<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif;font-size:12pt"><div>Thanks, Ted,<br>The problem is, as I understand it, is that the near-term issue is not the availability or cost of nuclear fuel; it's the capital costs of construction, which are 1/3 higher for LMFBRs vs. PWRs. They've also had a checkered history, with many operational and maintenance problems, sodium fires & leaks, etc.<br>The US program was canceled in the 80's because of cost over runs and pressure from the nuclear nonproliferation community. It was felt that the controls at that time weren't adequate to prevent possible diversions from the amount of bomb-grade plutonium that would be produced in large-scale reactor operation. That was under the Regan administration. President Regan, despite his "warrior" image was quite concerned with the issues of nuclear weapons and their
proliferation.<br></div><div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; font-size: 12pt;"><br>Ron Force<br>Moscow ID USA<br><div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; font-size: 12pt;"><font face="Tahoma" size="2"><hr size="1"><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">From:</span></b> Ted Moffett <starbliss@gmail.com><br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> Moscow Vision 2020 <vision2020@moscow.com><br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Wed, September 15, 2010 7:44:21 PM<br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [Vision2020] Liquid-Metal Fast-Breeder Reactor: Twice as Much Energy in World Uranium Reserves (!) as in Fossil Fuel Reserves<br></font><br>
<div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="padding-left: 1ex; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">
<div>To "Off list" respondent:<br> </div></blockquote>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="padding-left: 1ex; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">
<div>You may very well be correct. Perhaps the ALMR (Advanced Liquid Metal Reactor) that is discussed in the following 2005 article from Scientific American is not as promising as it appears the authors indicate:</div>
<div> </div>
<div><span><a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalcenter.org/NuclearFastReactorsSA1205.pdf">http://www.nationalcenter.org/NuclearFastReactorsSA1205.pdf</a></span></div>
<div> </div>
<div>The advantages, unless I misunderstand, are that much much more energy can be derived given uranium resources, and nuclear waste can be reduced given it can be used as fuel. Existing PWR reactor designs, if I have my facts straight, cannot supply enough energy from uranium over many decades, to largely replace fossil fuels, given the low efficencies of how PWRs use fuel.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Thorium is another option for powering nuclear reactors, more abundant than uranium; but with fast breeder reactors using uranium thorium is not as necessary, given uranium could supply a lot of energy for many decades. Info on thorium as a nuclear fuel at website below:</div>
<div> </div>
<div><span><a target="_blank" href="http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf62.html">http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf62.html</a></span></div></blockquote>
<div>-------------------</div>
<div>More information on fast neutron reactors with a list of fast reactors that have already been in operation at website below:</div>
<div> </div>
<div><span><a target="_blank" href="http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf98.html">http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf98.html</a></span></div>
<div>-------------------</div>
<div>Tom Blees' "Prescription for the Planet" advocates use of fast breeder reactors to partially solve the anthropogenic climate warming crisis:</div>
<div> </div>
<div><span><a target="_blank" href="http://prescriptionfortheplanet.com/">http://prescriptionfortheplanet.com/</a></span></div>
<div> </div>
<div>The website below, "Science Council for Global Initiatives," presented on the "Prescription for the Planet" website above, also endorses use of "Integral Fast Reactors (using nuclear waste as fuel)" with a positive suggestion that nuclear weapons be used to generate peaceful (my wording) energy:</div>
<div> </div>
<div><span><a target="_blank" href="http://www.thesciencecouncil.com/">http://www.thesciencecouncil.com/</a></span></div>
<div><span class="e" id="q_12b176c513998df6_2"><br> </span></div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="padding-left: 1ex; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">
<div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="padding-left: 1ex; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">
<div>
<div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif;">
<div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif;">
<div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif;"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">
<hr size="1">
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">From:</span></b> Ted Moffett <<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:starbliss@gmail.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:starbliss@gmail.com">starbliss@gmail.com</a>><br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> Moscow Vision 2020 <<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</a>><br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Mon, September 13, 2010 4:48:20 PM<br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> [Vision2020] Liquid-Metal Fast-Breeder Reactor: Twice as Much Energy in World Uranium Reserves (!) as in Fossil Fuel Reserves<br>
</font>
<div>
<div></div>
<div><br>
<div>Perhaps environmentalists who are opposed to peaceful nuclear power should consider the technology proposed below, given it has the potential to greatly reduce reliance on fossil fuels, dependence on which (especially coal) has polluted the environment and caused more premature human death than peaceful nuclear power, many times over. The nuclear genie is out of the bottle anyway, and those determined to abuse nuclear technology for nefarious ends will not be deterred by environmentalists who oppose nuclear power for peaceful energy generation.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Read document "Resource Limitations on Earth-Energy," Kulcinski, 2004, University of Wisconsin-Madison, on page 28, regarding the claim in the subject heading:</div>
<div> </div>
<div><span><span><a target="_blank" href="http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/neep533/SPRING2004/lecture3.pdf">http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/neep533/SPRING2004/lecture3.pdf</a></span></span></div>
<div>------------------- </div>
<div> </div>
<div>HyperPhysics website (way cool one stop shop for Physics science) from Georgia State University, with info on liquid metal fast breeder reactors::</div>
<div> </div>
<div><span><span><a target="_blank" href="http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html">http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html</a></span></span></div>
<div> </div>
<div><span><span><a target="_blank" href="http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nucene/fasbre.html#c4">http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nucene/fasbre.html#c4</a></span></span></div>
<div> </div>
<div><span><span><a target="_blank" href="http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nucene/reactor.html#c5">http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nucene/reactor.html#c5</a></span></span></div>
<div>------------------------------------------</div>
<div>Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett</div></div></div></div></div></div><br> </div></blockquote></div><br></div></blockquote></div><br>
</div></div>
</div><br>
</body></html>