The world isn’t too hot on nuclear energy today, and for good reason. But “nuclear energy” doesn’t have to be the kind we’ve come to know and botch. Some engineers think the rocks we’re walking on could change electricity forever.
Motherboard’s new mini-doc, “The Thorium Dream”, follows just that — the fantasy of ditching uranium in favour of thorium, which is claimed to create far safer, cheaper and extremely abundant. So why aren’t we using this tech that was developed decades ago? The film does a terrific job navigating this strange electrical counter culture, talking to the minds who envision a near future that sounds like sci-fi. They say it could be very real. [Motherboard]
maddogeco
Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 7:25 AMor just dont bother. you have to dig up from good land they are still bad bi-products, there is still a centralized power grid that is vulnerable to collapse. decentralized solar and a combo of thermal and tidal power is the answer
Colonel
Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 8:54 AMIn an ideal world, yes, those would be the answer. But (as far as I know) the technology isn’t at a level where those renewable sources can provide enough energy for current demands. Without a significant decrease in consumption (which won’t happen any time soon) or a huge increase in technology (which will take time) they just aren’t viable alternatives to what we have.
Unfortunately.
Plazma
Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 5:58 PMThat’s not the answer.
Nuclear Fusion. Now that’s the answer. All you need is hydrogen, and all it makes is helium. Jut gotta find a way to make it work in an environment that isn’t the sun…
maggie
Sunday, November 20, 2011 at 12:25 AMDecentralized generations a great idea, but solar still suffers from in efficiency and a huge energy requirement for the production of silicon wafers. That said though the more energy coming from a renewable source the easier it will be to produce these products with lower impacts. Thorium reactor designs have been around for a while, I think I heard this debate a good few years ago. They seem like a great stepping stone if nothing else.
Cameron
Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 8:23 AMAustralia should be pumping money into research into this area. We could be at the front scientific and engineering excellence in this area if we actually worked on it, instead we’re happy to continue digging up coal and selling it. What’s going to happen in 30 or 40 years, when the world has all but weaned off coal, what are we going to be then? These kind of future technologies are the ones we need to be working on, so when other nations come around to wanting cleaner and more efficient power we’ll be ready to sell it to them.
Sicarius123
Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 8:51 AMLabor has it all planned out. When the coal runs out, we’ll be at the forefront of taxing our citizens!
Carbon Tax! Yeah!
StevoTheDevo
Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 9:25 AMIt’s a crappy plan if that’s the case… Cause when the coal runs out, the carbon stops being produced and the tax stops raking in the loot!
Antonia
Wednesday, November 16, 2011 at 1:59 PMAnd the Liberal Party would happily allow everyone to suffer in order to keep the Rich rich.
Lachlan Bromage
Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 9:32 AM+1. God damn us power hungry nerds!!!! LOL
will
Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 10:44 PMSure lets turn the life sustaining hydrogen into inert helium, why not use the helium from the moon that isn’t supporting life. yes i know there is fuck loads of hydrogen but I don’t want the world to end up like mad max except with more helium .
will
Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 10:44 PMdammit hit reply on the wrong comment.
Dave
Wednesday, November 16, 2011 at 9:14 AMI’m now going to go watch the movie and run all the dialogue through a pitch bender to see what that would be like…
DarthDVD
Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 8:23 AMThere is still waste from a thorium reactor… but the ammount of waste and the radioactive period is much much less than uranium. (or so ive read)
and its much much more safer.
On some reactor designs you just turn the particle accelerator off with a flick of a switch thats keeping the thorium reaction going, in another reactor designs you remove and cool down 1 uranium fuel rod thats keeping the thorium reaction going.
its easyer to cool down 1 uranium fuel rod than 10x or more (or however many you need in a uranium nuclear reactor).
DarthDVD
Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 8:25 AMIndia has a working prototype reactor and china are working on a reactor as we speak.
spk
Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 9:00 AMChina are sinking heaps of money into this. They need safer ways to power their country. I think it is a pretty good step towards the future.
danny
Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 9:29 AM1 reason it didn’t take off was the simple fact you could not weaponize any by products.
also its a lot safer as some of the designs are walkaway safe with the simple fact the can not (as far as i know) meltdown!
MrTaco
Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 11:49 AMI love things that “create far safer, cheaper and extremely abundant”.
james
Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 1:20 PMI still believe in that fairy tale that is cold fusion FTW