Is there a role for nuclear energy?

[Neferti]

Again, uranium is on the way out, thorium will be the nuclear fuel of the future. Good thing we have tons of thorium, eh?

So 1st you advocate fast breeders, which the waste from is plutonium that is deadly for 25,000 years. And now you advocate thorium fueled pebble bed reactors, which the waste from remains toxic for 4.5 billion years.

The Germans have had problems with their pebble bed reactor, and India refuses comment on its pebble bed reactor.

Pebble bed reactor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor

Production of fuel
All kernels are precipitated from a sol-gel, then washed, dried and calcined. U.S. kernels use uranium carbide, while German (AVR) kernels use uranium dioxide.

Criticisms of the reactor design
Since the fuel is contained in graphite pebbles, the volume of radioactive waste is much greater, but contains about the same radioactivity when measured in becquerels per kilowatt-hour. ... In 2008, a report[12][13] about safety aspects of the AVR reactor in Germany and some general features of pebble bed reactors have drawn attention. The claims are under contention.[14] Main points of discussion are

* No possibility to place standard measurement equipment in the pebble bed core, i.e. pebble bed = black box
* Contamination of the cooling circuit with metallic fission products (Sr-90, Cs-137) due to the insufficient retention capabilities of fuel pebbles for metallic fission products. Even modern fuel elements do not sufficiently retain strontium and cesium.
* improper temperatures in the core (more than 200 °C above calculated values)
* necessity of a pressure retaining containment
* unresolved problems with dust formation by pebble friction (dust acts as a mobile fission product carrier)

Don't take too much notice of Monk, he starts drinking his Home Brew for morning tea, so is well sozzled by mid afternoon.

[Outlaw Yogi]

The point of a breeder reactor is, it creates fuel as it generates power—very little waste. I consider them the stop gap solution until in the future fusion is fantastically, phenomenally favored with features galore.

MOX fuel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOX_fuel

... Worldwide, almost 100 tonnes of plutonium in spent fuel arises each year. A single recycling of plutonium increases the energy derived from the original uranium by some 12%, and if the 235
92U is also recycled by re-enrichment, this becomes about 20%.[4] With additional recycling the percentage of fissile (usually meaning odd-neutron number nuclides) in the mix decreases and even-neutron number, neutron-absorbing nuclide increase, requiring the total plutonium and/or enriched uranium percentage to be increased. Today in thermal reactors plutonium is only recycled once as MOX fuel, and spent MOX fuel, with a high proportion of minor actinides and even plutonium isotopes, is stored as waste.

[Outlaw Yogi]

Not a new idea, I have been fascinated by the idea and promise of fusion power since my Physics I & II days at Adelaide Uni in the 60s.

I wouldn't count on fusion being available within a 100 year timeframe...

I'd wack another zero or few onto that 100 year timeframe.

Y'see the energy required to create a magnetic field strong enough to contain a fusion reaction massively outweighs the energy generated by the reaction. Thus fusion remains in the realm of perpetual motion fantasy.

[Viking King.]

Yogi ma man,
it would appear you have read through a good deal of the conversation, nut wrong with that,
but you should have also noted it is mainly on personal observationsand personal thoughts,
I for one am not a nuclear scientist but do enjoy learning about what goes on about me,
you write that nuke is a dud, if this be the case then why is it called "nuclear energy?"
it had to be given a name and so "nuclear" is it for now until something else comes along,
same as "Atomic energy" it got the name because science set out to smash the atom,
in achieving this it is simply named because of the power/energy involved in spliting the atom,
in years to come science may try to cut through the "String of the String theory"
will it then be called "Putwang"?
Atomic energy, Nuclear energy, dis dat and da other energy have always been under testing and always will be to try and better it's abilities.
There is the collider creating what they call the big bang replica, what might happen with these tests in years to come,
in the U.S the are building one hell of a massive beyong massive laser machine, so far it is said to have cost some 15 trillion dollars, they doubt it will be at full operational ability within this century, the idea is to see if it can blow up another planet, same as we saw in the movie Star Wars and the "Death Star", why are they doing it and wasting so much money to provide so much power to run a city?
Because it is a challenge to science when someone asks "What if?"

[boxy]

Are you a spambot? They bang out posts like that, pretending to be saying something... but actually not making any sense at all, as well.

[IQS.RLOW]

Whack a "Viagra" or "Cialis" in there and bingo

[Viking King.]

Did someone fart?
an rotton stink floating around.

[Outlaw Yogi]

VK, doesn't matter what you call it, 60 years of extremely expensive unfulfiled promise is a dud!
We can generate vastly more electricity with just solar PV panels alone, for a fraction of the cost.

The big lazer .. or photon beam you mention, is as far as I'm aware, hardly death star capability, but is hoped to possibly bumb asteroids (and probably space junk) off an undesirable course/trajectory.

[Viking King.]

VK, doesn't matter what you call it, 60 years of extremely expensive unfulfiled promise is a dud!
We can generate vastly more electricity with just solar PV panels alone, for a fraction of the cost.

The big lazer .. or photon beam you mention, is as far as I'm aware, hardly death star capability, but is hoped to possibly bumb asteroids (and probably space junk) off an undesirable course/trajectory.

Yes, for a fraction of the cost, agreed, but there are also many many local councils who reject the installations of windfarms or fields covered with solar panels, many home owners would not even consider purchase of a wind turbine for personal use on the home, where does it end with the negatives on this even though we all want to save money with our power bills.
The U.S would be the biggest waster of energy we can think of, the reason why they light up so greatly at xmas time is because they get a reduction in power bills during the season, what do we get in other countries, increase after increase because of the extra usage.

The laser;
Sure, to blow away giant asteroids and space junk, all that money spend to blow something up that may destroy the earth, something they have not come across yet, why not look after what is happening now instead of something that "MAY" occur in 1000 yrs from now?
All that money spent so far and what will be spent in years to come could get the U.S out of debt and possible feed every other country at the same time. and strill have enough left for dessert.

[Outlaw Yogi]

Yes, for a fraction of the cost, agreed,

And usually cost/price is the deciding factor.

... but there are also many many local councils who reject the installations of windfarms or fields covered with solar panels, many home owners would not even consider purchase of a wind turbine for personal use on the home, where does it end with the negatives on this even though we all want to save money with our power bills.

Just about, if not all councils have high voltage power line corridors through their territory, what better place to put mini wind turbines, banks of PV panels, or solar thermal turbines? ... its open space and often acts as wind tunnels.
Many home owners have rooftop whirly-gigs to extract hot air ... ever considered how easy it would be to retrofit those whirly-gigs with collars of neodymium magnets and copper coils? .. every one could be a mini alternator.

The laser;
Sure, to blow away giant asteroids and space junk, all that money spend to blow something up that may destroy the earth,

No, sorry, cant blow anything away .. as in a cutting/burning lazer. Believe it or not, it is supposedly the weight of the photons in the light beam that is meant to hit like a psuedo-solid object.
Thing is, no matter how big a waste of money it turns out to be, once its known to be poor value for money, its ditched, but with nuke power, once signed up, industry players keep putting their hand out for corporate welfare forever.