Thorium nuclear reactors and safer energy supply too

[razz]

Someone told me about these so I googled to get more info.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/8393984/Safe-nuclear-does-exist-and-China-is-leading-the-way-with-thorium.html

There is a lot of thorium around the world, China is developing reactors as well as Norway for a good energy source. The US had the chance but wanted the plutonium from uranium for bombs, it seems, so let it go years ago.

It has possibilities maybe

[Zigzagman]

Times like these, I wish we had Ketchup around to tell us the "facts". I don't care much for the "nukes" simply because the waste lasts 100K years and I don't think we are responsible enough to handle a challenge like that. :confused:

I do think that in such a techno world we can do much better than oil, gas, coal. We simply has to have a leader somewhere in the world that is strong enough to convince the rest of the world to accept change. I can only hope.:cool:

I personally don't care where it comes from if it can save us from ourselves.:)

Peace

[RosieTR]

I still don't understand why hydrogen hasn't been developed as an energy source. It takes energy to make hydrogen so it would be most useful as a storage vehicle for wind, solar, geothermal, etc types of energy. Each house could have its own H-gas "plant" stuck in the window or on the roof somewhere. As well, there could be power plants to generate energy either directly or indirectly. The state of Wyoming has enough wind to power the whole US if there were a storage mechanism, for example. Another idea is compressed CO2 though with hydrogen the byproduct is water which makes a closed system (water in=water out). But maybe I need to brush up on my physics-perhaps there are snags beyond political/economic ones. You can change politics and possibly direct economics in certain ways, but physics is physics.