Australia Nuclear Update

An Australian-based think tank is urging that nation to consider using thorium to power a new generation of nuclear reactors:

Australia should consider using its abundant reserves of the radioactive metal thorium to provide the nation with a vital alternative source of energy, a strategic thinktank says.

Australia's centre for strategic analysis, Future Directions International, made the recommendation in a new study on the country's future energy options released.

The study, Australia's Energy Options, says new safer and cleaner nuclear energy technologies could replace the country's reliance on oil, gas and coal for electricity.

It suggested Australia could use thorium instead of uranium to generate a new source of electricity.

"Australia holds the world's largest reserves of thorium, which could possibly fuel low-risk/low waste reactors which did not generate weapons-grade fissionable material, and which also could substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions," Future Directions said.

The study said Australia has much to gain from looking at the nuclear issue and urged the government to carry out a review of new nuclear technologies.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Energy, Uranium, Thorium, Australia, Mining

Comments

Anonymous said…

IIRC, Thorium is a fertile element rather than a fissionable one. Thorium 232 absorbs a neutron and transmutes to U-233 which is fissionable. I've seen reports that claim U-233 is a better bombmaking material than U-235. According to the following link the US has tested nuclear bombs using U-233:

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq4-1.html#Nfaq4.1.7.1

So much for the assertion that Thorium is not a proliferation threat. (This is no reason not to use it, let's just avoid easily refuted claims of non-proliferation.)

October 7, 2005 at 10:16 AM

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap...

Nuclear Utility Moves Up in Credit Ratings, Bank is "Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy"

Some positive signs that nuclear utilities can continue to receive positive ratings even while they finance new nuclear plants for the first time in decades: Wells Fargo upgrades SCANA to Outperform from Market Perform Wells analyst says, "YTD, SCG shares have underperformed the Regulated Electrics (total return +2% vs. +9%). Shares trade at 11.3X our 10E EPS, a modest discount to the peer group median of 11.8X. We view the valuation as attractive given a comparatively constructive regulatory environment and potential for above-average long-term EPS growth prospects ... Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy. SCG plans to participate in the development of two regulated nuclear units at a cost of $6.3B, raising legitimate concerns regarding financing and construction. We have carefully considered the risks and are comfortable with SCG’s strategy based on a highly constructive political & regulatory environment, manageable financing needs stretched out over 10 years, strong partners...

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog