One ton of Thorium can produce
as much energy as 200 tons of
uranium, or, now get this, as much energy as 3,500,000 tons of coal! Little wonder Thorium was named after Thor,
the Norse god of thunder.
It was discovered way back in
1829 by a Swedish chemist, and guess what; it’s
relatively abundant in the
earth's crust. Actually Thorium minerals
occur on all of the continents of Earth; the truth is Thorium is not a rare
element, having an abundance level comparable to that of lead, twice that of
arsenic, and threefold that of tin. Thorium’s abundance means that
there is probably more energy available from Thorium than from both Uranium or Fossil
Fuels such as oil or coal.
Thorium reactors are designed
to be meltdown proof. Simply put, a plug is placed at the bottom of the reactor
which melts in the event of a power failure or if temperatures exceed a set
limit; in this way (when needed) the fuel is drained into an
underground tank for safe storing.
And too, in a Thorium reactor there
is much less nuclear waste—up to 20
times less, thus eliminating the need for large-scale or long-term storage. Plus the radioactivity of the resulting waste
drops down to safe levels after just a few hundred years, compared to tens of
thousands of years needed for current nuclear waste to cool off.
When Thorium is irradiated, or
exposed to radiation to prepare it for use as a fuel in nuclear reactions, the
process forms small amounts of uranium-232
(a
highly radioactive isotope which makes handling of the fuel outside of a large
reactor or reprocessing facility incredibly dangerous)
as opposed to Uranium-233, this being of considerable importance because only eight
(8) kilograms (17.637 pounds) of Uranium-233 are required to
create a nuclear weapon.
Sounds great huh? But if you
believe Stephen Ashley of the University of Cambridge it may not be so great: He
insists that if an element known as Protactinium-233 is extracted from Thorium
early in the irradiation process, no Uranium-232 will form. Instead, the
separated Protactinium-233 will decay into high purity Uranium-233 and remember
only eight (8) kilograms of Uranium-233 are required
to create a nuclear bomb. He points out though that creating weapons-grade Uranium in this way
would necessitate someone having access to a nuclear reactor during the
irradiation of thorium fuel, so the good news here is that it's not likely that
a terrorist group would be sophisticated enough to carry out the conversion
process but an aggression minded county just might be able to do it.
In contrast, Laurence O'Hagan who
is the CEO of the Weinberg Foundation which is a non-profit organization
promoting the development of Thorium fuel responded to Ashley's claims. O'Hagan says such proliferation concerns are simply overstated.
“There are proliferation issues with anything nuclear,” he says. “But if you
are out to make a bomb, you go after Plutonium rather than Thorium and Uranium-233.”
Historically, Thorium’s primary
use was for the Welsbach Mantles used
in portable gaslights. Along with other ingredients, the Thorium in these
mantles produced a dazzling light when heated with a gas flame. Today (2015),
Thorium metal is used on a very limited basis as a source for nuclear power.
On the other hand, Uranium is the preferred fuel used in
most nuclear power plants today. It was discovered
in the 18th century, it is an element found everywhere on Earth, but
primarily in trace quantities. It wasn’t until 1938 that a couple of German
physicists revealed that uranium could be split into parts to yield energy,
lots of energy! So if you have already deduced
that Uranium is the principal fuel for nuclear reactors and the main raw
material for nuclear weapons, you’re right!
So, yep, these days the main
use of Uranium in the civilian sector is to fuel commercial nuclear power
plants; here Uranium is typically enriched to a U-235 isotope which makes up
about 0.72% of natural Uranium; when bombarded with slow neutrons this Uranium element
(U-235)
undergoes rapid splitting into smaller atoms with the release of neutrons and
energy that is used in nuclear reactors and yes, atomic bombs. You might take note
that if used for nuclear weapons production, Uranium is enriched dramatically,
usually over 90% (believe it or not, the exact value is still
classified).
Of late (April
2015)
there has been a lot of heated debate about the framework for a nuclear deal
with Iranian that has been reached by the US and four U.N.
Iran is high on the idea of
removing a long list of International sanctions which started in November of
1979, by then U S President Jimmy Carter, to ease pressure on its struggling
economy and gain access to the international market. To complicate the
situation, Iran insists that it has the right to develop nuclear capabilities
for energy and medical purposes and is therefore unwilling to discard its
nuclear resources in total.
So the April 2015 Framework Agreement
includes the following:
- Iran has agreed to cut by two-thirds its supply of centrifuges, these machines are at the core of the Uranium-enrichment process, from around 19,000 to about 6,000, and retain only its earliest generation centrifuge machines.
- According to the Framework Agreement, Iran will be permitted to continue Uranium-enrichment but far below the levels required for a nuclear weapon.
- Iran has agreed to reduce its stockpile of enriched Uranium by 97%.
- Iran has pledged to grant the International Atomic Energy Agency access to all of its nuclear facilities and to its nuclear supply chain.
- The U.S., the United Nations and the European Union will lift nuclear-related sanctions once Monitors / Observers have determined that Iran has complied with its side of the bargain.
- American sanctions related to human rights abuses, terrorism, and non-nuclear weapons will remain in place.
So, why the big fuss by members
of the U S Congress, Israeli leaders, and several Arab states in the Middle
East Region? The short version goes like
this:
- Opponents say that a single-year “breakout time” is not long enough.
- Such opponents say the U.S. and its allies would have too little time to react if Iran does choose to build a nuclear weapon.
- The biggie though is that no one seems to trust the Iranian Government. They raise concerns that no matter how much “inspection” access Iran gives inspectors, they could still attempt to build a nuclear weapon without observers or U.S. intelligence finding out.
Why
might these concerns be relevant?
Simply put, Iran is currently without
question enriching Uranium 238 to produce U-235 which is an element which can
be to split and be used to breed Plutonium 239 which is the primary fissile
isotope used for the production of nuclear weapons. It
is commonly believed
by the majority of the civilized world that Iran is striving to enrich Uranium to
the 90+% level which is needed to make a viable atomic bomb whereas only a maximum
of 5% enrichment is necessary for nuclear power stations, and as you may recall, Iran has always claimed
domestic energy and medical purposes to be their only mission for enriching Uranium.
So
why might this deception pose a problem? Since 1979 the Iranian Government has
demonstrated its willingness to engage in actions generally perceived by the
majority of the civilized world to be hostile.
In short, no-body seems to trust them!
Most folks believe a nuclear armed Iran would, in the best of circumstances,
hold the entire Middle East region hostage to the threat of total nuclear destruction.
You see, according to a recent (August
28, 2014) report from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
(SIPRI), nine nations — the United States, Russia, United Kingdom, France,
China, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea — possess approximately 16,300
nuclear weapons; that’s far too many by anyone’s standards! The last time a nuclear weapon was used
during war or offensively was at Hiroshima and Nagasaki Japan near the end of
WWII. There has not been a thermonuclear weapon used during war since and if
humanity plans to survive, it must stay that way.
The
solution just might be, Thorium based nuclear facilities for Iran! The
international community should agree to assist Iran in producing as many
Thorium based nuclear power plants as it sees fit. Furthermore it could be argued that the international
community should agree to fund a large percentage of Iran’s transition from
Uranium (and dismantling its small Plutonium breeder reactor no one wants
to talk about) to Thorium based fuel and form a consortium to control the Thorium
along with the “scientific know how” required to get the job done.
As we all know, the U S, and
most likely the rest of the world, is apt to baulk at taking on another very
expensive venture in hopes of saving mankind but the alternative might just be nuclear war!
Regardless, before you decide
this proposal is just another bad idea among many, relating to the ongoing turmoil
in the Middle East, think about this:
There are 196 nations on
Earth. Would you believe that in 2014 Israel
ranked 50th in economic power, among all those nations? Yet this tiny infant Middle East country, not even
a hundred years old, is the most outspoken opponent
for a “deal” with Iran.
With this in mind take note that
in 2007, the Bush Administration and the
Israeli government agreed to a
10-year, $30 Billion military aid package for the period from 2009 to
2018.
Then in 2014 the 113th
Congress passed the Consolidated
Appropriations Act which provided, among other things, President Obama’s
full $3.1 billion request for Israel.
For 2015, the Administration has
requested $3.1 billion in military funding for Israel and another $10 million
in Migration and Refugee Assistance. The Missile Defense Agency’s 2015 request
for joint U.S. - Israeli programs is $96.8 million. The Obama Administration is
also requesting $175.9 million for the Israeli Iron Dome defense program.
Here’s
what all of this amounts to: The U.S. provides Israel with
$8.5 million in military aid alone every
damn day! So it comes as little
surprise
to learn that Lieutenant-General Gabi Ashkenazi, Israel's Army Chief of Staff
from
2007 to 2011, once pointed out “that in the past few years US taxpayers have
contributed more to the Israeli defense budget than Israeli taxpayers
themselves”.
All
this information poses the question . . . Would the money mentioned
above not be better spent by insuring a Thorium based nuclear program in Iran?
Sources:
No comments:
Post a Comment