Oh dear, George...

[biffvernon]

You can't make bombs out of the stuff.

Oh yes, that was it. They're no use then.

[Potemkin Villager]

Nice post, Paul.

It's not the first time Monbiot has gone native. He writes a lot. Sometimes I feel his priority is getting his work published (and paid for) with content coming second.

For once I totally agree with Biff!

The dark side of hacks is their attention seeking compulsion to write (anything).

The plus side is that we do not have to read or believe all their
infallible pearls of wisdom.

[vtsnowedin]

I beg to differ.

I expected that you would.
I am not saving that nuclear power is perfectly safe and an easy fix for our future energy needs. I am saying that it (warts and all) is the best alternative when you consider all the costs and limitations or every alternative that we now know of. It is dancing with the devil for sure and we need to do much more on redundant safety systems then have ever been considered necessary before but every other alternative leaves billions ether freezing to death in the dark or drowned by rising sea levels or poisoned by air pollution.
Just like voting you have to choose the lesser of two evils.

[kenneal - lagger]

(Remind me, if thorium reactors are so smart why don't we already have them in every village - I thought the physics was worked out more than half a century ago.)

They need a stream of particles to get them started and that has only just been invented (as I read in the last week or so, somewhere).

[kenneal - lagger]

but every other alternative leaves billions ether freezing to death in the dark or drowned by rising sea levels or poisoned by air pollution.
Just like voting you have to choose the lesser of two evils.

That sounds like four evils to me.

[Keepz]

but every other alternative leaves billions ether freezing to death in the dark or drowned by rising sea levels or poisoned by air pollution.
Just like voting you have to choose the lesser of two evils.

That sounds like four evils to me.

You forgot fanatical devotion to the Pope.

[vtsnowedin]

but every other alternative leaves billions ether freezing to death in the dark or drowned by rising sea levels or poisoned by air pollution.
Just like voting you have to choose the lesser of two evils.

That sounds like four evils to me.

Yes but we get to compare them by twos and threes. A sort of primary system with a final runoff at the end if you will.

[RenewableCandy]

but every other alternative leaves billions ether freezing to death in the dark or drowned by rising sea levels or poisoned by air pollution.
Just like voting you have to choose the lesser of two evils.

That sounds like four evils to me.

You forgot fanatical devotion to the Pope.

Yes but I don't like the sound of their main weapon being surprise

[JohnB]

Yes but I don't like the sound of their main weapon being surprise

Or is that fear, surprise and ruthless efficiency?

One thing that is certain is that there will be trouble at mill .

[eatyourveg]

Yes but I don't like the sound of their main weapon being surprise

Or is that fear, surprise and ruthless efficiency?

One thing that is certain is that there will be trouble at mill .

Surprise? OK...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSe38dzJYkY

[mobbsey]

I thought the physics was worked out more than half a century ago.)

You can't make bombs out of the stuff.

I beg to differ.

Thorium is not a "fissile" it's "fertile". You bombard thorium-232 with neutrons; it absorbs one to produce thorium-233; that decays into protactinium-233; which then decays into uranium-233 -- the whole process takes a month.

Uranium-233 can be used as a substitute for uranium-235 in thermal reactors; or if you pack 16kgs into one space and initiate it with a few neutrons it makes fireworks... although, unlike conventional fireworks, before initiating by hand it you must spread on some factor 1 billion sunblock

However, the fact that it takes a month to go from thorium-232 to uranium-233 is also the flaw in the thorium fuel cycle because if you tried to do this in a reactor core the fission products would poison the process (they capture the neutron you need to make protactinium) and prevent efficient production of uranium-233. For that reason all the designs are either a "slow breeder" reactor, with the thorium on the outside and which then has to be reprocessed (which is what the Americans did in the early 60s); alternately you make the uranium-233 in a particle accelerator and then make fuel from it (which is what the Chinese are trying to do).

So, because of the technical steps and processes involved, thorium will always be a problematic fuel cycle to maintain -- plus the fact that the fission products, whilst less long-live than uranium (10,000 years instead of 100,000 years) are intensely more radioactive (meaning the reactor/spent fuel storage needs more heavy shielding).

So, thorium isn't as easy as the uranium cycle; on that note let's conclude with the verdict of the US Atomic Energy Commission's 1962 study for the President and the US Congress on the civilian benefits of the uranium fuel cycle --

Fissile material in nature is confined to uranium-235, constituting only 0.7% of natural uranium... if this were our only potential source, the contribution to our energy reserves would scarcely deserve the developmental cost.

[Aurora]

The Guardian - 26/03/11

This cynical Angstlust around nuclear power is reckless and insensitive

The dangers facing Japan following the Fukushima disaster are ongoing. Exploiting them to win an argument is in poor taste.

Article continues ...

<snip> The summit in the art of self-deception has been scaled by the Guardian journalist George Monbiot .......

[RenewableCandy]

Angstlust??

Shurely they mean Schadenfreude, or even Winkelgeschwindigkeit?

[biffvernon]

What winkelgeschwindigkeit looks like. (In case you didn't know.)

[RenewableCandy]

It's my favourite German word! And given that it has to do with the rate at which something spins, kind-of apt in this case.