Thorium vs Uranium

[rigney]

Yes, green energy should be used to its fullest where and when possible. But this artilcle and video are quite interesting and should make us wonder why it has taken 50 years to evaluate the pros and cons of using a nuclear process that seems much safer than uranium, to build the same power source? With advanced particle accellerators already on the drawing board, it should take only a short time to design the mechanics needed to incorporate such a new system, while possibly using parts of the old one? Will someone please explain to me why we haven't done so already?

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13040853

Edited May 14, 2012 by rigney

[Moontanman]

Actually the video does explain that, thorium cannot be used to make bombs, current nuclear reactors produce weapons grade material, at the start of the nuclear age bombs were what it was all about. Here is another good video about thorium.

 

Edited May 14, 2012 by Moontanman

[rigney]

Actually the video does explain that, thorium cannot be used to make bombs, current nuclear reactors produce weapons grade material, at the start of the nuclear age bombs were what it was all about. Here is another good video about thorium.

 

 

Thanks Moon, I was going to use your link, but chose what I thought to be the lesser of two evils: discombobulation and confusion. "NOT SO"! Anything we feel to be worth having has always been geared to the framework of money and power.(The last four or five minutes) of this link should convince you. Edited May 14, 2012 by rigney

[insane_alien]

thorium cannot be used to make bombs, current nuclear reactors produce weapons grade material, at the start of the nuclear age bombs were what it was all about. Here is another good video about thorium.

 

Thorium-232 breeds U-233 which could potentially be used in a nuclear device. sure, it won't be as good as plutonium, but it'll get the job done and could be used as a primary in a multistage device.

[Moontanman]

Thorium-232 breeds U-233 which could potentially be used in a nuclear device. sure, it won't be as good as plutonium, but it'll get the job done and could be used as a primary in a multistage device.

 

 

Thanks for the heads up, i was under the impression that U-233 wasn't bomb grade material.

 

Another plus on thorium reactors is that they can "burn" the long lived nuclear waster we currently produce and gain energy from it and reduce it's half life to the point that it would only have to be stored for centuries instead of many millenia.

[rigney]

Thorium-232 breeds U-233 which could potentially be used in a nuclear device. sure, it won't be as good as plutonium, but it'll get the job done and could be used as a primary in a multistage device.

 

Bet your backside I'm not gonna jump the gun on Moons reply, which will be coming shortly. I'm intrerested only in a passive energy deployment to produce electrical power for a worlds consumptiom. And really, we don't need a nuclear holicost to destroy this world, humans are doing their damdest at present with our garbage to get it done. Now! Please, let's get back to the topic.

Edited May 14, 2012 by rigney

[Moontanman]

Here is a shorter more to the point video about thorium reactors