What is the future of energy? Like anything
associated with the human experience, energy
has a vibrantly colorful past, one that is
virtually guaranteed to catalyze a new, and
perhaps contentious way forward. Wood, a renewable
biomass, was the first ever source of energy
and continued to remain the preeminent basis
of productivity in the United States until
the mid to late 1800's, when coal fueled the
second-half of the Industrial Revolution.
Another paradigm shift would occur in the
middle of the 20th century, when petroleum
products rose to dominance, and alongside
it, a rapid increase in the usage of natural
gas. While coal would continue to make significant
contributions, mainly as a primary energy
source for electric power generation, another
more distinctly controversial element would
make its presence known.
Under the atomic number 92, uranium is the
heaviest and last naturally occurring element
in the periodic table. During the age of the
Roman Empire, the element was used as an ornamental
accessory, with yellow-colored glass containing
more than 1% uranium-oxide being discovered
in Naples, Italy, and which date back to 79
A.D, according to research conducted by chemistry
expert C.R. Hammond. More closer to modern
times, the discovery of the element is credited
to German chemist Martin Heinrich Klaproth,
who named it after the then newly discovered
planet Uranus. But it wasn't until 1896 when
uranium's inherent radioactivity was discovered
when Henri Becquerel, a French physicist and
Nobel laureate, left a sample of potassium
uranyl sulfate on top of an unexposed photographic
plate, determining later that emissions from
the uranium salt had exposed the plate.
Uranium research would continue well into
the 20th century, with fervor accelerating
towards the development of the atomic bomb.
While it would never lose its dubious association
with military proliferation, a direct consequence
of the rapidly escalating Cold War, uranium
took a decidedly commercial-friendly path
on December 20th, 1951, when Argonne National
Laboratory's Experimental Breeder Reactor
I, became the first nuclear reactor to generate
electricity. Two-and-a-half years later, the
introduction of the world's first commercial
scale nuclear power plant in Obninsk, a small
city some 62-miles southwest of Moscow, confirmed
the beginning of a different kind of war : the
business of nuclear commerce.
Today, the United States is the world's largest
producer of nuclear power, accounting for
more than 30% of worldwide nuclear generation
of electricity, according to the World Nuclear
Association. The country's 104 nuclear reactors
produced 821 billion kilowatt-hours in 2011,
accounting for over 19% of total domestic
electrical output.
However, the United States imports 95% of
its uranium and only produces about 5 million
pounds of uranium compared to the 50 million
pounds that it consumes.
However, the recent crisis in Fukushima, along
with other highly publicized meltdown events
leading to a 30-year period where very few
reactors were built in the U.S., have placed
a damper within the court of public opinion.
Also negatively affecting the nuclear power
industry is the volatility of fossil fuel
based commodities, which became most evident
in 2009 when a precipitous decline in the
price of gas placed the economic viability
of proposed nuclear power plant projects in
doubt.
This has given rise to a potentially game-changing
revolution in thorium. Billed as a direct
competitor to uranium, thorium, named after
the Norse god of thunder Thor, is claimed
to produce an equivalent amount of power but
without any of the nasty side-effects that
is psychologically linked to the public's
perception of worst-case scenarios. From a
supply demand perspective, the International
Atomic Energy Agency places the total of known
and estimated Thorium resources at 4.4 million
tons, which makes it more abundant than uranium
within the Earth's crust.
According to Forbes.com, the most common source
of thorium is the rare earth phosphate mineral,
monazite. World monazite resources are estimated
to be about 12 million tons, two-thirds of
which are in India. This has significant geopolitical
implications, considering that India has a
far more friendlier posture to the United
States and its allies than that of its neighbor
China, which is increasingly becoming belligerent
and therefore, unreliable as a trading partner.
Writing for scientific-research based magazine,
Cosmos, Tim Dean expressed one of the most
hopeful outlooks for thorium when he stated,
�What if we could build a nuclear reactor
that offered no possibility of a meltdown,
generated its power inexpensively, created
no weapons-grade by-products, and burnt up
existing high-level waste as well as old nuclear
weapon stockpiles? And what if the waste produced
by such a reactor was radioactive for a mere
few hundred years rather than tens of thousands?
It may sound too good to be true, but such
a reactor is indeed possible, and a number
of teams around the world are now working
to make it a reality.
So if thorium really is the antidote for the
world's most pressing energy and ecological
challenges, what has prevented its mainstream
proliferation? The critical obstacle for thorium
utilization is that it is not vigorously fissile,
meaning that unlike enriched uranium, it cannot
produce power independently without an outside
catalyst. It also lacks the ability to maintain
criticality in that the end of the thorium
cycle does not produce enough neutrons to
keep the reaction self-sustaining. This is
the reason why reactors using thorium fuel
are called "sub-critical" reactors.
Thus thorium faces a two-stage obstacle : a
technical one in providing the thorium fuel
with enough neutrons to keep the reaction
self-sustainable, and a more rational one,
that is, doing this in an economically profitable
manner. Although there are organizations addressing
the drawbacks to thorium utilization, the
technology is young and undeniably expensive.
By the time thorium becomes commercially viable,
advances in other energy-related endeavors
totally unrelated to the nuclear fission process
could demand a majority share of scientific
research dollars.
This brings up another impediment to the commercialization
of thorium. While the thorium cycle produces
far less plutonium byproducts, it still maintains
the critical hazards of fuel mining and fabrication,
reactor safety, production of dangerous waste,
and the possibility of nuclear weapons proliferation,
according to Jan Ber�nek, leader of Greenpeace
International's Energy Campaign. Since thorium
is a technology that is derived from nuclear
fission, it cannot escape its inherent risk
factors.
Therefore, from a practical perspective, thorium
may ultimately prove to be a distraction,
a sort of cointelpro against an already viable
industry that is poised to move higher. According
to the U.S. Energy Information Administration,
the world's energy consumption will increase
by an estimated 56% by the year 2040, or an
annualized rate of nearly 2.1%. At this trajectory,
few countries have the patience nor the wherewithal
to invest in a foreign and unprecedented technology
which may or may not work as advertised.
Traditional nuclear power is also partaking
in an underappreciated makeover. After years
of decline, the U.S. government's research
and development funding for nuclear energy
is being revived with the objective of rebuilding
American leadership in nuclear technology.
In a cooperative task-force that consolidates
research laboratories, the nuclear industry,
and academia, the federal government has significantly
stepped up R&D expenditures for future plants
that improve or go well beyond current designs.
Of particular interest is the Next Generation
Nuclear Plant, or NGNP, a project that will
develop a Generation IV high-temperature gas-cooled
reactor, which would be part of a system that
would produce both electricity and hydrogen
on a large scale. The Department of Energy
has forwarded a goal to have a pilot plant
ready at its Idaho National Laboratory by
2021.
In spite of all the complexities and various
moving parts, the energy dilemma boils down
to one action : when people flip the switch,
do they see light? Those that answer this
question in the most cost-efficient manner
will ultimately win the war. As of yet, nothing
matches the power potential and compactness
of nuclear energy, and the world's increasing
size and demands come down to cold, hard numbers.
Therefore, look for nuclear power, and more
specifically, uranium-based companies to lead
the advance in global energy proliferation.
By Joshua Enomoto for Future Money Trends
THE FUTURE OF ENERGY
3 | Page
