With some concept tests thorium used as a nuclear fuel could
end energy as a problem issue and shift the economy into a new
growth phase. All the conversation in the media, politics
and the economy could be moved to building the next centuries
energy production with thorium and the various ways to use the
metal as a fission power source.
Nobel laureate Carlo Rubbia at the European Organization for
Nuclear Research points out the use of thorium as a cheap, clean
and safe alternative to uranium in reactors may be the magic
bullet we have all been hoping for. It’s an idea well
worth much more attention. The math on thorium is
impressive. Dr Rubbia says a metric ton of the silvery
metal produces as much energy as 200 tons of uranium, or
3,500,000 ton of coal. A handful would power a major city for a
week.
Another thorium reactor opportunity is thorium consumes its
own hazardous waste. It can even scavenge the plutonium left by
uranium reactors, acting as an eco-cleaner. Kirk Sorensen,
a former NASA rocket engineer, now chief nuclear technologist at
Teledyne Brown Engineering, and closely watched Internet
commentator and educator says, “It’s the Big One, once you start
looking more closely, it blows your mind away. You can run
civilization on thorium for hundreds of thousands of years, and
it’s essentially free. You don’t have to deal with uranium
cartels.” He’s right; thorium is so common that miners
treat it as a nuisance, a radioactive by-product when they dig
up rare earth metals. The U.S. and Australia are full of the
stuff. So are the granite rocks of Cornwall in the UK.
Some beaches in India are loaded with thorium. Not so much
mining is needed: all thorium is potentially usable as fuel,
compared to just 0.7% from uranium as much of the uranium has
already decayed.
U.S. scientists knew in the late 1940s that thorium was a
high potential fuel, but weapons priorities pushed uranium and
plutonium to the front. Yet by the early 1970s thorium
research had produced a highly workable, safe and low cost
reactor design that the U.S. put on the shelf. Uranium
industry competition with thorium won the struggle for research
and development funding.
Europe’s Organization for Nuclear Research took a run at
funding in 1999-2000 when CERN went to the European Commission
and they were rebuffed. The EU used European experts from
France, as the French industry is the largest in Europe.
Professor Egil Lillestol, a world authority on the thorium
fuel-cycle at CERN says, “They didn’t want competition because
they had made a huge investment in the old technology.” It
was the classic victory of vested interests over scientific
progress.
Thorium offers some other important aspects, it does not
require isotope separation, the process of separating the
desired reactable forms of uranium and plutonium from the
decayed ore, a big cost saving. Weapons made from thorium
are impractical.
Meanwhile a great deal of thought and concept development has
taken place. Dr. Rubia, who has a patent on a thorium fuel
cycle has licensed to the Norwegian firm Aker Solutions, a part
of the huge Aker Group. Aker is working on the patented design
using a proton accelerator at its UK location.

Rubbia Fuel
Cycle.
Victoria Ashley, the Aker UK project manager, said it could
lead to a network of pint-sized 600MW reactors that are lodged
underground, can supply small grids, and do not require a huge
concrete safety dome. It will take £2bn to build the first one,
and Aker needs £100mn for the next test phase. Add Aker to
the list of mini reactors at a giant 600MW rating.

Aker Solutions
ADTR Concept
So Aker is looking for joint venture deals with U.S.,
Russian, or Chinese firms. The Indians have their own projects –
none yet built – dating from days when they switched to thorium
because their weapons program prompted a uranium ban.
In the U.S. research pioneers are exploring a truly radical
shift to a liquid fuel based on molten-fluoride salts, an idea
once pursued by US physicist Alvin Weinberg at Oak Ridge
National Lab in Tennessee in the 1960s. The original documents
were recovered by Mr. Sorensen.
The matter today wallows in the U.S. administrations passive
silence on research – a hint that loyalties are to the
environmental pressure groups – even as thorium would solve
those group’s primary objections and the entrenched interests.
It’s eerily like the 1930s when researchers knew the Nazis were
busily working on an atomic bomb, news that met simple
disbelief. U.S. president Roosevelt needed more than a letter
from Einstein, but a meeting shifted the minds such that
Roosevelt started the Manhattan project.
No other on Earth energy source exists at the volumes that
thorium offers. Not uranium, oil, gas, coal or other fuel
can compare. The assorted reactor designs all offer a
weapon free design, some could use the spent uranium fuel on
hand now and extract its energy as well as destroy the uranium’s
potential as a weapon or a pollutant, safety concerns are
reduced to decades instead of centuries, and the construction
costs and operating expenses with a cheap fuel are intensely
motivating to power producers and ratepayers.
The issue isn’t about the science, thorium reactors have
already ran successfully, its people who have to become informed
and apply the pressure needed to overcome the special interests
in the political arena where the regulatory barrier has the
potential of thorium corralled and stopped. It’s your
planet, economy and family – can we all stay uninformed, silent
and bleeding our financial resources for the benefit of the
special interests only because we don’t know? Nope – now
you know.
By Brian Westenhaus
Source:
A Thorium Overview Update
This article originally published at:
http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Thorium-A-Cheap-Clean-and-Safe-Alternative-to-Uranium.html
|