I guess its high time for a technical and nerdy post. No worries though, will present it here in the most non-scientific way as can be possible done for the benefit of non physics students.
With global oil prices hitting $142 per barrel this week and locally at RM2.70 per litre making the possibility of poor souls as myself with no driving licence driving anytime soon , very very remote, its high time alternative fuel sources get pushed into the lime light.
I'll start of with the controversial one first- going Nuclear.
To be blunt, Nuclear fuel is clean. Period. The only short term waste is water and a bit of steam. the long term waste is another matter altogether. Spent fuel rods containing uranium which takes 10,000 plus years to decay to safe levels added with a bit of hype surrounding Chernobyl and Three Mile Island reactor meltdowns makes it difficult, politically for deals like the current hot India-US civillian nuke deal to fall through.
But all thsi is known, i'll get to the point.
The key to safe and CLEAN nuke plants is now an element called Thorium. Its a lighter element that Uranuim-238 and has some really fab properties.
In conventional nuke plants, U-238 is refined to U-235 before being used, the reason for this being u-235 is more unstable than U-238, making a long fission chain reaction possible. The actual whole story is much more complicated, would love to explain more, but that would make this whole already boring post a tad bit more boring.
To skip all this, Thorium can be used to fuel future reactors. Its attractive points?
1) waste produced from burning thorium in a reactor is dramatically less radioactive than uranium
2) thorium reactor waste would only stay radioactive for 500 years, less than uranium's 10,000 plus years
3) Thorium fuel process can literally EAT up old plutonium waste, enabling the continued usage of old nuke power stations and using that waste to fuel the thorium powered plants!
4) So thorium might just be able to kill two birds with one stone. Not only does a thorium-fuelled reactor produce significantly less high-level waste, but it can also dispose of the decommissioned nuclear weapons and highly radioactive waste from nuclear reactors using more conventional fuels. Oh yes, it can also generate electricity.
To be frank, research into thorium nuke power is still ongoing and the above facts have only been tested in a lab. There are a few problems that hampers widespread thrium usage at the moment,
Want more? Read the whole article here:
Thorium Nuclear Fuel Source
| Country | Th Reserves (tonnes) | Th Reserve Base (tonnes) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Australia | 300,000 | 340,000 | ||
| India | 290,000 | 300,000 | ||
| Norway | 170,000 | 180,000 | ||
| United States | 160,000 | 300,000 | ||
| Canada | 100,000 | 100,000 | ||
| South Africa | 35,000 | 39,000 | ||
| Brazil | 16,000 | 18,000 | ||
| Malaysia | 4,500 | 4,500 | ||
| Other Countries | 95,000 | 100,000 | ||
| World Total | 1,200,000 | 1,400,000 | ||
Am guessing if we decide to go Nuke anytime soon, we can use Thorium.
On Biofuels
I'll just talk about biodiesel. Loads of people have been talking about going hydrogen, going electric, solar etc.
These are all very fine, but we're neglecting one point here. Infrastructure demands.
Hydrogen vehicles means new cars. New EXPENSIVE cars. New HEAVY EXPENSIVE cars...with serious issues about efficiency.
I do realise i'm being a bit close minded here. We can have other means of transport for the future, other than cars, but for the sake of blogging and arguments, i'll set a few boundary conditions:
1) We still need cars
2) Petrol stations mus remain as their existance makes the transition to biodiesel much simpler than hydrogen....simply scrub out the old tanks and fill em with the stuff.
3) Existing diesel engines can be used and will be used.
4) People just love driving
Righto, that being said, a renewable fuel source is biodiesel. Ranging from the stuff that needs to be treated and refined from palm oil to the stuff that can be poured into a gas tank the minute its extracted (from some seeds...names i;ve forgotten)
But this poses one problem. Agricultural land is limited. And we need food. That being said, to produce enough fuel (am talking about millions of barrels of diesel per day, you would need to practically reduce your grown food industry by hell a lot.
The point of this whole debate?
Its a round about way of simply making a point. Every alternative fuel source has tradeoffs and benefits. For hydrogen and electric power, its the expense consumers have to support, new infrastructural needs and simply the loss of that feel good engine noise.
For biodiesel, we have to starve to drive.
Having highlighted this, i shall come to the ultimate point.
JUNK YOUR DAMN CAR AND TAKE THE BLOODY BUS......or rather the tram.....
Cause you see, trams like the ones in Melb and San francisco and in increasing number of european cities are cheap to install and run. You simply need over head power lines, and tracks that can be easily imbedded in roads. Simply get rid of all busses and replace the bus lines with tram lines.
Power the trams with electricity from Thorium power plants.
This post is not the whole story, nor are the suggestions and opinions mentioned here, the final words.
Go Googling for more info on how to tackle tranportation probs. Its bloody interesting and occasionally u stumble across good stuff.
Cheers from,
Matrix
|