Just posted this on Facebook. Would like to hear the opinions of others.
Is there a place for nuclear energy in a sustainable energy system? What if its radioactive byproducts only needed 300 years of storage instead of tens of thousands years? And they couldn't be converted into nuclear weapons?
If we moved to thorium instead of uranium, maybe the threats posed by nuclear energy would be far smaller. I kept this in mind after Karl-Henrik Robèrt mentioned thorium in a session at Blekinge Tekniska Högskola last year. There may be a future for nuclear fission that is different from the past.
Your thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Hi Adrian
Thorium very well could be the answer. It's full potential is much more greatly enhanced when used in a Molten Salt Reactor. The nature of this rarely seen type of reactor is that recycling the fuel lets most of the fuel to be used so compared to current reactors it's vastly superior. The main reason that we don't see them now is because of the time of it's experimental period in the 1960's it proved to be very successful creating energy but not at creating weapons grade fuel.
Post a Comment