Peak Uranium and Thorium  

Wired has an article up on the use of Thorium in nuclear reactors - a favourite rebuttal of the "peak uranium" argument against nuclear power that may have some weight (and it appears against some of the nuclear poroliferation arguments as well). Like uranium, it appears we have the world's buggest supply of thorium, so if the world takes this option up we'll no doubt end up with more radioactive miners and national parks (as well as more export income to compensate for our endless appetite for foreign made goods)

On the subject of "peak uranium" it appears that the Ux Consulting Company is about to start publishing a depletion model for the uranium industry.

Fueling nuclear reactors with the element thorium instead of uranium could produce half as much radioactive waste and reduce the availability of weapons-grade plutonium by as much as 80 percent. But the nuclear power industry needs more incentives to make the switch, experts say.

Scientists have long considered using thorium as a reactor fuel -- and for good reason: The naturally occurring element is more abundant, more efficient and safer to use than uranium. Plus, very little of it breaks down into plutonium as it is used, meaning that governments have access to less material for making nuclear weapons.

But design challenges and a Cold War-era interest in using nuclear waste byproducts in atomic bombs pushed the industry to use uranium as its primary fuel.

Now, as governments look to prevent the proliferation of nuclear arms and as environmentalists want to reduce the volume of nuclear waste building up around the world, thorium is again drawing attention.

Over the past several years, studies in the United States and Russia have yielded solutions to some of the issues that troubled earlier researchers. And in January, India -- which has the world's second largest reserve of thorium behind Australia --announced it would begin testing the safety of a design of its own.

Unlike burning fossil fuels, using nuclear fission to generate electricity produces no soot or greenhouse gases. This helps keep the skies clean and doesn't contribute to global warming. The World Nuclear Association estimates that the electricity industry would add 2.6 billion tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere each year if it used coal power instead of nuclear.

Some governments also like nuclear power because it reduces their dependency on foreign oil.

Finally, the fuel used to power nuclear reactors is very compact in comparison to fossil fuels. For instance, one pound of uranium can supply the same energy as 3 million pounds of coal. This makes it attractive for use in nuclear-powered vehicles like submarines, aircraft carriers and spacecraft.