Thorium reactors: Cleaner, safer, easier nuclear energy
Nuclear reactors that use Thorium instead of Uranium as a fuel have been under some discussion lately, and for a good reason.
Thorium reactors need less fuel, produce less waste; and less dangerous waste, they can’t melt down and they produce no materials that can be reliably used to make nuclear bombs.
Dispatch.com had a very enlightening article on Thorium reactors recently.
The statistics:
- There is about 4 times as much Thorium in the earth’s crust as there is Uranium so it is considerably easier to find.
- To make a certain amount of energy (1 GW) you need 1 ton of Thorium, 322 tons of Uranium or 3.5 million tons of coal.
- To produce the above amount of energy Thorium produces less than a ton of waste which needs to be stored for 300 years. Uranium produces 43 tons of waste that needs to be stored for 100′000 years. (Coal would produce 7 million tons of CO2 and 75 thousand tons of other non-radioactive waste materials)
“The amount of thorium it would take to power my whole life is the size of a marble that would fit in my hand,” Sorensen said. “The amount of coal that would power my life would bury my yard to 30 or 40 feet.”
While this is not a new idea, the nations that have a tradition with nuclear power plants have continued to use Uranium because they have built infrastructure and experience with it. This is the only compelling reason not to use Thorium plants.
In addition to India, which is pursuing less-efficient, water-cooled thorium reactors, he said, the Czech Republic is exploring liquid fluoride thorium reactors…
If you compare these to the nuclear plants we have today there is no doubt in my mind that we should go for these plants as a replacement.
What do you think?
I haven’t read any negatives.
I’d do it.
Yeah same here. I’ve never heard a downside other than it not fitting into the current infrastructure.