F. George McDuffee wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 15:15:04 -0700 (PDT), oldjag
wrote:
snip
Given the huge potential impact LFTR and liquid fuels generation could
have on our economy I can not understand why I have not heard one iota
about either from any mainstream "news" source or "alternative" energy
show.
snip
so include some links. My email below include several.
FWIW -- an email I sent to my congressional representatives
on this follows. Feel free to use all or any part of it if
you wish to write your own congresspeople.
You can get their names and webmail URLS at
http://senate.gov/ and
http://house.gov/
Be sure and bookmark for easy future nagging.
----- start of email -----
Dear Senator (Representative):
As I am sure you are too well aware, the economic recovery
of the United States has been significantly retarded by a
number of dubious "make-work" projects that have diverted
money, manpower and attention away from productive and
efficient/effective activities. Rather than simply complain
about this, I have three proposals to both help insure
American energy independence and to provide meaningful
employment through domestic infrastructure improvement and
basic industrial capacity expansion.
Any one of these proposals is "stand alone," but if all
three are implemented these should be highly synergistic.
It is highly suggested that these projects be done through
new limited life authorities or GSEs [government sponsored
enterprises] with limited input from existing government
agencies and private companies because the existing
governmental Departments, Agencies, Administrations, etc.,
and the large, nominally American corporations, that should
be promoting these activities are overly committed to the
status quo, and are prone to obstructionism, timidity,
obfuscation and delay, to protect on the one hand their
bureaucratic "turf," and on the other hand their profits and
the perceived value of their obsolescent
processes/products/expertise. Because of the current
"budget crunch," and a historical lack of any measurable
results from its founding in 1977 to the present, it is
further suggested that the funds currently allocated to the
Department of Energy be redirected to these projects.
http://www.cfo.doe.gov/budget/10budg...Highlights.pdf
http://www.cfo.doe.gov/budget/10budget/start.htm
In no particular order:
· Contract with SASOL [a large South African corporation]
to construct and initially operate several domestic US
medium sized coal to petroleum conversion plants. These
plants should be sited as close as possible to existing high
production coal mines to minimize transportation costs.
These plants will produce not only liquid fuels such as
gasoline, diesel and JP4 jet fuel, but also feed stocks for
our petrochemical industries. Note that the waste from this
process will provide feedstock for the next suggested
project. Coal to oil conversion is economically viable when
the price exceeds about 50$US per bbl. The world price is
currently about twice this.
http://www.sasol.com/sasol_internet/...vid=1&rootid=1
This project is sitting about 20 miles south of me in Manahoy City, PA.
The project has been stopped in its tracks when the government pulled
the committed funds from the project. This area is sitting on the
largest antricite hard coal deposit in the world. If these projects
would get set up the oil industry would have some competition and that
sure would be a problem for them.
http://www.google.com/custom?hl=en&c...pi&btnG=Search
John
· Commercialize one or more of the existing processes to
extract uranium, thorium and the so-called rare earths from
what are currently waste products such as power station fly
ash and copper processing liquids. If the radionuclides are
extracted, a public health benefit may also result, and a
domestic source of rare earths is strategically important.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/1997/fs163-97/FS-163-97.html
http://www.indmin.com/Article/236289...rom-waste.html
http://www.springerlink.com/content/g64832528l7l5682/
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/71797664...YL-PHOSPHONATE
· Design for serial production and construct prototypes of
moderate size molten salt cooled/moderated THORIUM fusion
reactors. Because of safety concerns it is suggest that the
working reactors and generators be sited far underground but
close or even in [under] the major metro areas where the
generated power is to be consumed to minimize power
transmission losses. A thorium reactor generates very
little nuclear waste, and this can be [re] processed on site
eliminating any need for transportation or long-term storage
of high-level nuclear wastes. Indeed, a molten salt thorium
reactor can be used to dispose of much of the existing
high-level nuclear waste, while extracting the considerable
amount of energy this waste still contains, thus eliminating
some contentious nuclear power issues such as the Yucca
Mountain storage facility.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_reactor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium_fuel_cycle
http://energyfromthorium.com/joomla/...64&It emid=63
Even here it will be possible to contract with the current
industry leaders in China and India for the construction of
one or more domestic US prototype reactors. The US
pioneered this technology at the Oak Ridge National
Laboratories, but terminated/abandoned this work/technology
in the late 1960s.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nl5DiTPw3dk
http://www.thehindubusinessline.in/2...1051780100.htm
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/02/chi...nd-japans.html
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/20...thorium-power/
http://www.climateactionprogramme.or..._t echnology/
http://amrminerals.co.uk/assets/file...%202010%20.pdf
http://amrminerals.co.uk/assets/file...oject-2011.pdf
There is at least one domestic US private sector company
engaged in thorium reactor research.
http://www.bullfax.com/?q=node-can-t...nuclear-energy
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/...s-of-reactors/
I would be pleased to discuss these suggestions in greater
detail with you or your staff.
----- end of email -----
As a general rule, unless you have some positive suggestions
or alternatives to a problem, complaining is useless and
even counter-productive.
-- Unka George (George McDuffee)
..............................
The past is a foreign country;
they do things differently there.
L. P. Hartley (1895-1972), British author.
The Go-Between, Prologue (1953).