Beyond the technical issue is the economic issue - what does this due to the capital cost of the electricity produced? This is less of an issue when the question is extending the lifespan of existing nuclear plants, but when, in the US, there is legislation proposed to provide substantial financial incentives to the construction of new nuclear power plants. I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
So I think it could work as top load, if designed for it.
What is the development status of thorium reactors btw? A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!
What is the development status of thorium reactors btw?
That I don't know.
My interest is in terms of strong sustainability, where I don't view a lifestyle on an energy budget relying on technology that cannot be propagated outside a select group of core economies as long-term sustainable. Core economies can't avoid proselytizing for their lifestyle and standard of living among semi-peripheral and peripheral economies, after all.
So a fuel cycle without the proliferation concerns of the common fuel cycles might qualify as something more than a medium term stop-gap.
And if it qualifies as something more than a medium-term stop-gap, then it might have the basis to claim support as an infant industry that existing nuclear technologies do not have. I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
