I've looked at this a little. It's been under study for over 30 years, so
the pros and cons are pretty well understood. The wikipedia page ("thorium
fuel cycle") covers them. It's definitely feasible, probably an economic
win for countries with a lot of thorium (e.g. India), and arguably a little
safer. But for me, bottom line is that it doesn't change the fundamentals.
There are still waste handling issues and reactor design issues and nuclear
economy/proliferation issues. So moving from U to Th is a difference (in
the technology sphere) that doesn't really make a difference (in the public
policy sphere).Jeff On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Patrick Ellul <ellulpatr...@gmail.com>wrote: > Hello collective, > > Is Thorium really safer? And is it reallya a feasible solution? > > > http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21628905.600-indias-thoriumbased-nuclear-dream-inches-closer.html?cmpid=RSS|NSNS|2012-GLOBAL|online-news > > Regards, > Patrick >
