"Oil Crisis this Decade.....Ending Globalisation and Restoring Local Economies"

So, you think Global Warming will change your life? Well, have a look at this video!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5wSHSvIMro

At 08:30 - "Ending Globalisation and Restoring Local Economies" is predicted. Now that is a life-changer!

What do you think?

Is Peak Oil for the good or for the bad?

We need to stop burning all hydrocarbons for energy and save them for the essential things we need.

The way to do it - Get the first-of-a-kind LFTR built and get the proof of its inherent safety into the faces of the general public - Oil Prices will do the rest - and the rest is:  Worldwide deployment of LFTRs for electricity and for the creation of a hydrogen-economy for fuelling transportation and for fertiliser production.

Martin Durkin - We Need You! Tell the Story of Alvin Weinberg and LFTRs

http://www.martindurkin.com/webform/contact

This is my email to Martin Durkin on 11 November 2011. So far, it has gone unanswered. 

Dear Mr. Durkin,

I am a Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor (LFTR) advocate and host the only UK Blog on the topic "LFTRs to Power the Planet":  http://lftrsuk.blogspot.com/

The history of this uniquely safe and affordable nuclear power-generating reactor is a Greek Tragedy because, had it been deployed 40 years ago when the technology was 90% proven on an operating reactor, the world would not be in the polluted mess it is now. Since LFTRs can be used for the manufacture of liquid fuels, Peak Oil would still be in the distant future as hydrocarbons would only have been used for the stuff we need and not just burned for energy. 

Instead, it was side-lined in favour of the Light Water Reactor (LWR) which produced plutonium for bombs; Three Mile Island was a Pressurised Water Reactor (PWR) plant, which is a one version of a LWR and Fukushima had the other version, a Boiling Water Reactor (BWR).

The story which needs to be told is that of Alvin Weinberg, under who's Directorship, at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) the Molten Salt Reactor Experiment (MSRE) was conducted; this operating reactor produced power from 1965 to 1969 and the design is the basis for what we now call the LFTR.

After working on the Manhattan Project, Weinberg joined forces with Admiral Rickover in designing a nuclear propulsion reactor for the Nautilus Class Submarines and it is he who invented and patented the LWR. However, when LWRs were being considered for civil power generation, Weinberg predicted the loss-of-coolant/meltdown accidents (since witnessed at Three Mile Island and Fukushima) and railed against their use. Instead, Weinberg championed the intrinsically safe Molten Salt Reactor (MSR - now LFTR) and for his troubles, in 1972 he was asked to resign from his pursuit of further MSR development at ORNL, by a Congressman in the LWR camp.

Worldwide deployment of low-cost, modular LFTRs, capable of being transported on flat-bed vehicles and container-ships are affordable by the developing world. LFTRs can supply all of the energy requirements of every individual on the planet (at developed world standards), for hundreds of thousands of years, from the near inexhaustible resources of thorium fuel. Thorium is so energy dense that the ground under your feet can supply energy more cheaply than any other fuel - Weinberg described it as "mining the rocks..."

There is no other form of energy supply that is less environmentally destructive and capable of worldwide deployment. We have to dream that the raising of the standard of living of the most deprived and deserving will solve many of the worst problems facing humankind.

This 40 year stasis of a solution to the world's energy woes has brought us to turbulent times of great inequality; if this is not the saddest 'Accident of History', I don't know what is.

Would you consider telling the story, in your much-admired fashion?

Regards,

Colin Megson.

Global Warming is not a Crisis - Please tell me this is True!!

How people long to be told that Global Warming is not a Crisis. This could not have been demonstrated more forcefully than in a debate called:

Global Warming is not a Crisis - one debate - 3 speakers for the motion - 3 speakers against the motion. Before the debate: the audience poll showed:  30% in favour - 57% against - 13% don't knows. After the debate the polled figures reversed:  46% in favour - 42% against - 12% don't knows. 

Many of those present were obviously swayed by the forcefulness of the protagonists’ emphasis on scientific uncertainty and demonstrated that their earlier opinions, formed from computer models with scary projections, were reactions to the hyperbole of alarmists. The same hyperbole was repeated by those against the motion but, with their palpable feet of clay, there was little conviction in what they had to say.http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9082151 

For LFTRs, the enemy should be atmospheric pollution and particulates from the burning of fossil fuels, which are responsible for 2 million premature deaths per annum. Everyone can agree on such FACTS (more reliable than computer model projections involving unknowable positive feedbacks) and all our endeavours should be aimed at deploying clean energy sources.

See the heading to this Blog to get an instant perspective on the relative environmental degradation caused by energy supplied from - Coal - Uranium - Thorium.

LFTRs are 'in the air' in the Corridors of Power

But not in a short term, optimistic way. Email your local MP - http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/mps/  and find out their views.

House of Lords - Written Answers

Tuesday 8 November 2011

Energy: Nuclear Reactors

Question

Asked by Lord Stoddart of Swindon

To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the desirability of supporting the building of thorium-fuelled nuclear power stations in preference to uranium-fuelled stations.[HL12948]

Baroness Stowell of Beeston: Ultimately it is for industry to propose what type of fuel to use in any future nuclear reactors, the designs of which would be subject to independent regulatory assessment and acceptance. To date, no potential operator has put forward proposals for a thorium-fuelled plant in the UK.

That said, the department is aware of the potential of thorium-fuelled nuclear reactor designs and is in the process of assessing claims regarding its suitability as an alternative to uranium based reactors in the longer term.

The current view of thorium reactor technologies from the nuclear industry is that, whilst the science is reasonably sound, developing reactors based on a thorium fuel cycle would carry major technological and commercial risks. The resources required to develop these technologies to the point at which they might be deployed successfully at a commercial scale are also very significant.

To date, both in the UK and elsewhere in the world, this has prevented private industry and government from investing significantly in the development of the technology. No thorium reactor design has been implemented beyond relatively small, experimental systems, whilst many either only exist on paper or have only had specific subsystems demonstrated.

As an indicator of the challenge of taking this technology further, the Chinese Academy of Sciences estimates that a development period of at least 20 years will be required before a demonstration thorium molten-salt breeder reactor might be available.

While thorium does not appear to have a part to play in the UK's near to mid-term energy market, we do maintain an interest in its development. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State has asked the National Nuclear Laboratory (NNL) to look further into the wider benefits of next-generation reactor designs and to compare the use of thorium and uranium fuels in them. We are expecting the findings to be available in due course.

Keeeeeep Voting! We're in the Top 40 now!

http://38degrees.uservoice.com/forums/78585-campaign-suggestions/suggestions/2017457-uk-manufacture-of-liquid-fluoride-thorium-reactors?ref=title

Have a look at this! Votes coming in thick and fast!

Vote for it now, if you haven't already done so. If you have already voted and you're convinced that LFTR manufacture in the UK can benefit us all, then become a LFTR advocate and convince family, friends and acquaintances to vote with us.

It won't be long now before the 38Degrees machinery gets behind a manufacturing future for the UK!