The Conservative Cave

Interests => The Science Club => Topic started by: thundley4 on December 31, 2009, 03:23:02 PM

Title: Uranium Is So Last Century — Enter Thorium, the New Green Nuke
Post by: thundley4 on December 31, 2009, 03:23:02 PM
  Wired Magazine (http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/12/ff_new_nukes/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+wired/index+(Wired:+Index+3+(Top+Stories+2)))

Cheap, safe nuclear fuel with almost none of the drawbacks of conventional nuclear power?  What's the catch?
Title: Re: Uranium Is So Last Century — Enter Thorium, the New Green Nuke
Post by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on January 02, 2010, 04:03:44 PM
  Wired Magazine (http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/12/ff_new_nukes/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+wired/index+(Wired:+Index+3+(Top+Stories+2)))

Cheap, safe nuclear fuel with almost none of the drawbacks of conventional nuclear power?  What's the catch?
It sounds spooky so the greens will never go for it.
Title: Re: Uranium Is So Last Century — Enter Thorium, the New Green Nuke
Post by: Oceander on January 02, 2010, 04:30:39 PM
  Wired Magazine (http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/12/ff_new_nukes/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+wired/index+(Wired:+Index+3+(Top+Stories+2)))

Cheap, safe nuclear fuel with almost none of the drawbacks of conventional nuclear power?  What's the catch?

I'm asking the same question.  Perhaps it's a matter of, shall we say, the energy-density, i.e., perhaps the reactions don't generate useable energy in the same way that, say, burning a gallon of gasoline produces a lot of useable energy.
Title: Re: Uranium Is So Last Century — Enter Thorium, the New Green Nuke
Post by: NHSparky on January 02, 2010, 10:15:19 PM
Alpha-emitter.  Yeah, nasty shit, that Thorium.  And really not fissionable per se until you get it to U-233 (aka, a thermal fuel) in a breeder process, has a half-life of about 12 BILLION years, and of course reprocessing hasn't been done in this country since the Carter administration.

--The fuel costs to separate the U-233 from the Th-232 are high.
--Impurities in the U-233 result in very high doses due to short-lived high-energy gamma emitters such as Thallium 208.
--Again, recycling issue with Th-228.
--Uranium is still more easily converted into nuclear fuel and still abundant enough to make Thorium impractical.
Title: Re: Uranium Is So Last Century — Enter Thorium, the New Green Nuke
Post by: Oceander on January 02, 2010, 10:39:48 PM
Alpha-emitter.  Yeah, nasty shit, that Thorium.  And really not fissionable per se until you get it to U-233 (aka, a thermal fuel) in a breeder process, has a half-life of about 12 BILLION years, and of course reprocessing hasn't been done in this country since the Carter administration.

--The fuel costs to separate the U-233 from the Th-232 are high.
--Impurities in the U-233 result in very high doses due to short-lived high-energy gamma emitters such as Thallium 208.
--Again, recycling issue with Th-228.
--Uranium is still more easily converted into nuclear fuel and still abundant enough to make Thorium impractical.

Bingo!  I didn't think it was just another perpetual motion machine somebody had overlooked.
Title: Re: Uranium Is So Last Century — Enter Thorium, the New Green Nuke
Post by: thundley4 on January 03, 2010, 04:24:16 AM
Gas lantern mantles , like those used in Coleman lanterns and even in the old fashioned gas street lamps used to be made use Thorium.  That's what gave them that nice bright glow.