Can thorium save the world?

In an earlier post, we had spoken of CSP or concentrated solar power as an emerging area with much potential. Costs are not as high as PVs and storage problem is solved. The only problem is with land, we had cited. But while water is an issue in CSP, those in the field have been increasingly using air to cool the systems instead of water.

As Joe Gelt points out that water use in concentrated solar is greater than that of coal and similar to nuclear per MWh generated: a coal fired plant uses 110 to 300 gallons per megawatt hour; a nuclear plant uses between 500 and 1100 gallons/MWh; and a solar parabolic trough plant uses 760-920 gallons/MWh.

While noting that air is being used for cooling, he points out how this would greatly increase building costs because enormous cooling towers would need to be constructed. Also relying on air to cool would not cool the water circulating through the plant to a low enough temperature for peak performance, decreasing the efficiency of the plant.

This is the issue in the the thoriumenergy blogspot. The writer has been advocating Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor as a sustainable energy source on two counts mainly, that of energy efficiency and waste.

Here’s how: Thorium is a sustainable energy source, with the potential to provide people all of the energy they need for millions of years. There is already a great deal of Thorium above ground in the form of mine tailings, enough to supply human demands for hundreds of years. Thorium energy conversion is 100 to 200 time more efficient, than current uranium reactor technology.

Recycling of existing coal fired power plants sites for LFTR use has the potential to create energy savings of 50% to 75% compared to start from scratch power plant construction.

LFTR Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor produce little to no nuclear waste, thus greatly diminishing energy inputs into waste control. Material outputs from nuclear daughter products would be an energy savings, that would be unique to LFTR technology.

There is little unused byproducts, he says, while concluding the technology has potential to be 100 percent pollution free.

So, thorium wins against Helium (solar energy's source!). Can anybody who is a nuclear expert clear the doubts, or rather, claims? After all, Indian scientists had protested before the nuke deal that fast breeder reactors working on thorium can do it for the country.