There are a number of folks and industries, who could see their business model destroyed by the widespread roll out of clean, safe, cheap, carbon free, Molten salt thorium and electricity with a median price PKH of a tad under two cents. (professor Hargreaves, Thorium, cheaper than coal) Hence all the fire and fury, massive misinformation, obfuscation campaign.

And they are coal/fossil fuels, big nuclear and all the renewables many so called green advocates are earning a current bonanza off of?

And are in truth green in name only? As they rake in a fortune from production that leaves a toxic legacy for centuries in the environment.

Alvin Weinberg, inventor and patent holder of the first working nuclear reactor. Knew something needing to operate at up to 300 atmospheres would end in tragedy. And he has been proved right several times.

Of interest is his reaction as his first reactor went up and down, switching itself off then just as mysteriously switching itself back on.

As he lay in bed he worked on a hypothetical theory that would explain the problem and he was essentially correct.

You see all solid fueled reactors produce xenon. A gas that eats neutrons and as it does so stops the nuclear reaction.

And later when the stuff had absorbed as many neutrons as it could hold, the neutron exchange resumed and the reactron continued.

They got round it, according to Alvin, by inserting more fuel rods in places around the reactor.

It is widely believed xenon was implicated in the Chernobyl disaster.

Anybody remains free to fact check my claims and from peer reviewed Authenticity! NASA scientist and nuclear technologist, Kirk Sorensen as Authentic as peer reviewed presenters go!

Not bogus links crafted in St Petersburg! Where ill mannered, rude cyberbully, bombastic and routinely abusive Adian, clearly gets the bulk of his information/misinformation!
Alan B.

Even the climate castropharians don't mention thorium. Alan must have a pile of the stuff to sell.

ttbn: I'm advocating thorium for one reason and one reason only. I consider it's our best chance of effectively dealing with real climate change and because before I shuffle off this mortal coil, I want to be able to look my kids and Grandkids in the eye and tell them I left no stone unturned to ensure they had the best possible future and a more prosperous one than their parents enjoyed. And to pass on the benefits of technology and superior economy! It really is that simple.

Apart from that I know our world will be a better place where every home has affordable electricity and safe potable water to drink and grow sustenance crops.

Two thirds of the homes on this planet are places without a washing machine and where the women slave many unnecessary hours every day fetching water and hand washing clothes. And we're all poorer for it!

Adian clearly understands nothing about nuclear technology. Except what he can find in some dubious link or other. Because if that were not the case, he would know the longer the half life, the less radioactive the material.

Moreover if he had actual knowledge, he would know about the science of hormesis. This science demonstrates that some above average rads might be beneficial. And confirmed in studies of cohorts where the background radiation was higher. Which showed cohorts with less cancer than the average, and in all such cases.

Apologies Adian for calling you a few probably deserved names, but out of order anyway.
Alan B.

Alan B.,
I see you're completely failing to address the points I made, and resorting to ad hominems instead. Do you seriously imagine that any of the other readers, looking at what I've written and what you've libellously claimed about me, won't conclude you're a hypocritical idiot?

FWIW your assumptions about me are completely wrong. For a start I'm not ideologically opposed to nuclear. I'm skeptical about its potential in Australia for economic reasons, but globally it has a great future. And that does include thorium fuel and molten salt reactors. And some day may even produce power below 2c/kWh (or more likely 2¥/kWh). But I look at the whole story, while you read only the proponents' claims and laughably conclude that everyone who doesn't share your enthusiasm is either an idiot or a shill, or maybe just badly informed. Apparently the idea that anyone could now more about something than you has never occurred to you!

I concur that xenon was implicated in the Chernobyl disaster. An inexperienced crew mismanaged the restarting of a badly designed reactor with non uniformly distributed xenon 135. As I said: Mismanagement of the effects of xenon was certainly a major cause, but it had nothing to do with "expanding inside the fuel rods"

To find out about xenon 135, start by reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iodine_pit

BTW of course I know that "the longer the half life, the less radioactive the material". Technically it's a slight oversimplification (because the materials are usually mixtures, and some decay products are also radioactive). But accepting the simplification, it shows a comprehension error on your part: xenon 135 has a 9 hour half life so is highly radioactive - certainly unsuitable to be released into the atmosphere. Its decay product caesium 135 has a two million year half life - not highly radioactive, but radioactive enough to be hazardous. And yes I'm aware of horses - but I don't consider it sufficient to rely on to justify long lasting environmental pollution.

Guys, guys, even though I find your 'pissing contest' entertaining I would like to add my thoughts.
Firstly those who have followed me know I am a vehement opponent of PC. Secondly, I also would gladly contribute to a 'let's get rid of all the greens and tree huggers' fund. It confounds the crap out of me how anyone could consider a politically clueless group of people as a serious contender for a political party. In any shape or form.
To the point; renewables are a fiction! A fool will tell you all the wonders of renewables. There are none. The only one with a proven record is hydro. All this other rubbish is a fiction generated by the elite and their mates who have the govt's ear so they can extract money for nothing. Wind. Apart from the disgustingly obscene visual pollution, they are a folly. Solar. Again visual pollution, and too ineffective. No need to go on. Basically the Achilles heel to all these 'pipe dreams' is cost per unit return. ie; what you get out of them compared to the setting up and on going costs, they fall way too short of the mark. Tesla makes a big deal of his batteries in South Australia. How does it work again, I've forgotten? You can power a small suburb for 45 minutes? These are ALL con-jobs. My message to Canberra is stop stealing our money and get back onto proven sources of power generation. One final point. Electric cars. Unless I can ravel the same distances on a charge as I do now, 'refuel' at about the same time I do now, and, best of all I pay the same money to buy the car as I do now, (based on a base Falcon or Commodore), you can stick your electric cars. I was recently offered a 'like new' 2010 Toyota Hybrid, for NOTHING. They could not sell it because the battery pack was too expensive. The car ended up at the crushers. A 2010 model, like new car. Someone justify that for me. I know you can't.

Apologies for failing to notice my autocorrect had turned hormesis into horses!