SuperFuel: Thorium, the Green Energy Source for the Future (MacSci)

Please read this book. You may not agree with everything Martin writes (I don't). You may even want to scream at him (I did a couple of times). But this book is a very good opener for a discussion on an important subject that few are familar with. Equally important, if the proponents of the liquid fluoride thorium reactors (LFTRs) are essentially right this technology offers an important contribution (not a panacea) to solving the energy crisis and aleviating global warming.This is not exactly a balanced book. Richard Martin is advocating for the thorium-based technology and makes no bones about it. At the same time, he does not ignore the problems of this technology (although to my taste he minimizes some of them, about which more below), and he makes a reasonable effort to be fair to competing views.The historical chapters are illuminating. If you have wondered how we ended up burning increasing amounts of fossil fuel sixty-odd years after we were hyperbolically promised "electricity too cheap to meter", Martin will show you. The technical chapters are good considering that this is a book for the general public and more detail is available in the blogosphere. The last chapters, which discuss present business activity and future prospects, are up-to-date and present a convincing case for allocating resources to the (re)development of this technology. Success is by no means guaranteed, but at this point I would rather see a couple of billions going into LFTRs than into fusion or (heavens) into "clean" coal.Now here are things I'm not so crazy about (but you should read the book anyway!). First off, I think Martin does not fully acknowledge the fact that thorium technology, while much "greener" than the uranium/plutonium technology, still generates a lot of fission nuclear waste. It is true that most of these radioactive isotopes are relatively short-lived and will be essentially gone in a few centuries. However, there is still the danger, in an untested design, of an uncontrolled release into the environment. Especially in a high-temperature reactor, some volatile species (xenon, iodine, volatile fluorides of tin and antimony etc.) may be released accidentally if there is a gaseous leak (the author does mention repeatedly how the gaseous Xe-135 isotope will be separated and removed). This brings me to another de-emphasized issue: potential corrosion of metals in contact with hot liquid salts, if any oxygen finds its way in. There may be good technical solutions to this but I didn't see them mentioned in this book and I sure hope the issue is not being pushed under the rug. For these and related reasons I would call LFTR "greenish" at best, not "green" as the cover would have it.I think Martin appreciates - but I hope the various fire-breathing investors he interviewed do too - that after Fukushima there is little chance for this technology to take off without the buy-in of the environmental community and the wider public. That's why all relevant issues have to be addressed squarely and without PR legerdemain, and in any development plan the safety of the public and the workers has to be - and to be shown to be - truly "Job 1". This is why I object to two ideas that Martin seems to find appealing: (1) small stand-alone reactors, and (2) giving one man (following the model of General Groves in the Manhattan project) absolute authority over the project. The first idea will make inspection more difficult and will increase the chances that skilled personell for performing emergency operations will not be available at all times. (Banks of many modular reactors sharing a site should be OK however.) The second idea was workable in time of war, but is inconsistent with democracy and will cause deep suspicions toward the project. People who care should also watch against the established nuclear industry trying to "greenwash" themselves by sprinkling a little thorium into their conventional fuel rods.There is much more to say about this book. It is well and persuasively written but not so well edited, and it's not hard to find factual mistakes: potassium has 3 natural isotopes, not one (p.36); most but not all materials expand when heated (p.73); the boiling point of the fluoride salts used by Weinberg must have been way above 680 degrees F (p.129); and the 1960s were obviously Weinberg's, not Weinberger's heyday (p.132). A nuclear engineer would probably have his/her own list.So, this is not the "perfect" thorium book. But read it anyway. It is well worth a few TV-less evenings.

Drawing or figures are not readable and are turned 90 degrees. I have not been able to print legable copies, nor have I been able to contact anyone who could help with *.pdf copies to print off.

In a way my mind rebels against giving this book by Richard Martin a four star rating. This book has some solid strengths. It is pretty well written and understandable for the general reader. And the book does provide a good introduction to Thorium nuclear power. Neutrons from nuclear reactions can turn Thorium into the Uranium 233 isotope which can easily be used in chain nuclear reactions to produce heat for electricity generation and the desalinization of water. Mr. Martin discusses the Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor and how this device can produce a steady supply of energy safely. He provides a description of this reactor and how it works. He also is very good in his presentation of the history of nuclear energy including the backgrounds and personalities of such lead developers as Hyman Rickover and Alvin Weinberg. Mr. Martin demonstrates that the uranium reactors, or reactors not using thorium, were given priority in development mainly because they could be easily used to propel nuclear submarines.Thorium is an element that is much more prevalent on the earth's surface than uranium. I most definitely agree thorium nuclear power should be developed. And good books on thorium power should be written.However there are some deficiencies. Mr. Martin uncritically assumes the truth of the global warming hoax. I will not go into the details of this fallacy here except to recommend Ian Wishart's book Air Con, the Seriously Inconvenient Truth About Global Warming. Then Mr. Martin also claims that uranium reactors are basically too unsafe to develop. I have to disagree. There are many designs of uranium reactors. Obviously a few designs are inherently unsafe like the water cooled graphite moderated Chernobyl reactor. But uranium reactors have worked quite well in many countries for decades. And Fukushima should not be considered a counter argument. Fukushima was devastated by a tsunami or natural disaster. And at the reactors there were only four deaths, none of which was due to nuclear radiation. Considering the radiation levels surrounding the area the Japanese government overreacted by evacuated the population. And there are now super safe uranium reactor models that have been designed.I also believe I have read nuclear energy books with somewhat better descriptions and pictorial illustrations of the reactor operations.I recommend this book with reservations.

Ricevuto puntualmente. Un libro consigliato per scoprire che un nucleare (quasi) pulito e sicuro è possibile senza dover attendere la fusione nucleare, se mai ci arriveremo.

I am just a mechanical engineer with no nuclear background at all, but even I can see the sence in going down the thorium path. Maybe the US will be overtaken by China on this front too. I hope not!

I recived it today, awesome packing and book looks so good, soon I'll make a review after reading it!

I thought the book was more of a technical book, but turn out to be merly a divulgation one with a really low level, its good for people who have no idea about nuclear energy or chemistry, but for people with knowledge in the matter will be probably boring as it can get

people will not be free of the milton friiedmanns of the world until the hot fission pushers are displaced by getting back on track to cold fusion and making it work the rothchilds and others killed flieshman and pons as well as Eugene mallove who were the scientists working on cold fusion--as fhe is following the fission gurus on hot fission and what can you expect from a man with his loyalties to hot fission--we are on a path to capitalist destruction of the human race--hopefully cold fusion will win before its to late--hot fission is not green!!Richard--- change before its to late and some terrorist gets their hands on weapons grade plutonium that you hot fission people have made for your bombs. the book is very clear lets try and burn up most of the plutonium and only leave enough for trillionaire control of the masses !it will be a slow and risky road to keep control in the hands of world rulers of the indentured slaves which they need as who else can they profit on? jim danish