Common Metal Could "Eliminate Fossile Fuels Overnight" - Polidicks

[QUOTE] We could then stop arguing about wind mills, deepwater drilling, IPCC hockey sticks, or strategic reliance on the Kremlin. History will move on fast. Muddling on with the status quo is not a grown-up policy. The International Energy Agency says the world must invest $26 trillion (£16.7 trillion) over the next 20 years to avert an energy shock. The scramble for scarce fuel is already leading to friction between China, India, and the West. There is no certain bet in nuclear physics but work by Nobel laureate Carlo Rubbia at CERN (European Organization for Nuclear Research) on the use of thorium as a cheap, clean and safe alternative to uranium in reactors may be the magic bullet we have all been hoping for, though we have barely begun to crack the potential of solar power. Dr Rubbia says a tonne of the silvery metal – named after the Norse god of thunder, who also gave us Thor’s day or Thursday - produces as much energy as 200 tonnes of uranium, or 3,500,000 tonnes of coal. A mere fistful would light London for a week...... [/QUOTE]Continue the story here, it's very interesting [URL]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/7970619/Obama-could-kill-fossil-fuels-overnight-with-a-nuclear-dash-for-thorium.html[/URL]

Awesome! Thorium reactors were always a great idea. It produces far more energy than that of uranium or plutonium. If I remember right, it isn't unstable enough to weaponize, either, so not is it only a cheap alternative, but decreases the risk of attacks.

So if it's so much more powerful than Uranium, why is that? Uraniums power comes from radiation, so does Thorium give off a decent amount of radiation? [b]Edit[/b] Apparently it's too unstable like the post above me said, because it emits too many gamma rays according to the article.

Fuck yeah metal :rock:

What's the point since fusion power is literally about to take off? We are literally years away from commercial fusion power.

Impractical for reasons I would not list here (Belgians did it).

No nuclear is a bad idea don't you remember Chernobyl a state-of-the-art plant it exploded did you know nuclear reactors can blow up like nukes? I dun wann nukes in my backyurd!!!!1!1!!one!1111eleven!!!1!1!eleventyone!1!1 Obama is poisoning our eggs and our children with his nookolear reactors fox news told me so people wake up to the social-communist nazi obamacare conspiracy you all sheep!!! Also 9/11 vote Palin :downs:

[QUOTE=Raneman;24477211]Impractical for reasons I would not list here.[/QUOTE] Please do, educate me :buddy:

[QUOTE=Raneman;24477211]Impractical for reasons I would not list here.[/QUOTE] so what is the point of saying that in the first place?

[QUOTE=Redcow17;24477199]So if it's so much more powerful than Uranium, why is that? Uraniums power comes from radiation, so does Thorium give off a decent amount of radiation?[/QUOTE] Radiation has nothing to do with the amount of power it produces. Radiation is only a pointer to instability, which is why uranium is easier than thorium to start a reaction. That is why uranium is a prized fuel, it doesn't require much energy to start a reaction. [QUOTE=Wolfie13;24477209]What's the point since fusion power is literally about to take off? We are literally years away from commercial fusion power.[/QUOTE] Fusion is decades away, not mere years; we have yet to break even.

[QUOTE=Wolfie13;24477209]What's the point since fusion power is literally about to take off? We are literally years away from commercial fusion power.[/QUOTE] This. It can, potentially, be sustained for 30 times the expected lifespan of our sun.

:buddy:

[QUOTE=Wolfie13;24477209]What's the point since fusion power is literally about to take off? We are literally years away from commercial fusion power.[/QUOTE] I certainly hope so.

[QUOTE=Wolfie13;24477209]What's the point since fusion power is literally about to take off? We are literally years away from commercial fusion power.[/QUOTE] The experts say it will be done in 2050. So yeah, we can't just sit while the Uranium runs out until we get fusion. We have to use nuclear power, whether it's through safe Thorium or not-so-safe-but-security-measures-are-good-enough Uranium. It has the potential to save the energy crisis and provide safe, clean, long-lasting energy for us all until we discover how to maintain stable fusion. ... So after we're done with the "nookolear power is dangerous nutjobs!!!" we'll have a whole new generation of people thinking fusion is dangerous.

Sweet a new fuel source.

[QUOTE=ExplodingGuy;24477303] Fusion is decades away, not mere years, we still have yet to break even.[/QUOTE] [Edited because retardation] But the time for fusion power to become commercially available is nowhere close to single-digit numbers.

It's impractical because the Belgians stole everyone's thorium and are using it for waffle syrup and chocolate.

[QUOTE=Eudoxia;24477400]A reactor in Korea has broken even[/QUOTE] What? When? Where? Source?

I'm not really educated on Thorium and its availability, but is it a scarce metal? Or is there a vast quantity that is able to be used?

[QUOTE=BaconDioxide;24477520]What? When? Where? Source?[/QUOTE] Disregard me. I... Got it wrong :saddowns:

Pretty cool, never thought about Thorium being used.

[QUOTE=Eudoxia;24477646]Disregard me. I... Got it wrong :saddowns:[/QUOTE] I was gonna say man, having a reactor reach break even now would be fucking crazy awesome news.

[QUOTE=Shadowstone;24477618]I'm not really educated on Thorium and its availability, but is it a scarce metal? Or is there a vast quantity that is able to be used?[/QUOTE] The article says it's so common that miners treat it as a nuisance

[QUOTE=Sean C;24477756]The article says it's so common that miners treat it as a nuisance[/QUOTE] Well then! We should start looking into this more then :)

[QUOTE=Eudoxia;24477646]Disregard me. I... Got it wrong :saddowns:[/QUOTE] :smug: But having a fusion reactor break even would be a massive achievement. I think I know what reactor you were talking about...

Very very very late. God these science articles are like, 5 months late. [editline]05:42PM[/editline] Oh it's a mainstream news site, no wonder.

Fusion power, reactors, nuclear power, scare oil conflicts... This is all sounding suspiciously like Fallout 3.

Mhmm, sure, could, would, should, won't. Another miracle-cure to the world's problems that will simply never surface. Be it because it's too hard to obtain in the necessary quantities, not as effective as they thought, buried and forgotten by shady government agencies or companies that would lose out if it came to use, etc. I like to be optimistic but come ON. By this stage with all these miracle technologies and elements and power sources and whatnot reported in the last 10 years, we should have cured cancer, aids & ebola, taken to the stars in ships with unlimited power, and be enjoying living to the ripe old age of 99999. Instead, we get a news article every second week from scientists or doctors or whoever-the-hell claiming that they've stumbled upon some amazing new piece of technology or whatever that will solve all our problems. Yeah right.

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;24477886]Fusion power, reactors, nuclear power, scare oil conflicts... This is all sounding suspiciously like Fallout 3.[/QUOTE] :colbert:

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;24477886]Fusion power, reactors, nuclear power, scare oil conflicts... This is all sounding suspiciously like Fallout 3.[/QUOTE] Alot of games seem to use resource wars as a background story.