U.S. AEC, forerunner of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the United States Department of Energy spoke of electricity in the future being "too cheap to meter, this might be what's holding us back.

Cant impose a tax on what doesn't exist, ETS wise, now can we.


We could always impose a fresh air tax (FAT) or something I guess...

Ironically, since 2007, we have seen a sharp decline in new nuclear plants being added to the grid, 2008 being the first year ever whereby none were added, and only 1 or two (from memory) were added to the grid during 2009.

Even stranger, some countries formerly pro-nuclear appear to be closing their plants down, for no apparent reason at all.

With a determination to go green and cut emissions the USA has resumed development of nuclear power generation after thirty years of no new stations.

And why not.

Pres Obama says a few kilograms of uranium is  better than 30 million barrels of oil and there are no emissions at all.

Who could argue with that.

deepthought wrote on Aug 14^th, 2010 at 9:31pm:


Not me, thats for sure.

mellie wrote on Aug 14^th, 2010 at 9:32pm:


You could be right Mel, but some of us can live in hope that less toxic methods of power will be used in greater volume here in the near future.

Quote:


Haha. I should be so lucky.

Quote:


He's following in the path of his predecessor - the same as our leader/s are doing.

Obama makes a good argument obviously, but NP stations dotted all over the planet aren't going to stop Texas Oil going out of business.

mantra wrote on Aug 14^th, 2010 at 9:47pm:


Derek is a George Bush sock puppet?

And Jules is operated by remote by Johnny?

mantra wrote on Aug 14^th, 2010 at 10:28pm:


This discussion has taken a strange twist.

Johnny cooperated with wars and trade agreements?

Jules and Kev, equally, are puppets?

I need to know more.

mantra wrote on Aug 14^th, 2010 at 10:28pm:


Now, this is interesting....

mellie wrote on Aug 14^th, 2010 at 10:37pm:


Uranium is abundant in the earth's crust.

We will have developed fusion reactors before there is much chance of running out.

deepthought wrote on Aug 14^th, 2010 at 10:49pm:


No it isn't abundant, nor is thorium a viable replacement at present. The technology hasn't progressed past theory. Fusion reactors still need more energy to run than they produce. We can't base our future energy supplies on theories.

Quote:

Mantra
Quote:


Rubbish - there are already working reactors:
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf62.html

Quote:

Bob...

Power reactors

Much experience has been gained in thorium-based fuel in power reactors around the world, some using high-enriched uranium (HEU) as the main fuel:
#The 300 MWe THTR (Thorium High Temperature Reactor) reactor in Germany was developed from the AVR and operated between 1983 and 1989 with 674,000 pebbles, over half containing Th/HEU fuel (the rest graphite moderator and some neutron absorbers). These were continuously recycled on load and on average the fuel passed six times through the core.
#The Fort St Vrain reactor was the only commercial thorium-fuelled nuclear plant in the USA, also developed from the AVR in Germany, and operated 1976-1989. It was a high-temperature (700°C), graphite-moderated, helium-cooled reactor with a Th/HEU fuel designed to operate at 842 MWth (330 MWe). The fuel was in microspheres of thorium carbide and Th/U-235 carbide coated with silicon oxide and pyrolytic carbon to retain fission products. It was arranged in hexagonal columns ('prisms') rather than as pebbles. Almost 25 tonnes of thorium was used in fuel for the reactor, and this achieved 170,000 MWd/t burn-up.
#Thorium-based fuel for PWRs was investigated at the Shippingport reactor in the USA (discussed in the section below on the Light Water Breeder Reactor).
#In India, thorium has been used for power flattening in the initial cores of the two Kakrapar pressurised heavy water reactors (PHWRs).
The 60 MWe Lingen Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) in Germany utilised Th/Pu-based fuel test elements.
--------------------------------------------------

So Bob, it's still in it's relative infancy, and not quite commercially viable in it's entirety yet.  

In India, thorium has  only been used for power flattening in the initial cores of the two Kakrapar pressurised heavy water reactors (PHWRs)...so....  not quite there yet.

Had we planned on burning coal for the next 70 years until our uranium depleted, then convert to this then "hopefully" commercially-ready thorium reactor?

But thanks for introducing us to thorium none the less Bob, and yes, it's definitely something to think about, this and work towards commercial use  and HOPEFULLY preserve/hoard, this opposed to depleting it before we have even started using it like we did our uranium.

...Perhaps another 20/30 years?

Well guys & gals.
We need people with vision in Australia.
WE need to start a Thorium reactor & mining industry which
we can sell to the world.
This is hard to organise - it would be like the Manhatten Project.

Certainly people like labor who couldn't organise some
school buildings & some Pink Batts couldn't do it.

We would need to buy up the best scientists from India & elsewhere
to help us.
It could be done but we need vision.

Mellie
Quote:


Why not make a huge leap & go straight to Thorium?
Imagine safe supplies of electricity at affordable prices
with zero green house gases.
Thorium reactors can't go critical.
They are inherently safe &  the science is proven - you can get
energy from Thorium.

Bobby. wrote on Aug 15^th, 2010 at 12:04am:


Vision is something you won't get from labor or liberal. They would prefer to train up trades people instead of engineers and scientists. It makes you wonder what on earth they are trying to achieve with this so called education revolution. Educating people to do what ?? Change tap washers

Quote:


Well, someone's got to do it, and if we are going to stop immigrating at the rate we are, (I hope so) then we are going to need home-grown tradies willing to work for peanuts, changing washers in the future.

This and those willing to mine our thorium also.

Don't knock tradies, because applying a stigma to their craft might result in a tradie complex, and I don't particularly feel like nor do I even know how to change my own toilet roll, much less a washer, do you?

Quote:


No, but have you taken our Chinese/foreign investors into consideration since then?

Of which have an endless appetite for our Western Australian republic mining industry, apparently.

...We need to put something into our constitution to stop irresponsible governments depleting/selling off our crucial resources at their will...whenever they need to make up the budget deficit fast.

Bobby. wrote on Aug 15^th, 2010 at 1:32am:


No, they would just rather buy Australia and be done with it.

Quote: Quote:


That is a shallow answer.
We found plenty of money which was borrowed for sub-standard school halls
& pink batts - installed incorrectly.
I would rather pour money into technology.

Mantra
Quote:


A 300 Mega Watt Thorium reactor was already used for 6 years
and was shut down in 1989 due to engineering problems.
See Link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/THTR-300

Thorium was already providing electricity 21 years ago.
Going on your figures of 30 years required to get the engineering right
we could have a viable reactor in 9 years time.

It would still require something akin to the Manhatten project but
we could do it if we hire the right people.
Our future needs to be based on technology & value adding not
just digging stuff out of the ground & letting others
make money out of it.

Mantra.
Quote:


It's a free world so if it's relevant yes.

I would dearly love Australia to be holding the Aces.
I want us to have a monopoly over the raw materials
& the technology.
I want to see every other country looking up to us
as world leaders.
I want them to be jealous of us.
I want a prosperous future for Australia.

Australia should move to nuclear power generation, esp or first in Vic and SA where very dirty brown coal is burned. But with Gen 4 fast breeder reactors.

Secondly, we could make a motza taking the world’s high grade nuclear waste for storage in the exhausted Broken Hill lead mines. would benefit Pt Pirie where the stuff can be unloaded and Broken Hill.

Eventually we will need more renewable energy: nuclear fusion would be good but when will it be commercially rolled out? Secondly, solar energy but collected in space where we can get intense, uninterrupted sunlight.

Bobby. wrote on Aug 15^th, 2010 at 9:27am:

Where we could shine is in storing and eventually reprocessing of waste.

Oh and world leaders? Our MRRT and the NBN make us the frontrunner there. Other countries are now looking at running out FTTH and other reource-rich countries are considering levying their own MRRT.

Bobby. wrote on Aug 15^th, 2010 at 10:35pm:


According to what I've just read, there is a method available to 'recycle' spent nuclear fuel rods and use them in a type of Nuclear reactor to generate power....
Either a Faster Breeder Reactor or Nuclear reprocessing ...which appears to use 'spent fuel rods' as a Mixed Oxide or MOX fuel...

Wouldn't that be at least a partial answer to the nuclear waste problem???