Fuel of the Future?
January 02,
2014 AFP
• Because of the physics involved in using
thorium, meltdowns and explosions are impossible
By Ronald L. Ray
Can a
little-known element, named for the mythological Norse god, Thor, provide safe
nuclear power and a path to long-term energy independence for all?
Several scientists are shouting, “Yes!”
But if
that is so, why is the possibility of using
thorium to generate electricity unknown even to many nuclear
physicists, and what is blocking implementation of technology which has been
available since the 1950s?
Following
World War II, the effort to develop atomic energy for electricity needs
followed two paths. One we all know of, which uses the radioactive elements
uranium and plutonium, was pioneered by Enrico Fermi and has resulted in large
quantities of dangerous nuclear waste. It also has provided us with meltdowns
at the Fermi plant near Detroit, Mich., Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and the
meltdown and explosions at Fukushima.
The
other, nearly forgotten method was promoted fervently
by Alvin Weinberg, a long-time head of Oak Ridge
National Laboratory (ORNL), primarily because of its far greater
safety. The technology uses thorium-232 to breed uranium-233, typically
employing molten fluoride salts at ambient pressure as a coolant, rather than
high-pressure water.
A
prototype reactor ran safely for four years, from 1965 to 1969, so development
costs would be minimal, and most of the few remaining safety and operational
issues have since been overcome.
Liquid
fluoride thorium reactors (LFTR) possess a number of significant
advantages, too. Thorium is about four times more abundant than uranium and
nearly as common as lead. It is not a radioactivity hazard in its natural form
and the United States already has tons stored away as a byproduct of rare earth
element mining.
Because
of the physics involved in using thorium and LFTR technology, meltdowns and
explosions are impossible.
Reactors
are smaller, maintenance is simpler and safer and LFTRs are more than 80% self-supporting,
generating almost as much fuel as they consume, needing additional fissile
material only for start-up. Consequently, only one ton of hazardous radioactive
waste is produced for every 35 from uranium technology. It can be isolated more
easily and is dangerous for only 300 years, rather than 10,000. Moreover, the
fission byproducts are unsuitable for building weapons; they can be converted
only with great difficulty. Thus, proliferation of nuclear arms is not a
hazard.
Nobel
Prize in Physics winner Carlo Rubbia estimates that it would require 200
tons of uranium to produce the same amount of energy as one ton of thorium. It
would take 3.5 million tons of coal to do likewise. So LFTR technology is a
sustainable source of very inexpensive electricity, sufficient to last a
millennium.
- See more
at: http://americanfreepress.net/?p=14456#sthash.2HRhGsa6.dpuf
Why,
then, do we not have dozens of thorium reactors?
The
answer is found in three words: “mutual assured destruction.” Polish-born Jew,
Admiral Hyman G. Rickover, was in charge of developing
the U.S. nuclear Navy in the 1960s and 1970s. But he and several congressmen
also wanted to build bombs to shower on the Soviets. Safety of U.S. citizens
was not their concern.
Thorium
was therefore of no use to the genocidal warhawks, who shut down the ORNL
program in 1973 and told Weinberg to resign, after he had dedicated 18 years to
safe atomic energy.
Lately, however,
there has been a resurgence of world interest in thorium, with India and China
leading the pack, along with Norway and Russia. The U.S. and Israel also
have development programs but hypocritically refuse to suggest the thorium
alternative to their perceived enemy, Iran.
Finally,
the uranium industry in the U.S. continues to fight thorium possibilities, as
it would lose a lucrative repeat-sales market. So it may require some
foresighted venture capitalists to make safe nuclear power a reality.
Ronald L. Ray is a freelance author and an
assistant editor of THE BARNES REVIEW. He is a descendant of several
patriots of the American War for Independence.
- See more
at: http://americanfreepress.net/?p=14456#sthash.2HRhGsa6.dpuf
No comments:
Post a Comment