Wanting to find out more I read [1] - startling that 1979 little incident only cost a billion to clean up. [2]
From [1] > In 2009, science writer Richard Martin stated that Weinberg, who was director at Oak Ridge and primarily responsible for the MSRE, lost his job as director because he championed development of thorium reactors.[23] Weinberg himself recalls this period:
[Congressman] Chet Holifield was clearly exasperated with me, and he finally blurted out, "Alvin, if you are concerned about the safety of reactors, then I think it may be time for you to leave nuclear energy." I was speechless. But it was apparent to me that my style, my attitude, and my perception of the future were no longer in tune with the powers within the AEC
Hi, sorry to say, but that's actually a myth. The US never did and never seriously planned to make weapons from commercial reactors. We make weapons with special graphite or heavy water moderated weapons production reactors. The MSRE was shut down because:
* The existing major industrial and utility commitments to the LWR, HTGR, and LMFBR.
* The lack of incentive for industrial investment in supplying fuel cycle services, such as those required for solid fuel
* The overwhelming manufacturing and operating experience with solid fuel reactors in contrast with the very limited involvement with fluid fueled reactors.
* The less advanced state of MSBR technology and the lack of demonstrated solutions to the major technical problems associated with the MSBR concept.
If that is actually true, has China basically solved the energy and the emissions problems?