The Valley Catholic
Can nuclear energy save the planet?
By Paul Chestnut & Anthony Strawa
This article discusses a potential
alternative form of energy, a form of
nuclear energy called Liquid Fluoride
Thorium Reactor. Previous articles in
this series on Environmental Justice
have focused on problems that manmade environmental degradation and
climate change are causing God’s creation.
The Catholic Church does not endorse any particular energy policy but
it recognizes that we must work toward
a world that is free from the pollution
caused by burning fossil fuels for energy. Catholic social teaching and the
St. Francis Pledge encourage us to learn
about policies and technologies so that
we may effectively
participate in the
decision-mak ing
process.
The Green Committee at St. Thomas Aquinas Parish
in Palo Alto recently sponsored a
lecture about alternative nuclear energy
sources as part of a series called “Spirituality Tuesday,” presented by Dr. Alex
Cannara, a physicist/electrical engineer
and activist from Menlo Park.
Dr. Cannara said that the predominant technology used to generate
civilian nuclear power today is the
Light Water Reactor (LWR). Problems
associated with LWR are well known:
perception of poor safety, problems of
nuclear waste and potential for nuclear
weapons proliferation. Dr. Cannara is a
proponent of the technology frequently
referred to as Liquid Fluoride Thorium
Reactor (LFTR).
LFTR is different from conventional
nuclear reactors that use water and solid
fuel elements. A liquid-fluoride reactor
uses a solution of several fluoride salts
as its basic nuclear fuel. Dr. Cannara
believes this technology deserves attention for the following reasons:
• LFTR can be operated at low cost
relative to present nuclear reactors.
Thorium is plentiful in the U.S. Construction cost per watt is estimated
to be under $3, which is far less than
current LWRs.
• LFTR is safer than LWR since there
is no water to turn to explosive steam
or release explosive hydrogen. Fluoride
salts will not react dangerously with
air or water.
• LFTR has a reduced long-term
waste problem compared to LWR. So-
February 25, 2014
commentary
‘We must work toward a world
that is free from pollution.’
called “nuclear waste” or spent-nuclear
fuel produced in LWR remains reactive
for thousands of years and is not useful
as an energy source, whereas wastes
from LFTR are reduced on site to whatever low level is desired, and need storage underground for only hundreds,
not thousands, of years.
The technology was thoroughly
investigated and proven at the Oak
Ridge National Laboratory Molten-Salt
Reactor