Slashdot Mirror
Thorium, the Next Nuclear Fuel?
mrshermanoaks writes "When the choices for developing nuclear energy were being made, we went with uranium because it had the byproduct of producing plutonium that could be weaponized. But thorium is safer and easier to work with, and may cause a lot fewer headaches. 'It's abundant — the US has at least 175,000 tons of the stuff — and doesn't require costly processing. It is also extraordinarily efficient as a nuclear fuel. As it decays in a reactor core, its byproducts produce more neutrons per collision than conventional fuel. The more neutrons per collision, the more energy generated, the less total fuel consumed, and the less radioactive nastiness left behind. Even better, Weinberg realized that you could use thorium in an entirely new kind of reactor, one that would have zero risk of meltdown. The design is based on the lab's finding that thorium dissolves in hot liquid fluoride salts. This fission soup is poured into tubes in the core of the reactor, where the nuclear chain reaction — the billiard balls colliding — happens. The system makes the reactor self-regulating: When the soup gets too hot it expands and flows out of the tubes — slowing fission and eliminating the possibility of another Chernobyl. Any actinide can work in this method, but thorium is particularly well suited because it is so efficient at the high temperatures at which fission occurs in the soup.' So why are we not building these reactors?"
Don't expect any thorium based reactors any time soon.
Deleted
Except for the fact that Israel is accountable to the free world.
Ha! I'll believe it when they invite the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in and give them full access to all their nuclear facilities, and fully acknowledge their nuclear capabilities (for example, how many nuclear bombs do they have?). Israel is nothing more than land stolen from other countries after WW II and supported by the US (not only in technology but with billions of US$ in handouts). Israel only exists because the US pays for it to survive. Without the US taxpayers money and the US military support, Israel would shrivel and die.
What's the problem with that?
Animals mean nothing. We are people. We ought to care about people. As long as we have enough animals to ensure that we can eat, and that the ecosystem doesn't collapse, worrying about the world from mother nature's perspective is just handwringing that is a luxury of those living in privileged first-world societies that are lucky enough to benefit from the back-breaking work of their ancestors.
Last I checked Iranians weren't training terrorists. And it is well known that Iran has actually not supported Hezbollah, contrary to popular American rhetoric. Actual case study shows that Iran is not anti-Israel, but anti-USA, and its current unpopular regime uses "west is bad". Iranians are not suicidal virgin seekers.
The real reason is that Israel is at odds with middle east, and cannot see another rising power.
You don't deserve a reply.
Israel has never been held accountable for any of their crimes. The U.S. will always make sure to veto any UN resolution that doesn't blame the victims^W^W^W criticise the Palestinian authorities equally as Israel. Israel does, on the other hand, have a somewhat stable government that won't be overthrown at the first opportunity. That makes their nuclear weapons slightly more secure.
That anyone can defend Hamas, et al is just stupefying.
Once you realize that for many people their ideology is much more important than the very lives of others, it stops being stupefying. It starts being something else, though. Of course if "not killing others" took precedence of fake but "lofty" ideals we wouldn't have many greens, lefties or even muslims (well you sure as hell wouldn't have any "political muslims", which is presumed to be somehow different from just plain "muslims", though no-one ever cares to specify different how exactly).
Ah, yes, the old "war for oil" idiocy again. Only in the mind of a blithering moron would it make more sense to spend trillions invading a foreign nation instead of investing a few billion in the development of domestic oil-sand and oil-shale extraction techniques.
You do realize that saying only blithering idiots would do it (while true) doesn't mean it didn't happen?
Who is John Cabal?