Thorium Ore: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Nuclear Energy

Author: Metas (Fin) Chongsoontornkul

Climate Change is real and every day our planet continues to burn. With electricity generation accounting for 25% of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide, I think we can all agree that we need to reconsider where we get our power. Allow me to present an option that is a little controversial: Nuclear Energy, specifically Thorium-based Nuclear Energy.

Before we get to Thorium, we must first ask, what is nuclear energy and why is it the best thing we have?

Part 1: The Case for Nuclear Power

Nuclear Power is the method of generating electricity through the process of Nuclear Fission, which works by bombarding the nuclei of certain elements with neutrons, splitting the atoms and releasing a massive amount of energy in millions of tiny controlled explosions. A medium such as water is also used to slow down these neutrons to help with the process. This produces energy in two forms: Kinetic Energy and Radioactive Energy. The kinetic energy is used to generate heat, which then heats up some water, turning it into steam which then turns turbines which generate electricity.

So, exactly how much energy does nuclear energy produce? A lot. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, “Nuclear energy has by far the highest capacity factor of any other energy source. This basically means nuclear power plants are producing maximum power more than 93% of the time during the year. That’s about 1.5 to 2 times more as natural gas and coal units, and 2.5 to 3.5 times more reliable than wind and solar plants.” An average Nuclear Reactor can create a Gigawatt of energy. To reach that same amount of energy, you’d need 3 to 4 coal plants.

But what about its effects on the environment? How can Nuclear Power possibly be cleaner than fossil fuels?

The carbon emissions from Nuclear power plants are absolutely negligible. This is because the process of Nuclear Fission doesn’t generate any emissions. Instead, all of the carbon is indirect such as fossil fuels used during mining or construction which ultimately add up to negligible amounts. In fact, 33 Gigatons of carbon have been prevented from entering the atmosphere in 2019 because of Nuclear Power. As a matter of fact, according to the IPCC, Nuclear Energy emits 4 times lower carbon than Solar Energy.

Of course, we need to address the elephant in the room: Radioactive Waste. Waste is classed into levels of radioactivity, from very low to high. The vast, vast majority of waste produced is classed as “Very Low” or “Low” and is not very difficult to dispose of. The type of waste that is actually dangerous is “High” radioactivity waste, which is 3% of the waste. This waste can be toxic for tens of thousands of years, longer than human civilization has existed. There are many ways to deal with this waste. Many countries opt to reuse and reprocess waste first. This process significantly reducing radioactivity and drawing extra power out of the re-used cores. High-Level waste must then be stored deep underground at secure sites, completely harmless to people. I would argue putting a tiny amount of toxic material in a super deep hole is infinitely better than putting literal gigatons of toxic material into the atmosphere.

But isn’t Nuclear Power extremely dangerous?

No. Despite what HBO’s Chernobyl will tell you, Nuclear Energy is not a threat to the wellbeing of people. According to NASA, by reducing the number of fossil fuels burned, Nuclear Energy has actually prevented over 1.8 million deaths between 1979 and 2009. There have only been a handful of high profile nuclear reactor meltdowns since the inception of nuclear energy. Notable ones are Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima. However, according to multiple studies, even accounting for the direct death toll of those 3 disasters, Nuclear Energy is responsible for the least amount of energy-related deaths. Safer than coal, oil, gas, wind, and even solar. The results are the same for serious illnesses too. Nuclear energy is not only safe but the safest form of energy. The 3 big incidents have occurred in abnormal circumstances and reactors have since made improvements to stop these already improbable incidents from happening again.

Finally, there’s the issue of Nuclear Weapons proliferation.

There is already a myriad of treaties and agreements such as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty which have the goal of spreading nuclear energy while removing nuclear weapons as a threat. Every nuclear energy site also must be inspected by the IAEA, a UN organization that monitors nuclear energy use. While it is possible to convert civilian reactors to weapons, it’s extremely difficult to do so and no country could do that without dire consequences. Of course, extensive safeguards must still be taken and continue to develop, but according to a Dartmouth study, Nuclear Energy programs rarely lead to proliferation.

So, now that we’ve established why nuclear power isn’t so bad, and can, in fact, be very good for us and the environment, what’s the deal with Thorium?”

Part 2: The Power of Thorium

Thorium is a naturally occurring, slightly radioactive metal located to blocks away from Uranium on the Periodic Table. Recently, there has been more and more research done on Thorium as a possible alternative to the typical uranium-based reactors. It’s very possible that Thorium could become the superior fuel to power the future of mankind.

What’s the difference between normal reactors and thorium reactors?

There are 2 types of nuclear fuels: Fissile and Fertile. Fissile material is the material that you can gain energy from nuclear fission. This includes Uranium. Fertile material, on the other hand, is not able to release energy itself but can be turned into fissile material when paired with another fissile material. This includes Thorium. When paired, Thorium will decay into Uranium-233, an excellent fissile material, superior to the typical U-235 or U-238.

What’s so special about Thorium is that it can “breed” it’s own fuel. To get it started, you need to introduce some fissile material, but Thorium reactors can create more than they consume. This could mean that these reactors could keep on functioning indefinitely. Another unique aspect of Thorium is that this process can be done in Molten Salt Reactors, meaning that it’s safer and just as efficient as “fast reactors”.

But what about the output?

It’s already proven that Nuclear Energy is already the most efficient form of energy that we have, but Thorium really takes this efficiency into absurd levels. According to CERN, one ton of thorium can produce as much energy as 200 tons of uranium or 3,500,000 tons of coal. This means that we can use power more with less material, waste, and a smaller carbon footprint. This, coupled with the fact that Thorium is 3 times more common in the Earth’s crust than Uranium, makes it the ideal choice for power, even if it’s too difficult to create breeding reactors.

And if that’s not enough for you, Thorium is much safer than Uranium.

It produces much less waste, 2 orders of magnitudes less in fact. This waste is also much less toxic than traditional nuclear waste, returning to safe levels in hundreds, instead of thousands of years. Because it’s fertile, mining is also much easier, requiring less ventilation, thus reducing the already low casualty rate to even lower numbers. About Nuclear Weapons: While it is still possible to use Thorium and it’s byproducts for weapons, it’s not as effective and more difficult to handle, making it not so ideal. Finally, because of its Molten Salt Reactor, the risk of a meltdown is practically zero. If the reactor were to overheat, the liquid fuel will drain into a container underground for safekeeping.

So with all of these benefits from Thorium Reactors and Nuclear Energy in General, why hasn’t this been put into use yet?

Part 3: What you can do to help

Nuclear Energy programs are underfunded due to lack of interest, and active efforts to remove Nuclear Energy as an option in recent years.

When people hear the word “Nuclear”, they often jump to Atomic Bombs and Nuclear War. This tainted reputation, coupled with Fukushima and Chernobyl, has lead to Nuclear Energy becoming the least popular form of energy.

While the incidents ware not common at all and are unlikely to repeat, they have been sensationalized into a new boogeyman, painting Nuclear Energy as dangerous.

Instead of building more plants, we’ve started shutting them down before their life cycle has ended. Due to significant public pushback, the United States, Germany, and France, leaders in Nuclear Energy have begun the process of phasing out nuclear energy, and this is hurting the planet. Shutting these plants down has actually increased carbon emissions and sped up climate change even more. By shutting them down, we’re polluting our planet more. This fear of Nuclear energy has lead to more harm than it would ever have done. We need more of it, not less.

As chronicled in his 2015 TED talk, Michael Shellenberger, a Nuclear Energy advocate, visited a developing thorium plant in China where they told him that the estimated time of arrival will be around 2040. According to them, they don’t have a third of their budget due to a lack of interest.

What you can do, is fight the misinformation. Don’t fight the atom, embrace it. Only by changing public opinion, by informing them and generating interest, can we turn the ship around. We need your help.

Sources and Further Reading:

Blix, Hans. “Global Aspects of Nuclear Power, Energy Supply and Nuclear Disarmament.” IAEA, IAEA, 24 May 1994, www.iaea.org/newscenter/statements/global-aspects-nuclear-power-energy-supply-and-nuclear-disarmament-0.

Conca, James. “U.S. CO2 Emissions Rise As Nuclear Power Plants Close.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 18 Jan. 2019, www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2019/01/16/u-s-co2-emissions-rise-as-nuclear-power-plants-close/#3778b13b7034.

EIA, Contributors. “U.S. Energy Information Administration - EIA - Independent Statistics and Analysis.” Nuclear Power and the Environment - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), U.S. Energy Information Administration, 15 Jan. 2020, www.eia.gov/energyexplained/nuclear/nuclear-power-and-the-environment.php.

ENEC, Contributors. “How Nuclear Energy Works.” How Nuclear Energy Works, Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation, www.enec.gov.ae/discover/how-nuclear-energy-works/.

EPA, Contributors. “Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data.” EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, 13 Sept. 2019, www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data.

Evans-Pritchard, Ambrose. “Obama Could Kill Fossil Fuels Overnight with a Nuclear Dash for Thorium.” The Telegraph, Telegraph Media Group, 29 Aug. 2010, www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/7970619/Obama-could-kill-fossil-fuels-overnight-with-a-nuclear-dash-for-thorium.html.

IAEA, Contributors. “Nuclear Power and Climate Change.” IAEA, IAEA, 13 Apr. 2016, www.iaea.org/topics/nuclear-power-and-climate-change.

Kharecha, Pushker, and James Hansen. “NASA GISS: Science Brief: Coal and Gas Are Far More Harmful than Nuclear Power.” NASA, NASA, Apr. 2013, www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/kharecha_02/.

Kurtzgesagt, Contributors. “3 Reasons Why Nuclear Energy Is Awesome! 3/3.” YouTube, Kurtzgesagt - In a Nutshell, 1 Apr. 2015, www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVbLlnmxIbY.

Kurtzgesagt, Contributors. “Nuclear Energy Explained: How Does It Work? 1/3.” YouTube, Kurtzgesagt - In a Nutshell, 26 Mar. 2015, www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcOFV4y5z8c.

Markandya, Anil, and Paul Wilkinson. “Electricity Generation and Health.” The Lancet, vol. 370, no. 9591, 2007, pp. 979–990., doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(07)61253-7.

Miller, Nicholas L. “Why Nuclear Energy Programs Rarely Lead to Proliferation.” International Security, vol. 42, no. 2, 2017, pp. 40–77., doi:10.1162/isec_a_00293.

O'Dowd, Matt. “Thorium and the Future of Nuclear Energy.” YouTube, PBS Space Time, 1 July 2019, www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElulEJruhRQ.

Office of Nuclear Energy, Contributors. “Nuclear Power Is the Most Reliable Energy Source and It's Not Even Close.” Energy.gov, Office of Nuclear Energy, 22 Apr. 2020, www.energy.gov/ne/articles/nuclear-power-most-reliable-energy-source-and-its-not-even-close.

Ritchie, Hannah. “What Are the Safest Sources of Energy?” Our World in Data, 10 Feb. 2020, ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy.

Shellenberger, Michael. “How Fear of Nuclear Power Is Hurting the Environment | Michael Shellenberger.” YouTube, TED, 5 Oct. 2016, www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZXUR4z2P9w.

Touran, Nick. “Thorium As Nuclear Fuel: the Good and the Bad.” What Is Nuclear?, whatisnuclear.com/thorium.html.

Touran, Nick. “What Is Nuclear Recycling?” What Is Nuclear?, Mar. 2009, whatisnuclear.com/recycling.html.

Wikipedia, Contributors. “Thorium-Based Nuclear Power.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 29 Apr. 2020, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium-based_nuclear_power.

World Nuclear Association, Contributors. “Thorium.” Thorium - World Nuclear Association, Feb. 2017, www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/thorium.aspx.