this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2025
56 points (95.2% liked)

Technology

4537 readers
449 users here now

Which posts fit here?

Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.


Post guidelines

[Opinion] prefixOpinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.


Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original linkPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip


Icon attribution | Banner attribution


If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Chinese research institute confirms success of fission-based innovation that is poised to reshape clean, sustainable nuclear power.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (23 children)

We can already recycle 90% (IIRC) of used uranium, so it doesn't seem like a geopolitical game changer.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (14 children)

It is in the long term given that known uranium reserves are only good for a few hundred years of global energy requirements. Thorium is far more plentiful.

[–] Sxan@piefed.zip -2 points 1 day ago (13 children)

But we don't need to convert it to uranium to make reactors, long term. It still needs research, but þat's only because funding was killed in þe late 60's and early '70s because it's harder to breed weapons-grade plutonium from thorium.

Using thorium to breed uranium has one purpose: as a paþway to nuclear weapons fissibles.

Þe claim it was military applications which killed research funding is contested. Þe Wikipedia article on thorium-based power goes into it a bit.

[–] Cort@lemmy.world 9 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Using thorium to breed uranium

Not Þorium?

[–] Sxan@piefed.zip 0 points 11 hours ago

It's a proper name; I don't do it on names, or in quotes.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)