# Australia's present nuclear diplomacy with India



## matross (25 August 2007)

INDIA's energy demands for energy will exceed any other nation having
established separate polices for domestic and defense nuclear fussion and fission as being generally accepted.

THORIUM FISSION is clearly the friendly nuclear energy into the future.For global peace radioactive thorium takes the equation out of the current australian debate because thorium does not lend itself to being enriched for nuclear weapons.THORIUM FISSION rather than uranium fussion has a consciencable effect to link Al Queda related armagedon to cease support for uranium.

There has been no precedence for a policy towards thorium until last weeks diplomatic proposed sales of uranium to india Australia sees indias established thorium reactors as a country that will lead global technology in the processing of thorium and cheap and safe fission reactors.

MR ZIGGY SWITKOWSKI came out to speak on ABC lateline buisness last week to reflect australias relationship in selling uranium to INDIA with feedback to australia of exclusive processing thorium fission technology .Australia 's fustration  is selling uranium and is encouraging  India to develop fission reactors with thorium technology as a global friendly energy as early as 2020.

My understanding of thorium fission process is limited but what did catch my attention is the separation of h2o in the reactors cooling process for duel purposes , oxygen is returned to burn as a reactor core flux at the same time radioactive particles are captured in charcoal both at very high temperatures.
According to a recent CHIGAGO CONVENTION freely escaped HYDROGEN by -product to form a liquifuel and add to an additional source of fuel to existing buses and commercial veichles running on hydrogen.also the excessive heat would be used in gasshouses and domestic heating as the energy relesed to weight wieght ratio is 10,000 to 1 with coal.

Is my new found faith illconcieved?


----------



## chops_a_must (25 August 2007)

You have to be careful when talking about "fusion" and "fission".

But no I'm not happy about it, and I don't think anyone should be. There is absolutely nothing stopping India from using our Uranium in their nuclear weapons.


----------



## R0n1n (25 August 2007)

chops_a_must said:


> You have to be careful when talking about "fusion" and "fission".
> 
> But no I'm not happy about it, and I don't think anyone should be. There is absolutely nothing stopping India from using our Uranium in their nuclear weapons.




Chop the thing is it dosen't matter. Look at Pakistan they didn't get uranium from us but still sold the tech to make a nuke to North Korea.


----------



## matross (25 August 2007)

correct fission is to thorium reactors as fusion is to uranium reactors thorium fission and or a hybred of fission and fussion can be used in a uranium reactor 
not the other way around because uranium fussion in a thorium reactor would cause core melt down thorium fission reactors cost many multiples times less than uranium reactors to construct as there cannot be a core mealt down when thorium accidents occur the material fuses  relatively harmlessly into the atmosphere that is why numerous cheap thorium reactors can be located in industrial suburbs according to the source of report out of recent chigago uranium convention.

Probably mr ZIGGY SWITAKOWSKI who leads the televised aust debate(s) saw no relevence in raising alternative cheap and friendly thorium fission as the technology is in the infant stage.If i may make comment for what its worth that India's experiences for thorium fission stems first from transferred uranium enrichment for both domestic and military technology , a common transparent view of nuclear threat would come from pakistan not India. 

Initially australia refused to sell uranium to India because India would not sign a global teaty and australia last week did a backflip the Mr Howard 's fustration may of been a priority compromise in exchange for india's developing thorium technology an example  aru produces both uranium oxide and thorium from the same factory.

I do not make a plug or hold aru shares, but will follow up more information from administration                     matross


----------



## chops_a_must (25 August 2007)

R0n1n said:


> Chop the thing is it dosen't matter. Look at Pakistan they didn't get uranium from us but still sold the tech to make a nuke to North Korea.




I think it does.

The last thing we want to be seen to be doing is helping in a nuclear arms race, and worse, TAKING SIDES!

But who cares about internation diplomacy and important treaties when there is money to be made, right?


----------



## MegaV (25 August 2007)

I understnad that many people are against selling india U for the fear of fueling a nuclear arms race. 

I think its importnat to remember that India has a no first strike policy. It never used its nuclear weapons to threaten any country (like pakistan or north korea frequently do). India has never even started a war (unlike USA, china, pakistan).  It is fair to say that its a peaceful country.

Having clocking growth rates of 8-9% per annum, its thirt for power is increasing. I think selling nuclear fuel will help india make clean power and in the process make us some money. I think there is nothing wrong with that.


----------

