background preloader

Thorium

Facebook Twitter

Bushfire smoke could cause lung problems for generations, US monkey study suggests. Updated 29 Jan 2020, 3:05amWed 29 Jan 2020, 3:05am Monkeys in Northern California are providing valuable clues to the health cost of exposure to bushfire smoke, revealing it could have potentially life-threatening consequences for humans. Key points: Scientists have studied the impact of bushfire smoke on monkeys since 2008The monkeys exposed to smoke had 20 per cent less lung capacity There are fears that prolonged exposed to smoke could affect human health Large swathes of south-eastern Australia were blanketed in smoke during the recent bushfire crisis, consistently exposing people to unsafe levels of noxious fumes not seen in some of the world's most polluted cities. But a decade-long study, tracking the impacts on a cohort of rhesus macaque monkeys from infancy to adulthood in California, is providing startling insight into what humans could expect in the future.

And, most troubling, they could pass all of those traits on to their offspring. 'There was just so much smoke' Thorium in Australia. Research Paper Index Research Paper no. 11 2007–08 Thorium in Australia Greg Baker Statistics and Mapping Section 17 September 2007 Contents Executive summaryIntroductionThoriumSources of thoriumThorium resourcesThorium as a nuclear fuelThe future of thorium in AustraliaConclusionGlossaryEndnotes Introduction Thorium is a naturally-occurring radioactive element that can be used in a new generation of nuclear reactors as an alternative source of fuel for the generation of electricity. Thorium has several advantages as a nuclear fuel: it produces less of the nuclear by-products normally used to make nuclear weapons and less of the long-lived radioactive products of conventional nuclear powerits use in suitable nuclear reactors can reduce the hazard of nuclear accidentsunlike natural uranium, its energy content can be used almost in its entirety, andthorium ore minerals are abundantly available in Australia.

Thorium Sources of thorium Thorium resources Back to top Thorium as a nuclear fuel Conclusion. Nuclear futures: thorium could be the silver bullet to solve our energy crisis. The only source of energy that can meet global demand while avoiding greenhouse gas emissions is nuclear power. But our perception of nuclear power is coloured by issues of safety, radiotoxic waste, and the threat of nuclear proliferation. Yet there is a safer alternative to current nuclear technology: new reactor designs inherently safer than conventional reactors, that produce little waste, and are proliferation resistant.

The new designs allow us to reuse our legacy of radiotoxic waste as fuel. The secret is a shiny, silver-coloured element called thorium, and it’s not new. Thorium has long been regarded as a potential nuclear fuel. Thorium is four times more plentiful than uranium, about as common as lead. There is considerable support for thorium as a nuclear fuel. Another approach is the accelerator-driven subcritical reactor (ADSR). The ADSR is extremely safe as the thorium-uranium process is “subcritical”. And in the UK? Part of our Nuclear Future series: Theconversation. Australia has developed something of an allergic reaction to any mention of uranium or nuclear energy.

Blessed as we are with abundant reserves of coal, oil and gas, we have never had to ask the hard questions many other nations have had to ask – questions the answer to which has been “nuclear” for many of those nations. Yet with the looming spectre of climate change and greater calls for a shift away from fossil fuels, nuclear power is once again on the agenda. The South Australian government has even called for a royal commission to investigate the plausibility of nuclear power in this country.

With discussion of uranium seeming to be out-of-bounds in some quarters, a growing community of devotees has sprung up around an alternative nuclear fuel: thorium. The call for thorium power is not without precedent worldwide. Thorium: critically different Thorium (atomic number 90) shares several similarities with its neighbour two doors down on the periodic table, uranium (atomic number 92). The Energy From Thorium FoundationBeyond Helen Caldicott! Dr. Helen Caldicott is the most prominent anti-nuclear activist in the world. She’s been featured on CNN, 60 Minutes, CBC and Democracy Now.

In the 80s, Helen Caldicott campaigned against nuclear weapons testing in the pacific (still responsible today for the majority of tritium we’re exposed to), and against the notion of a winnable nuclear war. She was nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for her efforts. She has always made inaccurate statements regarding civilian nuclear power. But, since the Fukushima-Diachii radiation release has caused (and is projected to cause) zero fatalities… …her tone has changed. MY ERROR: At 36:30 “1000 Mt GHG” means 1000 Megatonnes (million metric tons) of Greenhouse Gasses, and NOT merely metric tonnes.

Theme Music by: “Electric Car” by “They Might Be Giants”: Seinfeld 102nd episode Robert Stone @ FCCJ “Dr. The Energy From Thorium Foundation Can We All Just Get Along: the Oberlin College Experience. The home of documentary. Despite meltdowns and mountains of radioactive waste, could nuclear really save the planet? The Ritzy CinemaBrixton Oval, Coldharbour Lane, London, SW2 1JG (T: 0871 902 5739) Films individually priced, or buy a discounted full day ticket for £20 (£18 conc) Amazingly, nuclear power is now the cry from many climate change warriors! In a remarkable about-turn, climate change warriors and environmentalists are becoming pro-nuclear. They believe that with the surge in demand from the developing world, nuclear energy is our planet's 'cleanest' option, but with Fukushima still spewing radiated waste, the arguments against it remain potent.

As plans go ahead for the UK's first new nuclear plant in twenty years, join us for a day of brilliant films exploring the pros and cons. Six documentaries from different points of view; four international directors in discussion; a one-time chance to be informed, take part and focus on this key issue for the future of our planet. 12.00 - A IS FOR ATOM Dir. The Passion of Alvin Weinberg. The 59-year-old physicist was in something of a panic. The earth was getting hotter, and nobody in Washington seemed to care. Nuclear power — the only realistic way to produce a lot of electricity with few carbon emissions — was the solution.

But rising costs for nuclear power and the power of the coal lobby appeared to be trumping environmental concerns, and rationality itself. He started writing articles. The first he published in Science. It was called “Global Effects of Man’s Production of Energy.” Next, he co-authored an article evaluating what would happen if the U.S. moved away from nuclear. The problem was time. The physicist went to the Capitol, seeking supporters. The year was 1974, and the man’s name was Dr. Where the vast majority of today’s nuclear reactors are cooled by plain old water, Weinberg invented a radically new reactor cooled by molten salt. Alvin Weinberg was born in Chicago in 1915 and earned his PhD in physics in 1939 from the University of Chicago. Design of world's first Thorium based nuclear reactor is ready. More nukes: James Hansen leads call for “safer nuclear” power to save climate. James Hansen and three other PhD-wielding climate scientists published an open letter Sunday calling on the world to ramp up the development and deployment of “safer nuclear energy systems” to help slow climate change.

Nuclear power is a notoriously prickly subject for environmentalists: It promises bountiful zero-carbon power in an era of profligate fossil-fuel burning, currently meeting 20 percent of U.S. electricity needs. But it produces copious amounts of radioactive waste, and it threatens communities living nearby (you may recall Fukushima in Japan, Chernobyl in the former USSR, and Middletown, Pa., near the Three Mile Island nuclear reactors).

Global demand for energy is growing rapidly and must continue to grow to provide the needs of developing economies. At the same time, the need to sharply reduce greenhouse gas emissions is becoming ever clearer. Not everyone in the green movement will agree with this call for more nuclear. The Engineer December 2013. Nuclear power plant accidents: listed, visualised and ranked since 1952 | World news. How often do nuclear power plants go wrong? How many accidents and incidents are there? The explosions and nuclear fuel rods melting at Japan's Fukushima nuclear power plant, following the Sendai earthquake and tsunami last week, have caused fears of what will happen next. Today Japan's nuclear safety agency has raised the nuclear alert level for Japan from four to five - making it two levels lower than the Chernobyl disaster in 1986.

So far, the Japanese authorities have maintained that there is "no cause to fear a major nuclear accident". We have identified 33 serious incidents and accidents at nuclear power stations since the first recorded one in 1952 at Chalk River in Ontario, Canada. The information is partially from the International Atomic Energy Authority - which, astonishingly, fails to keep a complete historical database - and partially from reports. Of those we have identified, six happened in the US and five in Japan.

But how serious are they? What can you do with the data? More nukes? Are you kidding? Enviros push back against Hansen’s call. We told you on Monday about an open letter penned by James Hansen and three other prominent climate scientists calling on the world to ramp up development and deployment of “safer” nuclear power. The scientists argue that renewable energy isn’t enough to spare the world from the wrath of global warming, and that the power of the atom needs to be better tapped to help get us off fossil fuels. Publication of the letter coincided with the buildup to this evening’s screening by CNN of the controversial pro-nuclear documentary Pandora’s Promise.

The issue of nuclear power bitterly divides environmentalists, so plenty of people were not pleased to hear Hansen, a darling of climate-activism circles, leading a call for more nuke power. Many of the environmentalists and scientists who have written rebuttals in recent days have focused on safety concerns and the flailing economics of nuclear power. Here are excerpts from a few of those rebuttals. From the Natural Resources Defense Council’s blog: LENR Technology - LENR Technology LENR Technology, which is the basis for the reactions occurring in the ECAT core, have a huge advantage over existing energy sources because it utilizes the energy bound in the atomic nucleus.

Earlier this energy has only been utilized in nuclear reactors based on fission. LENR technology has several advantages over existing nuclear reactors in that there are NO radioactive materials involved, and that there is NO radioactivity and NO radioactive waste from the process. At the same time it has similar energy densities to other nuclear energy sources, which has far superior energy densities compared to any chemical energy sources such as oil, coal and gas. The superiority of LENR Technology lies in the energy density of the underlying reaction.

C + O2 → CO2 + 4.1eV, where the 4.1eV(=6.6*10-19J) is released as heat. Ni62 + H → Cu63 + 6.12 MeV, where the 6.12 MeV(=9.8*10-13J) is also released as heat. ECAT Fuel Facts – Comparison with Oil nc = (1-Tc/Th), ne=0.65*(1-Tc/Th)-1/COP. THEO13-20131028-hjxu.pdf. BBC World Service - In the Balance, Energy Dreams. ThoriumNuclearSlideshow. The many ways that molten salt reactors can fight the other CO2 scourge – ocean acidification - The Weinberg Foundation. Just add limestone. Molten salt reactors could process limestone and dolomite into a substance that would help neutralize ocean acid, says Alex Cannara. Ask anyone to identify the consequences of CO2 emissions, and the answer that most people who are not climate change skeptics will give is “global warming.” It’s a good reply. Rising concentration of atmospheric CO2 is heating up the planet to temperatures that could have broad, catastrophic climate consequences by 2050. But while global warming rightly receives plenty of attention, there’s another ongoing and lesser known CO2 scourge that could be even more disastrous: ocean acidification.

Simply put, up to half of the world’s man-made CO2 emissions land in the ocean, where it forms carbonic acid which will eventually wreak havoc if not stopped according to the United Nations-backed Ocean Acidification Network and other groups. A more acidic ocean threatens the existence of anything in the waters that has a shell or a skeleton. Dr. TEDxYYC - Kirk Sorensen - Thorium. The Energy From Thorium Foundation.

Other

Advocacy. Reserves. Reactors. About.