5 ms·
8 grams of thorium could replace gasoline in cars
- thestranger 15y agoUnfortunately, the oil companies are too powerful to allow something like this to succeed. I would be very surprised if anything ever came of this.
- thestranger 15y agoI guess being a realist earns you downvotes these days? See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car%3F http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car%3F
- bh42222 15y agoAnyone have more information on exactly how this works? Does it mean 200+ Kg of thorium, only 8 grams of which would be used up during a car's life time?
- p9idf 15y ago"Stevens has worked out you’d require a 227kg, 250MW thorium engine in order to power a typical road car." 250MW is around 333,333 horsepower. A 250kW, 333 horsepower, engine seems more likely to me.
- rdtsc 15y agoA 250MW engine could power a city and its suburbs. "Keep that foot on the gas, we need lights downtown for another couple of hours"
- Jabbles 15y agoI think the biggest hurdle will be containing the thorium so that a head-on collision between two cars at 100mph each doesn't leak radioactive material all over the road. I can't comment on the difficulty of building a nuclear engine weighing 227kg (I assume he means 250kW), but I would have thought the space industry would be the first to utilise such a breakthrough, and I'm not aware of the widespread adoption of those engines over solar panels. If these challenges are met then such an engine could be a viable alternative to the batteries in electric cars.
- uvdiv 15y agoFor an auto engine it is beyond hopeless (economics, safety). This particular case is a crackpot/scammer with no substance at all. Very small nuclear-powered engines are possible. There were several launched on space satellites by the US and USSR, i.e. http://www.etec.energy.gov/history/Major-Operations/SNAP-Overview.html http://www.etec.energy.gov/history/Major-Operations/SNAP-Ove... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosmos_954 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosmos_954 SNAP weighed under 430 kg for the entire power system (note this is a real fission reactor, not a radioisotope heat source like many space probes). These use highly-enriched uranium (weapons grade) to get very small cores. Nuclear reactors have been proposed for interplanetary probes, such as the (recently cancelled) Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter, which would have used a nuclear reactor powering an ion thruster. It's completely viable. http://nssdcftp.gsfc.nasa.gov/miscellaneous/jupiter/JIMO_Background/JIMO.pdf http://nssdcftp.gsfc.nasa.gov/miscellaneous/jupiter/JIMO_Bac...
- ahi 15y agoAlso tested for aircraft propulsion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_Nuclear_Propulsion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_Nuclear_Propulsion tl;dr They discovered it was a bad idea.
- GiraffeNecktie 15y agoSource article is much better: http://wardsauto.com/ar/thorium_power_car_110811/ http://wardsauto.com/ar/thorium_power_car_110811/
- rdtsc 15y agoSounds like another "just-around-the-corner-invest-now!" alternative fuel company. * A lot of wordy rhetoric about "clean" and "green" power, not technical references. * 200kg engines that generate hundreds of MW of power * Claims prototypes are coming "very soon" (2014) * Typical "lone inventor through sheer genius discovers new untapped, almost unlimited source of energy" * Picture of Obama on the site ("Look govt. is investing in this too, so should you, get ahead of the game!"). <sarcasm> Not bad. I bet some will buy in. There is a profit to be made off of pedalling "just-around-the-corner" amazing energy breakthrough deals. But in this case first order of business should be finding a better website designer. If they are peddaling this for "investors" they need more flash, some animations, maybe some fake graphs.</sarcasm>
- angdis 15y agoThree questions: 1) How much would 8g of Thorium cost? How much would the engine cost? Even with economies of scale, I can't imagine that it won't be an astronomical investment. 2) Could enough thorium ever be produced? Can it work on a North American ~1car/person scale? 3) Finally, is this _really_ a good use of the technology? Isn't it better to just drive less, use public/bike/walking for transportation, live closer to work, etc?
- cellurl 15y agoThis will get the trucking industry thinking! If nothing else, it will get people thinking.