Thorium: kernenergie, maar dan zonder alle nadelen?
In de loop der tijd hebben verschillende respondenten in hun reacties op mijn blog gewezen op de voordelen van thorium als brandstof voor nucleaire reactors. Niet alleen in de VS lijkt de belangstelling voor deze kernenergieoptie te groeien, maar ook in andere landen.
Er is reeds in verschillende delen van de wereld een aanvang gemaakt met de ontwikkeling van thoriumreactoren. Hierbij zijn Amerikanen, Chinezen, Russen, Fransen en Finnen betrokken.
John Coleman, de bekende Amerikaanse tv-meteoroloog, schonk aandacht aan deze ontwikkeling, zowel op zijn blog als in een speciale video.
Onder de titel, 'Thorium, energy source for the future', schreef John Coleman op zijn blog:
The ugly debate about energy has gone on and on. It is costing us billions of dollars. It is beginning to cripple our nation. I have been looking for a source of abundant, cheap electric power that short cuts the raging, highly destructive debate; a source all sides can support. I think I have found it. It is thorium.
Thorium is nothing new. It was successfully demonstrated in the 1960s. I am not the only one to find it; there are now 100s, maybe even thousands of scientists, promoting it. But it has largely been forgotten and overlooked ever since the military/industrial complex and their political and bureaucratic servants dumped it 50 years ago.
I am asking for all sides in the climate change, global warming, carbon dioxide, carbon footprint debate to consider supporting thorium. It is green; it produces no greenhouse gasses, no particulate pollution, leaves little waste and produces no risk of explosion, radiation or pollution in the atmosphere or ocean. It is cheap; an abundant resource found in the desert salts and rocks in virtually every country on Earth. It is relatively cheap and simple to use.
I see every reason why, despite their huge, continuing differences on other issues, that thorium power can be accepted and promoted by all sides. I think Richard Lindzen and Michael Mann, Joe Bast and Peter Gleick, Fred Singer and James Hansen, Lord Monckton and Al Gore, Roger Pielke and Joe Romm should all set aside their debate long enough to help get the move to thorium electric power generation rolling.
Thorium is nothing new. It was successfully demonstrated in the 1960s. I am not the only one to find it; there are now 100s, maybe even thousands of scientists, promoting it. But it has largely been forgotten and overlooked ever since the military/industrial complex and their political and bureaucratic servants dumped it 50 years ago.
I am asking for all sides in the climate change, global warming, carbon dioxide, carbon footprint debate to consider supporting thorium. It is green; it produces no greenhouse gasses, no particulate pollution, leaves little waste and produces no risk of explosion, radiation or pollution in the atmosphere or ocean. It is cheap; an abundant resource found in the desert salts and rocks in virtually every country on Earth. It is relatively cheap and simple to use.
I see every reason why, despite their huge, continuing differences on other issues, that thorium power can be accepted and promoted by all sides. I think Richard Lindzen and Michael Mann, Joe Bast and Peter Gleick, Fred Singer and James Hansen, Lord Monckton and Al Gore, Roger Pielke and Joe Romm should all set aside their debate long enough to help get the move to thorium electric power generation rolling.
Het is bijna te mooi om waar te zijn.
Ga verder met lezen
Dit vind je misschien ook leuk
Laat mensen jouw mening weten
