

To be relevant and appropriate.

To be pertinent.

The adverb form of the word is germanely.

Well, until next time!

Bye!

YT for next

Thứ Ba, 28 tháng 3, 2017

Youtube daily Mar 28 2017

Không có nhận xét nào:

Đăng nhận xét