It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

HELP US save $500 million dollars; save thousands of lives from cancer; help NASA explore deep space

page: 1
9

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 02:12 AM
link   

Here are the slides from the above presentation.


ABSTRACT

Uranium-233 does not exist naturally, but about a ton of the stuff was transmuted from Thorium-232 at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in the 1960's. Some people would have us blend this exceedingly rare element with natural uranium for disposal. However, Uranium-233 can be used in an advanced nuclear reactor with interesting properties. Uranium-233 is the cleanest burning fissile material. Employed as an initial fuel load for a Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor, this small supply of Uranium-233 can be the match to ignite a process that produces a huge supply of electricity along with small quantities of useful fission products. In particular, the LFTR produces small amounts of Plutonium-238, essential for NASA's deep space missions; Technetium-99m, exceedingly valuable for medical imaging; and other specialized isotopes used in cancer treatments. Nuclear power reactors can be engineered to produce many valuable materials through transmutation belying the term "nuclear waste".

Kirk Sorensen is chief nuclear technologist at Teledyne Brown Engineering in Huntsville, Alabama. He has been researching the nuclear fuel cycle for many years in connection with a strong interest in thorium as a planetary energy source. He is also a PhD student in nuclear engineering at the University of Tennessee in Knoxville under Dr. Laurence Miller. He runs a blog called "energyfromthorium.com" and is active in the Thorium Energy Alliance (TEA) and the International Thorium Energy Organization (IThEO) and is also a member of the American Nuclear Society (ANS).

www.youtube.com...



The United States is facing a budget deficit of $1.5 trillion this year, and the new Republican-led House of Representatives (where spending originates in the US government) is looking for ways to save money.

1. We in the thorium community have a significant idea for how the government can
save $500 million dollars
2. accelerate the development of LFTR
3. help NASA explore deep space
4. save thousands of lives from cancer

It’s pretty simple–cancel the Department of Energy’s plan to destroy the uranium-233 stored at Oak Ridge National Lab.

The DOE’s own Inspector General has begged them to stop, in order to preserve the valuable medical isotopes derived from the U-233 that can help fight cancer.

energyfromthorium.com...


In other words, the United States government will be paying approximately 500 million dollars in order to destroy some Uranium-233 that is being stored at one of the nations many national laboratories. Preserving this Uranium-233 can enable its use in medical isotopes, help NASA explore deep space, save 500 million dollars, and help enable the development of a new kind of nuclear reactor called the Liquid Thorium Fluoride Reactor (LFTR, or lifter) that eliminates the issue of nuclear waste as a concern, eliminates most perceived safety issues with current nuclear power, eliminates enrichment, and essentially eliminates significant amounts of mining which could in the future provide is with a a practically unlimited supply of energy.


This is a very expensive project to destroy a very valuable resource. Please ask your Congressman to put an end to this waste of taxpayer money and to direct the DOE to use the U-233 for LFTRs that will produce electrical power and valuable materials for NASA’s space exploration and cancer-fighting medical isotopes

energyfromthorium.com...


Here is the budget request to destroy the Uranium-233. You can also suggest that the program to destroy the U-233 be cut over at YouCut.

Thanks.

edit on 20/2/11 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)

edit on 20/2/11 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)

edit on 20/2/11 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 02:58 AM
link   
dude, you are wasting your breath, i have been ranting about thorium reactors and burning depleted uranium for nigh on 10 years..

in fact at one point my email asking a popular Australian science forum for help was the number one hit on Google for thorium.
its so obvious... but no one listens..



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 08:00 AM
link   
As an ignorant member of the community all I hear is Uranium and go hmm, nasty stuff. Reading this article about the unique properties of Uranium-233 and the effort that has gone into making it, it does sound like a very unique element. Personally I would not want to go any where near it, but I can understand how other scientists do. For a claim as a cure to cancer it is over the top, too expensive and half life is too long. There are much better radiations available for targeted cell destruction. As for the other claims there maybe something in it. The biggest value I see is in its uniqueness and as a research resource for nuclear physicist, metallurgist and others interested in such things. To throw out such a unique resource after so much work has gone into it is just another act of bureaucratic madness. Wither it is in a vault or deep underground the stuff has to be stored somewhere and is a real shame to reduce it back to a toxic soup after being refined.



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   
and thats the biggest problem. public relations...

thorium reactors are safe. they use less fissile material and even waste as a fuel and they cant go supercritical,

they could seriously be the answer to so many of our troubles globally, and we could literally burn the waste we have been making for 60 years. producing cheap electricity for all.

u-233 is only one of the fuels it is rather elegant.



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 09:07 AM
link   

As an ignorant member of the community all I hear is Uranium and go hmm, nasty stuff.

It's about as toxic as lead. You don't want to breath in Uranium dust or eat it, other than that it's fairly harmless. Radioactivity is not much of a concern with most isotopes of Uranium.


For a claim as a cure to cancer it is over the top, too expensive and half life is too long.

You might want to read the links in the links I posted. It is not a 'cure' to all cancer although it may be a viable treatment option which should be able to kill tumors.


Produced by adding an extra neutron to thorium, the uranium slowly breaks down into another form of thorium, and then into other isotopes, including actinium 225 and bismuth 213. What distinguishes both of these for cancer treatments is that as they decay into new materials, they emit alpha particles. These particles can be superior to the standard form of radiation used to treat cancer, gamma rays, because the rays travel long distances through tissue and damage many cells, while the alpha particles have very short trajectories, and carry relatively huge amounts of energy.

“A single atom delivered to a cancer cell can kill that cell,” said Dr. David A. Scheinberg, chairman of the experimental therapeutics center at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York. “Nothing else approaches that.”

Research trials at Sloan-Kettering on patients with acute myeloid leukemia are showing promising results, Dr. Scheinberg said, using antibodies to deliver the radioactive atoms directly to the tumors. Researchers there are testing the technique in animals for prostate, colon, lymphoma and brain tumors.

The isotopes have a convoluted history. Uranium 233 very slowly breaks down into thorium 229, half of it making the conversion over 159,000 years. There is a significant amount of thorium 229 only because the Energy Department has had tons of uranium sitting around for decades.

The thorium is not medically useful, but its half-life, the time for half to convert, is 7,340 years, and it decays into a radium isotope, and then into actinium, which has a 10-day half-life. (Short half-lives are desirable in this kind of cancer treatment, because such materials deliver their dose promptly.) One of the “daughters” of actinium is bismuth, which has a half-life of only 45.6 minutes. Researchers are testing both the actinium and the bismuth as therapeutic drugs.

Various alternative processes have been proposed for making actinium and bismuth, but none have been proved.

The Food and Drug Administration has approved two radioactive materials for delivery by antibody, both beta emitters, Dr. Scheinberg said; it has not yet approved an alpha emitter. Beta particles have less energy and travel farther, making them less helpful in treatment.

www.nytimes.com...


Saw no comments on cost.
edit on 22/2/11 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by C0bzz
 




You might want to read the links in the links I posted. It is not a 'cure' to all cancer although it may be a viable treatment option which should be able to kill tumors.


My argument has not been against Uranium 233, but just trying to put it in its proper place. The value of many radiation treatments in relation to cancer is in the ability to fracture the DNA and kill the cell. Cancer occurs when a cell fails to die. Benign cancers are not fatal, malignant cancers are. The value of radiation is in its ability to to kill cells when cells fail to die naturally. There are many radiations that can do this job with half lifes in the hours or days region, not millenium.



Uranium 233 very slowly breaks down into thorium 229, half of it making the conversion over 159,000 years.


I have no doubt that uranium 233 can kill cancer. But as a practitioner of radiology and cancer studies there are much safer alternatives available. I acknowledge there is value in this refined material, just do not exaggerate its benefit and harm your cause.




top topics
 
9

log in

join