7 ms·

China mostly builds nuclear reactors to retain the required industrial base to maintain a military nuclear program. Nuclear power is heavily subsidized in China

by tfourb 3mo ago

China mostly builds nuclear reactors to retain the required industrial base to maintain a military nuclear program. Nuclear power is heavily subsidized in China, as it is everywhere in the world. It might be cheaper than in the US or Europe, but its not "cheap".

Danox 3mo ago
The Chinese have built a small thorium reactor for research and development, and they went on to build a much larger Thorium reactor which they have refueled on the fly without taking it out of service. I am still surprised that America hasn’t it treated it like a Sputnik moment, but we live in different times than the mid late 1950s. I think we’re waiting for the Chinese to ship it around the world like EV cars. Imagine a Thorium reactor that can be put into the bowels of a Hospital or an office building basement and supply electrical power.
- fc417fc802 3mo ago
  Indeed we live in very different times. If a challenger appears whose success threatens certain aspects of one's worldview rather than compete and improve oneself people figured out that it is much lower effort to adopt a partisan mindset and deny reality. Modern American politics in a nutshell.
  - budsniffer952 3mo ago
    You think this is a modern American problem? What if I told you Europeans used to throw people in jail (or worse ) for claiming the earth was round, or that it revolved around the sun? This is a forever problem.
  - Recurecur 3mo ago
    Indeed. Good to hear you’re a Trump supporter!
- crote 3mo ago
  > Imagine a Thorium reactor that can be put into the bowels of a Hospital or an office building basement and supply electrical power. Imagine the terrorism we'll see when highly radioactive material is within reach of any disgruntled office worker.
  - LtdJorge 3mo ago
    You cannot make regular nuclear weapons out of thorium
    - nrb 3mo ago
      I think the larger concern is containment breach via sabotage and the resulting material release, definitely less than ideal if these things are put under random buildings where you have little perimeter control.
    - pbgcp2026 3mo ago
      And I already can imagine that prompt "Mythos, create a design for ..."
    - chickenbig 3mo ago
      > You cannot make regular nuclear weapons out of thorium https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233880587_Nuclear_energy_Thorium_fuel_has_risks https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233880587_Nuclear_e...
    - leonidasrup 3mo ago
      "Unlike natural uranium, natural thorium contains only trace amounts of fissile material (such as Th-231), which are insufficient to initiate a nuclear chain reaction. Additional fissile material or another neutron source is necessary to initiate the fuel cycle. In a thorium-fuelled reactor, Th-232 absorbs neutrons to produce U-233. Depending on the design of the reactor and fuel cycle, the generated U-233 either fissions in situ or is chemically separated from the used nuclear fuel and formed into new nuclear fuel." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium_fuel_cycle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium_fuel_cycle Many of specific issue around design nuclear weapons based on U-233 are classified. But: "A declassified 1966 memo from the US nuclear program stated that uranium-233 has been shown to be highly satisfactory as a weapons material, though it was only superior to plutonium in rare circumstances. It was claimed that if the existing weapons were based on uranium-233 instead of plutonium-239, Livermore would not be interested in switching to plutonium. The co-presence of uranium-232 can complicate the manufacture and use of uranium-233, though the Livermore memo indicates a likelihood that this complication can be worked around." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium-233#Weapon_material https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium-233#Weapon_material
- laurencerowe 3mo ago
  The Chinese demonstration plant is only 2MW thermal / 300KW electrical with the one currently under construction expecting to up that to 60MW thermal / 10MW electrical. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TMSR_(Chinese_reactor_project) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TMSR_(Chinese_reactor_project) The difficulty with molten salt reactors is that molten salt is highly corrosive. It will be interesting to see if they are able to make them cost effective.
0xbadcafebee 3mo ago
They don't need to build reactors just to retain a military nuclear program. They specifically maintain a nuclear deterrent by policy, they don't need an excuse. They build reactors because they need more power. They have 60+ reactors and will have more nuclear the US by the end of the decade. They're also heavily investing in next-gen reactors which they wouldn't need to do if they just wanted a weapons program. Yes it's subsidized, everything in China is subsidized, that's the best part of a planned-capitalist economy. But it's actually becoming more market driven so they can reduce financial pressure and force efficiency from competition. In 10 years those subsidies are gonna be a lot smaller
- bobthepanda 3mo ago
  it is worth noting that if you were to measure by degree of subsidy, the planned output for nuclear has not really budged, but wind and solar are exploding in China in comparison. > Even in China, nuclear power is little more than an afterthought. Nuclear’s share of total electricity generation in China fell for the third year in a row in 2024, to 4.5 percent. Nuclear capacity grew by 3.5 GW, while solar capacity grew by 278 GW. Solar and wind together generated about four times more electricity than nuclear reactors. > Since 2010, the output of solar increased by a factor of over 800, wind by a factor of 20, and nuclear by a factor of six. Renewables, including hydro, increased from 18.7 percent of China’s electricity generation in 2010 to 33.7 percent in 2024 (7.5 times higher than nuclear’s share), while coal peaked in 2007 at 81 percent and declined to 57.8 percent in 2024. https://www.worldnuclearreport.org/Global-report-confirms-and-details-nuclear-power-s-stagnation-Someone-needs-to https://www.worldnuclearreport.org/Global-report-confirms-an...
- Moldoteck 3mo ago
  no they dont. For military nuclear program you don't need power plants at all. You either have enrichment for uranium based warheads or a facility dedicated specifically to breed plutonium. Classic PWRs are unsuitable for that. There are ways - but it's so expensive that it's better to do it the proper way
Moldoteck 3mo ago
military is unrealated to plants. You are ill informed. The statement about subsidies is false too for existing plants. IPEX data is public. There are more subsidies for new units because the west is bad at construction but the amount is still not that great. Heck, biomass in EU gets 2x the CFD's vs min profitability limit of french Flamanville...

by tfourb 3mo ago

Danox 3mo ago

The Chinese have built a small thorium reactor for research and development, and they went on to build a much larger Thorium reactor which they have refueled on the fly without taking it out of service. I am still surprised that America hasn’t it treated it like a Sputnik moment, but we live in different times than the mid late 1950s. I think we’re waiting for the Chinese to ship it around the world like EV cars. Imagine a Thorium reactor that can be put into the bowels of a Hospital or an office building basement and supply electrical power.

fc417fc802 3mo ago
Indeed we live in very different times. If a challenger appears whose success threatens certain aspects of one's worldview rather than compete and improve oneself people figured out that it is much lower effort to adopt a partisan mindset and deny reality. Modern American politics in a nutshell.
- budsniffer952 3mo ago
  You think this is a modern American problem? What if I told you Europeans used to throw people in jail (or worse ) for claiming the earth was round, or that it revolved around the sun? This is a forever problem.
- Recurecur 3mo ago
  Indeed. Good to hear you’re a Trump supporter!
crote 3mo ago
> Imagine a Thorium reactor that can be put into the bowels of a Hospital or an office building basement and supply electrical power. Imagine the terrorism we'll see when highly radioactive material is within reach of any disgruntled office worker.
- LtdJorge 3mo ago
  You cannot make regular nuclear weapons out of thorium
  - nrb 3mo ago
    I think the larger concern is containment breach via sabotage and the resulting material release, definitely less than ideal if these things are put under random buildings where you have little perimeter control.
  - pbgcp2026 3mo ago
    And I already can imagine that prompt "Mythos, create a design for ..."
  - chickenbig 3mo ago
    > You cannot make regular nuclear weapons out of thorium https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233880587_Nuclear_energy_Thorium_fuel_has_risks https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233880587_Nuclear_e...
  - leonidasrup 3mo ago
    "Unlike natural uranium, natural thorium contains only trace amounts of fissile material (such as Th-231), which are insufficient to initiate a nuclear chain reaction. Additional fissile material or another neutron source is necessary to initiate the fuel cycle. In a thorium-fuelled reactor, Th-232 absorbs neutrons to produce U-233. Depending on the design of the reactor and fuel cycle, the generated U-233 either fissions in situ or is chemically separated from the used nuclear fuel and formed into new nuclear fuel." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium_fuel_cycle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium_fuel_cycle Many of specific issue around design nuclear weapons based on U-233 are classified. But: "A declassified 1966 memo from the US nuclear program stated that uranium-233 has been shown to be highly satisfactory as a weapons material, though it was only superior to plutonium in rare circumstances. It was claimed that if the existing weapons were based on uranium-233 instead of plutonium-239, Livermore would not be interested in switching to plutonium. The co-presence of uranium-232 can complicate the manufacture and use of uranium-233, though the Livermore memo indicates a likelihood that this complication can be worked around." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium-233#Weapon_material https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium-233#Weapon_material
laurencerowe 3mo ago
The Chinese demonstration plant is only 2MW thermal / 300KW electrical with the one currently under construction expecting to up that to 60MW thermal / 10MW electrical. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TMSR_(Chinese_reactor_project) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TMSR_(Chinese_reactor_project) The difficulty with molten salt reactors is that molten salt is highly corrosive. It will be interesting to see if they are able to make them cost effective.

0xbadcafebee 3mo ago

They don't need to build reactors just to retain a military nuclear program. They specifically maintain a nuclear deterrent by policy, they don't need an excuse. They build reactors because they need more power. They have 60+ reactors and will have more nuclear the US by the end of the decade. They're also heavily investing in next-gen reactors which they wouldn't need to do if they just wanted a weapons program. Yes it's subsidized, everything in China is subsidized, that's the best part of a planned-capitalist economy. But it's actually becoming more market driven so they can reduce financial pressure and force efficiency from competition. In 10 years those subsidies are gonna be a lot smaller

bobthepanda 3mo ago
it is worth noting that if you were to measure by degree of subsidy, the planned output for nuclear has not really budged, but wind and solar are exploding in China in comparison. > Even in China, nuclear power is little more than an afterthought. Nuclear’s share of total electricity generation in China fell for the third year in a row in 2024, to 4.5 percent. Nuclear capacity grew by 3.5 GW, while solar capacity grew by 278 GW. Solar and wind together generated about four times more electricity than nuclear reactors. > Since 2010, the output of solar increased by a factor of over 800, wind by a factor of 20, and nuclear by a factor of six. Renewables, including hydro, increased from 18.7 percent of China’s electricity generation in 2010 to 33.7 percent in 2024 (7.5 times higher than nuclear’s share), while coal peaked in 2007 at 81 percent and declined to 57.8 percent in 2024. https://www.worldnuclearreport.org/Global-report-confirms-and-details-nuclear-power-s-stagnation-Someone-needs-to https://www.worldnuclearreport.org/Global-report-confirms-an...
Moldoteck 3mo ago
no they dont. For military nuclear program you don't need power plants at all. You either have enrichment for uranium based warheads or a facility dedicated specifically to breed plutonium. Classic PWRs are unsuitable for that. There are ways - but it's so expensive that it's better to do it the proper way

Moldoteck 3mo ago

military is unrealated to plants. You are ill informed. The statement about subsidies is false too for existing plants. IPEX data is public. There are more subsidies for new units because the west is bad at construction but the amount is still not that great. Heck, biomass in EU gets 2x the CFD's vs min profitability limit of french Flamanville...