Nuclear Power. Why we chose Uranium over Thorium and ended up in this mess. Time to clean up.

I was born in Sweden, on the beautiful west coast where fishing was a way of life, the sunsets magnificent in the summer and the sailing around the skerries and in the fjords could never be forgotten. On the West Coast is also the second largest Swedish city, Gothenburg, home of the famous Chalmers’ Technical University. The year was 1948 and the Norwegian anthropologist Thor Heyerdahl had made his famous “Kon-Tiki  expedition” sailing on a balsa raft from South America to Polynesia.

Apr 30 is the official day to celebrate the arrival of spring in Sweden and Chalmers celebrates it in its own way with a parade somewhat like the Mardi Gras parade in Latin countries. I was there as a 6 year old lad when the float with a rather imaginative copy of the Kon-Tiki raft rattled by. I say rattled, for a galvanized wash tub was hooked up in the back with a rope and it made a loud metallic noise going down the cobblestones. This was the greatest thing I had seen or heard, so I decided right then and there to become a Chalmerist.

Sweden is a beautiful country with clean and abundant water, beautiful forests, a coast line full of small islands and fertile valleys, where the long summer days provide enough growing season to ensure good harvests. The nature is fragile, sensitive to acid rain and pollution. As I grew up I noticed a sharp deterioration in the water quality, there was too much nitrogen in the lakes, “we are fertilizing or lakes on average four times as much as our land” was a quote that stuck in my mind. The acid rain that came in from England and Germany killed the trouts in the cold mountain lakes, and algae bloom took out the oxygen in the larger lakes. In addition we had been treating our seed with Mercury, so carnivorous birds and animals were threatened with extinction.

The time came to apply to University, and to my delight I was accepted to Chalmers’ as a Technical Physics major. I felt, maybe I can do my part by becoming a Nuclear Engineer and help solve the energy needs of the future. The Swedes at that time championed the heavy water – natural Uranium program together with the Canadians. Sweden was at that time non-aligned, so it was not privy to any atomic secrets, it had to go it alone. They settled on the heavy water moderated natural Uranium process because Sweden had an ambition to produce its own nuclear bomb. Officially this was never talked about, and I was not aware of it at that time. They could have gone with Thorium instead, but Thorium produces very little Plutonium, and what it produces is PU-238, not suitable for bomb making.

I was excited to learn about all the possibilities and signed up for a couple of nuclear classes. One lab was to design a safety circuit, then run the heavy water research reactor critical and hopefully watch the reactor shut down from your circuit, not the safety shutdown. Then the word came that U.S. will sell partially enriched uranium at bargain basement prices if Sweden agreed to abandon the heavy water project and sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, a treaty being formulated by U.N.

Sweden was in awe about U.N, all the problems of the world were to be solved through it, and it had such capable General Secretary in Dag Hammarskjöld, a Swede. I looked at the light water, partially enriched  Uranium nuclear power plants being developed and decided to have no part with it, not due to safety concerns but it was the design that produced the most nuclear waste of any of the available designs. At that time there was still optimism that fusion would be ready by about the year 2010 or so. The cost of maintaining spent fuel in perpetuity was never considered, so light water reactors became the low cost solution.

India on the other hand refused to join the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, kept their heavy water program going and had by 1974 produced enough plutonium for one nuclear bomb, which they promptly exploded.  They still use heavy water moderated reactors, but since India is low on Uranium but rich in Thorium they have now converted one heavy water reactor to thorium with a Plutonium glow plug. It is set to go on-line in 2011. (1)

They are also developing  molten salt Thorium reactors, but full production is still a few years off.

There we have it. We could have gone with Thorium from the beginning, but the cold war was on, and the civilian peaceful use of nuclear energy was still all about nuclear weapons. Once all the bombs we could ever need were developed the greatest asset of nuclear power became its greatest liability.

We need to start over with Thorium, producing 0.01% of the long term wastes of other processes. There is enough Thorium around to last a million years at today’s cost. They can be built and produce energy for about 60% of the cost of a light water plant, and the total cost of ownership is even less since it produces and consumes its own fuel as you go. We will run out of just about every other ore long before then.

As time goes by, garbage dumps will look more and more attractive, having batteries, Mercury lamps, poisons galore, but also useful stuff capable of producing energy and fuel for transportation.  There are ongoing plans to convert garbage to jet fuel is taking place(2)

The future will need more energy to clean up the mess we’ve gotten  ourselves into.  Thorium is one part of the answer. Wind and solar are only blips on the energy chart, ethanol made from corn or other edible sources should be done away with, other biofuels can only do so much. Nuclear will have to play an increased role. Go Thorium!

• (1) India has a vision of becoming a world leader in nuclear technology due to its expertise in fast reactors and thorium fuel cycle. India’s Kakrapar-1 reactor is the world’s first reactor which uses thorium rather than depleted uranium to achieve power flattening across the reactor core. India, which has about 25% of the world’s thorium reserves, is developing a 300 MW prototype of a thorium-based Advanced Heavy Water Reactor (AHWR). The prototype is expected to be fully operational by 2011, following which five more reactors will be constructed. Considered to be a global leader in thorium-based fuel, India’s new thorium reactor is a fast-breeder reactor and uses a plutonium core rather than an accelerator to produce neutrons. As accelerator-based systems can operate at sub-criticality they could be developed too, but that would require more research. India currently envisages meeting 30% of its electricity demand through thorium-based reactors by 2050.

(2)(Feb 18, 2010) British Airways has announced plans to source a part of its fuel supplies from waste municipal waste to fuel plant. The company plans to procure 16 million gallons of green jet fuel annually from the Solena plant that would come up in London. The plant which is expected to come online in 2014 would convert 50,000 tonnes of municipal waste into jet-grade fuel. The volume of fuel supplied initially would be 2 percent of the total fuel consumption of British Airways. This would cut down on the carbon emissions generated due to the conventional jet fuel, kerosene.

Sesame Street comes to Pakistan. Our Foreign Aid tax money at work. A Limerick.

For Sesame Street into Urdu we paid

Twenty million  of our Foreign Aid

Our values it smothers

The girls wear head covers

Promote Muslim doctrine is here. Enough said.

Sesame Street comes to Pakistan US government aid agency sponsors $20m Pakistani remake of the American kids’ TV show There’s no Cookie Monster, no Big Bird and no Count von Count. But Pakistani children will soon start experiencing what millions in the west have done for more than four decades – the joys of Sesame Street. In a $20m (£12m) remake of the classic American children’s programme, the setting for the show has moved from the streets of New York to a lively village in Pakistan with a roadside tea and snacks stall, known as a dhaba, some fancy houses with overhanging balconies along with simple dwellings, and residents hanging out on their verandas. For the rest of the story see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/07/sesame-street-pakistan

Sarah Palin in Madison, Wisconsin. The start of the 2012 campaign. A Limerick.

MADISON, Wis. — Sarah Palin defended Wisconsin’s governor at a tea party tax day rally Saturday Apr 16 2011, telling hundreds of supporters that his polarizing union rights law is designed to save public jobs.

 Sarah Palin rallied the people in Madison

Shouted quite clearly “The battle is on”.

The rent-a-mob jeered

And the patriots cheered.

“It starts here, Obama, – Game on!”

98% of Catholic women use contraception. Really?

Planned Parenthood and NARAL (National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League) are telling their members that 98% of Catholic women use contraception.

My first observation is that this is a surprisingly large percentage. One Catholic woman in fifty is not using birth control. How can that be? Why would an 80 year old nun use birth control? 10% of all women are lesbians (this is a statistic that cannot be challenged), what type of birth control do they use? Or, is the very fact that they are lesbians a form of birth control? If so, why use the word contraception?

Planned Parenthood is quoting from a study made by the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute, a former Planned Parenthood affiliate. Did they exclude any women from their study, thus inflating the numbers?

Indeed they did. They included only women between the ages 15-44, normal child-bearing age. They excluded any woman who had not been sexually active in the last 3 months. They also excluded all postpartum or pregnant women. All women trying to get pregnant were also excluded. In fact, the only women included in the study were (pg.8 of the study) “those for whom a pregnancy would be unintended and who are “at risk” of becoming pregnant.” It is unclear if women whose attitude is: While I am not trying to get pregnant I am trusting in God, and if I do get pregnant it is the will of God to do a miracle in me. My hunch is that more than one Catholic woman in 50 has that attitude, so they would have to have been excluded as well.

The study probably should have been stated: 98% of all Catholic women using the services of Planned Parenthood use contraceptives and other forms of birth control, such as abortifacients  and abortion. That may be close to the truth.

There is no profit for Planned Parenthood in promoting abstinence. Yet it works every time.

Nancy Pelosi is informed as always. The hearing was on the constitutionality of the mandate, not biology.

This is her attitude to the Constitution of the United States:

Obama claims Jesus would back his tax policy. Really?

“Jesus would back my tax-the-rich policy.”

President Obama really did say that at the recent National Prayer Breakfast.

He went on to say that his understanding of the Bible is his basis for his economic policies.

So the question is: Which Governmental authority was Jesus so supportive of?

We have four choices: The Pharisees, The Sadducees, The local government, represented by Herod the Tetrarch, or the Roman government under Caesar Tiberius, represented by Pontius Pilate?

We all know his opinion of the Pharisees and Sadducees: Matthew 23:27
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead people’s bones and all uncleanness.”

This would be his opinion of Congress: Luke 11:46
And he said, Woe to you lawyers also! For you load people with burdens hard to bear, and you yourselves do not touch the burdens with one of your fingers.”

On Herod: Mark 8:15
And he cautioned them, saying, “Watch out; beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod.”  

 Acts 12:1
[ James Killed and Peter Imprisoned ] About that time Herod the king laid violent hands on some who belonged to the church.

Could it have been the Roman Empire that deserved the taxes? Jesus did say: Matthew 22:15-22 

Then the Pharisees went and plotted how to entangle him in his words. And they sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that you are true and teach the way of God truthfully, and you do not care about anyone’s opinion, for  you are not swayed by appearances. Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to  Caesar, or not?”  But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, “Why put me to the test, you hypocrites?  Show me the coin for the tax.” And they brought him a denarius. And Jesus said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?”  They said, “Caesar’s.” Then he said to them, “Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” When they heard it, they marvelled. And they left him and went away.

The tax mentioned was really a “tribute” and refers to a poll, or head tax, paid directly to the emperor by the subject peoples of the empire.

By His enigmatic response, did Jesus really mean for His followers to provide financial support (willingly or unwillingly) to Tiberius Caesar – a man, who, in his personal life, was a pedophile, a sexual deviant, and a murderer and who, as emperor, claimed to be a god and oppressed and enslaved millions of people, including Jesus’ own? The answer, of course, is: the traditional, pro-tax interpretation of the Tribute Episode is simply wrong. Jesus never meant for His answer to be interpreted as an endorsement of Caesar’s tribute or any taxes.

Instead of jumping into the political discussion, though, Jesus curiously requests to see the coin of the tribute. It is not necessary that Jesus possess the coin to answer their question. He could certainly respond without seeing the coin. That He requests to see the coin suggests that there is something meaningful about the coin itself.

In the Tribute Episode, the questioners produce a denarius. The denarius was approximately 1/10 of a troy ounce of silver and roughly worth a day’s wages for a common laborer. It carried the image of Tiberius, and Tiberius was so jealous of his image that Tiberius even made it a capital crime to carry any coin stamped with his image into a bathroom or a brothel.

Jesus then asks the counter question “Whose image is on the coin? They answer Caesar’s. But that is not all. The inscription also says “Tiberius Caesar, Worshipful Son of the God, Augustus.” And on the other side it says  “Pontif Maxim,” which means High Priest.

It was at tha point Jesus says “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s. “

It really had nothing to do with the lawfulness of paying taxes, but an admonition to keep their priorities straight.

So what is Jesus attitude towards collective duty versus individual responsibility?

An answer can be found in the parable of the ten talents:   Matthew 25:14-30 “For it is just like a man about to go on a journey, who called his own slaves and entrusted his possessions to them. 15 To one he gave five talents, to another, two, and to another, one, each according to his own ability; and he went on his journey. 16 Immediately the one who had received the five talents went and traded with them, and gained five more talents. 17 In the same manner the one who had received the two talents gained two more. 18 But he who received the one talent went away, and dug a hole in the ground and hid his master’s money.

19 “Now after a long time the master of those slaves *came and * settled accounts with them. 20 The one who had received the five talents came up and brought five more talents, saying, ‘Master, you entrusted five talents to me. See, I have gained five more talents.’ 21 His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful slave. You were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.’

22 “Also the one who had received the two )talents came up and said, ‘Master, you entrusted two talents to me. See, I have gained two more talents.’ 23 His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful slave. You were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.’

24 “And the one also who had received the one (L)talent came up and said, ‘Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow and gathering where you scattered no seed. 25 And I was afraid, and went away and hid your talent in the ground. See, you have what is yours.’

26 “But his master answered and said to him, ‘You wicked, lazy slave, you knew that I reap where I did not sow and gather where I scattered no seed. 27 Then you ought to have put my money ]in the bank, and on my arrival I would have received my money back with interest. 28 Therefore take away the talent from him, and give it to the one who has the ten talents.’

29 “For to everyone who has, more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away. 30 Throw out the worthless slave into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

If that doesn’t speak of individual responsibility before God, I do not know what will.

Oh, and with Jesus saying you should have put the talent in the bank, so I would have received my money back with usury he preempted Sharia Law which forbids interest payment on loans. Therefore Sharia Law is not of God.

Obama the fraud. A Limerick.

Obama, Soetoro, now Ludwig the fraud.

His birth doesn’t matter if here or abroad.

He is an imposter

Says the SSS roster.

In spite of all this, all the Dems still applaud.

Barrack Obama used the SSN 042-68-4425 on his Selective Service Form-One problem-That SSN Was Issued To Jean Paul Ludwig-Is Barrack Obama Guilty of Social Security Fraud?

Both Snopes and fact-check assert this is an internet urban legend. They also assert Obama is a natural born citizen without going into detail why that is so. That is not the point. Every working legal resident alien have a SS#. This is a simple matter of potential fraud. Until we get documentation about his citizenship that is verified authentic, and his college records, thesis, records that he has actually done anything I will remain suspicious.

According to the narrow definition of Natural Born Citizen, the one that Congress used to declare John McCain a Natural Born Citizen, Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen, since his father never was a Citizen of the U.S., not even a resident alien, just a foreigner on a student visa.

The National debt. Can it be blamed on George W. Bush? Nancy Pelosi anyone?

“After years of historic deficits, this 110th Congress will commit itself to a higher standard: Pay as you go, no new deficit spending,” Nancy Pelosi said in her inaugural address from the speaker’s podium. “Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not burden them with mountains of debt.”

How well did she do, and is all of this the fault of George W. Bush?

Let us look at the numbers.

When Bush was sworn in on January 20, 2001, the national debt was $5,727,776,738,304.64. Dennis Hastert was the speaker of the house.

When Pelosi was sworn in on January 4, 2007, the national debt was $8,670,596,242,973.04.

When Bush left office on January 20, 2009, the national debt was $10,626,877,048,913.08.

When Pelosi left office on January 24, 2011, the national debt was $14,014,049,043,294.41.

The estimated  National debt Feb 12, 2012 is $15,368,215,367,669.46.

The average debt added per day during Bush/Hastert 2175 days was $1.353 billion

The average debt added per day during Bush/Pelosi 741 days was $ 2.640 billion

The average debt added per day during Obama/Pelosi 714 days was $ 4.744 billion.

The average debt added per day during Obama/Boehner so far is about 3.52 billion.

In short: Republican President and Republican house is horrendous. Republican President and Democrat house is horrendous times two. Democrat President and Democrat house is horrendous times three and a half. Democrat President and Republican house has failed so far to make a dent in the increase. I am pinning my hope on Sarah Palin and the Tea Party. So far she has not entered the race. If there is a brokered convention anything can happen.

Sarah Palin vetoed over 500 million dollars of legislation during her term as Governor of Alaska in a time of revenue surplus. Even with that she enjoyed an approval rating of over 80%, earning her the title “The most popular Governor in America”.