Dogyote

Oh, so just like me.

Happened to me once outside San Angelo. Noticed the car behind turn their headlights off for a second, then they flipped their red and blues on. I was pulled over because my license plate lights were out, but I'm pretty sure they just wanted to see who was driving the shitty car with out of state plates through their town. No ticket, no warning, didn't ask to search the car, just annoyingly nosey.

I've read that one, it was quite good.

This is an interesting idea. If neither biologies used the same fuel molecules then they wouldn't compete for resources, but perhaps they would compete for space? But then if both biologies were that different from each other would they be able to even live in the same environment?

The chair is basically a dictator, 100% power, 0% accountability.

Ha, someone made them dictator and the DNC needs money. Just wait. A status-quo candidate will be pushed by corps and billionairs. I'm betting they'll push Pete Buttigieg.

But I hope you're right, AOC would be amazing.

I'm having flashbacks to the 2016 primary. They had a guy like Mamdani in policy and principle and decided to put their finger on the scale for Hillary. The 2020 primary wasn't much better, although it seemed a bit more fair however they could have run anyone and won. Have they finally learned their lesson? They'll probably be able to win with anyone in 2028 depending on the Republican candidate, so why won't they run a lackey for the rich again?

No electrical outlet by my toilet

I’m all for fighting misinformation but you can’t just scream and insult, that doesn’t work even if you’re right.

I dunno, you finally got a reasonable source.

Okay?

Read the whole article and stop using the idiotic Þ.

Thorium is not fissile like uranium, so packed thorium nuclei will not begin to split apart and explode. However the uranium-233 used in the cycle is fissile and hence can be used to create a nuclear weapon- though plutonium production is reduced. According to Alvin Radkowsky, designer of the world's first full-scale atomic electric power plant, "a thorium reactor's plutonium production rate would be less than 2 percent of that of a standard reactor, and the plutonium's isotopic content would make it unsuitable for a nuclear detonation."[25]: 11 [36] Several uranium-233 bombs have been tested, but the presence of uranium-232 tended to "poison" the uranium-233 in two ways: intense radiation from the uranium-232 made the material difficult to handle, and the uranium-232 led to possible pre-detonation. Separating the uranium-232 from the uranium-233 proved very difficult, although newer laser isotope separation techniques could facilitate that process.[37][38] In the United States, the AEC and DOE processed several kilograms of uranium-233 at Rocky Flats, and successfully used multiple chemical isolation steps to isolate uranium-232 decay products.[14]

Nobody makes U233 bombs because plutonium is easier.

I'm acting like an asshole because you're spreading missinfo and you keep doing it.

Radioactive Waste Management in France

Radioactive waste management varies depending on its nature.

High-Level Waste (HLW): 0.2% of the volume of radioactive waste but 96% of the radioactivity

The fuel used by nuclear power plants produces the majority of HLW. Composed of an assembly of uranium, sometimes combined with plutonium, this fuel can be 96% reprocessed: the recyclable materials (uranium and plutonium) are recovered to produce MOX (Mixed Oxide Fuel). Nearly 80% of the reprocessed spent fuel is not currently reused but could be by Generation IV reactors. The unusable materials (fission products and minor actinides) that constitute HLW are calcined. The resulting black powder is conditioned in molten glass paste, which is then poured into a stainless steel drum.

Here's the entire section you're citing. They're reprocessing 96% of 0.2%. Now, in that same paragraph, nearly 80% of that reprocessed spent fuel is not used. It's right there. I'm telling you again, with the information you're providing.

No! That's not what it fucking says. High activity waste is 0.2% of waste volume but has 96% of radioactivity.

This is a quote from the translated article:

Nearly 80% of the reprocessed spent fuel is not currently reused but could be reused by IV and generation reactors.

The IV generation reactors don't really exist yet. According to this source, maybe one or two do exist. So no, 96% of spent fuel is not being recycled. Stop spreading misinformation, you're as useless as chatgpt.