The closest the Dali Bama gets to 'nucular'.
Posted on 02/20/2011 1:02:34 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
An abundant metal with vast energy potential could quickly wean the world off oil, if only Western political leaders would muster the will to do it, a UK newspaper says today. The Telegraph makes the case for thorium reactors as the key to a fossil-fuel-free world within five years, and puts the ball firmly in President Barack Obama's court.
Thorium, named for the Norse god of thunder, is much more abundant than uranium and has 200 times that metal's energy potential. Thorium is also a more efficient fuel source -- unlike natural uranium, which must be highly refined before it can be used in nuclear reactors, all thorium is potentially usable as fuel.
The Telegraph says thorium could be used as an energy amplifier in next-generation nuclear power plants, an idea conceived by Nobel laureate Carlo Rubbia, former director of CERN.
Known as an accelerator-driven system, it would use a particle accelerator to produce a proton beam and aim it at lump of heavy metal, producing excess neutrons. Thorium is a good choice because it has a high neutron yield per neutron absorbed.
Thorium nuclei would absorb the excess neutrons, resulting in uranium-233, a fissile isotope that is not found in nature. Moderated neutrons would produce fissioned U-233, which releases enough energy to power the particle accelerator, plus an excess that can drive a power plant. Rubbia says a fistful of thorium could light up London for a week.
The idea needs refining, but is so promising that at least one private firm is getting involved. The Norwegian firm Aker Solutions bought Rubbia's patent for this thorium fuel cycle, and is working on his design for a proton accelerator.
The Telegraph says this $1.8 billion (£1.2 billion) project could lead to a network of tiny underground nuclear reactors, producing about 600 MW each. Their wee size would negate the enormous security apparatus required of full-size nuclear power plants.
After a three-decade lull, nuclear power is enjoying a slow renaissance in the U.S. The 2005 energy bill included $2 billion for six new nuclear power plants, and this past February, Obama announced $8.3 billion in loan guarantees for new nuclear plants.
But nuclear plants need fuel, which means building controversial uranium mines. Thorium, on the other hand, is so abundant that it's almost an annoyance. It's considered a waste product when mining for rare-earth metals.
Thorium also solves the non-proliferation problem. Nuclear non-proliferation treaties (NPT) prohibit processes that can yield atomic bomb ingredients, making it difficult to refine highly radioactive isotopes. But thorium-based accelerator-driven plants only produce a small amount of plutonium, which could allow the U.S. and other nations to skirt NPT.
The Telegraph says Obama needs a Roosevelt moment, recalling the famous breakfast meeting when Albert Einstein convinced the president to start the Manhattan Project. A thorium stimulus could be just what the lagging economy needs.
Wow! A world filled with tens of thousands of nuclear reactors. What could go wrong?
I think Ali Bama is more likely to go for flying carpet research.
I think we could spend a measly trillion and make it work...//not// I never could sell my perpetual motion machine.
The rule of thumb is that if a thing is good for America, Barry won’t do it; if it’s bad for America, he will.
The closest the Dali Bama gets to 'nucular'.
He only has 22 months left on his contract.
“He only has 22 months left on his contract.”
Is there an early termination clause?
The House & the Senate, The People or the Supreme Court. We’ve never had the Army play that game in 235 years, but I never say “never” anymore.
One would hope that a magazine with the word “Science” in its name would at least have a clue. Thorium reactors would be a replacement for coal fired plants - and would have no impact on oil consumption.
We’ll all be driving Chevy Volts, Nissan Leafs and Teslas, don’t ya know...
And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty [and] two months.
http://bible.cc/revelation/13-5.htm
I'd say yes.
Obama can’t figure out how a business makes, and uses, profit.
Why would he know anything about nuclear reactors?
First, the government has no business funding research!
Second, if it is such a no-brainer, investors would have funded its development already. Obviously, it is not a no-brainer and the author is a liar.
Third, this is not a substitute for oil....I don’t know how you make plastic out of thorium, revealing another lie by the author.
Make it so, Number one! (cue the music, the close-ups, fade to black)
Hey, don’t undersell those unicorn farts, they hold the key to energy independence S/
They’d better, since we’re not drilling any more wells, building any more power plants or mining any more coal or shale...
Or is this another electrical generation scheme that would leave me and others driving in the winter in North Dakota, running the heater, and trying to make it to the next major town? Or would I have to stop every 100 miles at some snow-drifted waypoint and wait for the thing to charge up?
Can we use the reactors for lubricants, chemical feedstocks (think plastics, pharmaceuticals, even synthetic fabrics and fertilizer)? How about asphalt? Roofing tar?
There is so much that comes from a barrel of oil that isn't motor fuel that never gets considered, even if the problems with the electric vehicles of today were solved overnight.
The solution may be electrical in the future, but for now, we need more oil, and the only way to get it is to drill oil wells.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.