Access
This article is part of Nature's premium content.
Published online 23 January 2008 | Nature 451, 380-381 (2008) | doi:10.1038/451380a
News
Nuclear fuel: keeping it civil
In the third of a series of articles examining nuclear issues, Jeff Tollefson looks at options for fuelling a global boom in nuclear power stations without enabling nuclear proliferation.
Billionaire investor Warren Buffett put US$50 million on the table in 2006 and challenged the world to raise another $100 million for an international nuclear fuel bank. He called it “an investment in a safer world” — a world that will soon host an expanding group of nuclear power reactors.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Comments
Reader comments are usually moderated after posting. If you find something offensive or inappropriate, you can speed this process by clicking 'Report this comment' (or, if that doesn't work for you, email redesign@nature.com). For more controversial topics, we reserve the right to moderate before comments are published.
What about Thorium? Does it not promise nuclear energy without the weapons risk?
Until safe containment of nuclear waste can be guaranteed for the necessary time needed to become harmless, this is absolute madness. The money would be far better spent in developing nuclear fusion.
I see this as another case of politicians looking for simple answers without looking deep into the technical issues. In agreement with Mr. Brookfield, thorium is an issue that gets ignored. When thorium is subjected to neutrons in any reactor some of it is converted to uranium 233, a different chemical that can be seperated from the thorium by simple chemical means. Uranium 233 makes great bombs. There is only enough uranium to support a world energy system for a half a century. I agree with Agness Witter, we need to spend our resources to develop Fusion energy sources. They produce far less radioactivity and their are a enough resources to last any centuries.
There is roughly three times as much thorium as uranium, so even accepting the very low estimate of half a century's worth of uranium, that is roughly two centuries worth of energy. Hopefully that is long enough to develop fusion as an energy source. Fusion reactors are an intense source of neutrons, so they could be used to transmute thorium to uranium 233 or uranium to plutonium for making bombs. Or to transmute nuclear waste into less hazardous elements. There are no simple answers, indeed.