Is this the end?, page-32

imho,

I believe that there are distinct differences between uranium and thorium. This is especially the case with the use of either material in the production of energy. I believe to treat the two as the same is a mistake made by by some greenies. If you are asking that I wish the greenies should be better educated on the topic of thorium, I would suggest that we all need to. If that education occurred the greenies may alter their attitude on thorium. I don't believe ignorance is good for anyone.

You can check my and others, thoughts on thorium on the thread under the topic of 'thorium' on HC.

You will see that raider provided a quote from the economist, being:

"China’s thorium programme looks bigger. The Chinese Academy of Sciences claims the country now has “the world’s largest national effort on thorium”, employing a team of 430 scientists and engineers, a number planned to rise to 750 by 2015. This team, moreover, is headed by Jiang Mianheng, an engineering graduate of Drexel University in the United States who is the son of China’s former leader, Jiang Zemin (himself an engineer). Some may question whether Mr Jiang got his job strictly on merit. His appointment, though, does suggest the project has political clout. The team plan to fire up a prototype thorium reactor in 2015. Like India’s, this will use solid fuel. But by 2017 the Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics expects to have one that uses a trickier but better fuel, molten thorium fluoride. "

http://www.economist.com/news/scien...d-after-norse-god-thunder-may-soon-contribute

A quote from a paper written by Dr Hashemi-Nezhad, a Sydney University Physicist working on thorium stated:
“The impact of the ADS technology to the Australian economy is enormous. Calculations show that if the known thorium resources of Australia (300,000 tonnes) are burnt in accelerator driven sub-critical reactors, it will provide an energy equivalent of 4.3x10^12 barrels of oil. This amount is equivalent to 5800 years of oil export, at a rate of 2 million barrels per day (similar to that of a major oil producing country in the Persian Gulf) or an income of ~ AUS$70x10^9 (US$52x10^9) per year for 5800 years at today’s oil price.
Accelerator driven subcritical nuclear reactors besides producing clean and cheap energy, provide a unique solution for the elimination of plutonium, minor actinides and long-lived fission products in conventional nuclear reactor waste as well as the plutonium from warheads: one of mankind’s unnecessary, unwise, self-destructive, cruel and crude technical achievements, for a peaceful and environmentally clean Earth.”
(Hashemi-Nezhad, N. “Accelerator Driven Sub-critical Nuclear Reactors”. Australian Physics, Vol. 43 No. 3, (2006), 90-96.)

You might like to explain how thorium's use can become out of control.

Do yourself a favour Imho and check out the possibilities of the use of thorium. I do not believe that it is the demon material you are suggesting in your post.

Cheers

Stoops