VERSIONS: روسيا اليوم NOTICIAS FREEVIDEO ИНОТВ RTД
breakingnews
Go to main page   USA   News   Thorium - the safer nuclear power?  
MORE ON THE STORY
Photo from http://www.tepco.co.jp 29.10.2011, 19:21 5 comments

Fukushima: Exposure underrated, outcome obscure

The consequences of the Fukushima disaster will be emerging for at least several decades. According to the Japanese government, it will take up to 30 years for the complete clean up of the radiation released from the reactors.

Fukushima nuclear disaster
Tokyo : Protestors wear masks as they protest against Japan's nuclear policy during a parade for Earth Day in Tokyo on April 24, 2011.  (AFP Photo / Yoshikazu Tsuno) 27.06.2011, 08:17 3 comments

Japanese fear authorities hide ugly truth about nuclear risks

The Japanese government is starting radiation checkups for more than two million people living near the crippled Fukushima plant. But many citizens of the country fear those in charge prefer face-saving public ignorance to life-saving knowledge.

Fukushima nuclear disaster
20.06.2011, 10:50 4 comments

No Japan without nuclear energy – Japanese official

Despite concerns over Japan's government hushing up the dangers, the second highest-ranking nuclear official in the country thinks the issue is simply too complicated for the general public to come to terms with.

Fukushima nuclear disaster
AFP Photo / HO / Japanese Government via JIJI Press 18.06.2011, 14:22 5 comments

Japanese government too slow - IAEA

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has criticized the government of Japan for its slow reaction to the disaster at Fukushima-1 NPP that broke out in March, following a devastating earthquake and tsunami.

Fukushima nuclear disaster
Workers installing large tanks to store radioactive contamination water at TEPCO's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant at Okuma town in Fukushima prefecture (AFP Photo) 13.06.2011, 08:31 4 comments

High level of radioactive strontium discovered in seawater near Fukushima

Dangerous radioactive strontium has been detected in seawater near the Fukushima-1 plant, at 240 times over the safe limit. Some 100,000 tons of contaminated water stored in the plant threatens to put out its drainage system in days.

Fukushima nuclear disaster

Thorium - the safer nuclear power?

Published: 01 November, 2011, 01:41
Edited: 01 November, 2011, 16:34

Thorium

(18.9Mb) embed video

TAGS: Natural resources, Nuclear, Russia, USA, Innovation


Solar, wind, and biomass have been touted as viable alternative energy sources to fossil fuels. But what if there is a nuclear energy source that is safe, green, and abundant? Thorium could be that source.

­

Lightbridge, based in Virginia, is now testing this next generation nuclear fuel in Russia.

It dramatically reduces the amount of waste in the reactor, reduces the toxicity of the waste coming out of the reactor, and doesn't produce any weapons usable materials,” says Seth Grae, president and CEO of Lightbridge.

It’s estimated that Thorium is three times more abundant than uranium, the element currently used in nuclear plants.Scientists say there is so much of it, that it can produce energy than all of the world’s oil, coal, and uranium combined. Sounds like the alternative energy source the world needs. But despite its advantages, nuclear experts say politics and corporate interests may be getting in the way.

That doesn't mean that it's going to be picked up by the utilities and implemented.They're going to look at the economics and not the environmental benefits,” says Thomas Cochran, Director attheNatural Resources Defense Council.

Cochran says the U.S. needs to change its energy policies in order to make Thorium more attractive to businesses.

They would have to have a different fee structure than the current one to encourage the development of thorium fuels,” Chochran says.

President Obama has vowed to transition the nation to alternative energy. With testing underway in Russia, China, and India, the United States may lose the race and find itself behind the curve when it comes to energy innovation and the jobs it may create.

I think in the coming years, you'll start to see more testing, more results, and more industry interests. But I think most of the industry interest in using Thorium in reactors is from outside the U.S.,” says Grae.

+13 (17 votes)
 
Back to top
next MORE NEWS
Hacktivist group threatens to start a war against a deadly Mexican drug cartel 31.10.2011, 23:52 9 comments

Anonymous goes after deadly Mexican drug cartel

In an attempt to save one of its own, the hackivist group, Anonymous threatens one of most notorious Mexican drug cartels, Los Zetas.

Republican presidential candidate and Texas Governor Rick Perry speaks to a local radio station after filing the necessary paperwork to be on the New Hampshire primary ballot October 28, 2011 in Concord, New Hampshire (Darren McCollester / Getty Images / AFP) 01.11.2011, 01:52 13 comments

Was Rick Perry drunk or on drugs during his latest speech? (VIDEO)

Rick Perry’s latest speech in New Hampshire was more of a cross between a Zach Galifianakis show and a Carrot Top act than an actual speech.

US Election 2012
James (unregistered) November 26, 2011, 02:57
0

"[Thorium] is unlikely to be commercially available for at least another 50 -100 years, long after we will have needed to transition to alternative energy sources. By contrast, wind and solar power are available today, [and] will last indefinitely."
Future solutions for the problems of today basically.

Orac4Prez November 19, 2011, 09:04
+3

Marco, compared with Thorium there are many more hazardous substances. We all breathe in a lot of benzene from petroleum . Benzene is a known carcinogen and hexane - a major component in petrol causes damage to the liver through its metabolites.  Oils and hydrocarbon wastes invariably leave PAH residues and we are exposed to them too.  Thorium produces far, far fewer radioactive byproducts than does uranium or plutonium and wont undergo runaway meltdown should a reactor experience difficulties  There is a need to contain thorium and the related materials and this process should be far simpler.   


It is the fact that the byproducts are not readily converted into weapons that makes this a desirable process from the viewpoint of the international community.  Having said that I am sure that some countries will be raising ridiculous objections for the simple reason that given the relatively greater abundance and location of the ores, that current world powers will not be able to dictate policy, or influence governments.



Bru Raczin November 10, 2011, 06:24
+1

As with anything else in this world what really matters is what type of "Green" one is talking about when it comes to energy.  When it all makes $sense$ then they'll start using it!