Samiur, I couldn't agree more. What can we do about it? The political system can't just change overnight or ever.

George, great question. Based on my reading and talking to thorium leaders, the biggest barrier is probably regulation. It is incredibly costly and difficult to have new nuclear designs approved. The cost of regulation is more than the cost of building a physical prototype reactor. We first want to educate the public, like this learning board is doing and then using the energy of the public to push politicians to change laws. Legislations don't change because politicians think it's the right things to do. Laws change because enough (very) concerned citizens fight really hard for it. We are just now starting the serious organizational efforts to make a future based on liquid fluoride thorium reactors a reality.

George, I think the biggest obstacle to implementation is that there is emphasis on maintaining the status quo - the money in exploration, development, refining, and processing hydrocarbon fuels creates a great deal of inertia. It is partially "the science", sure, but the US is not interested in being progressive in terms of its energy use. The natural gas boom will likely further be an obstacle for development. The challenge isn't about simply whether or not Thorium can provide all the energy we need - it is also about the politics surrounding energy, and the economic factors compelling people to not want a nuclear revolution. I don't say this in discouragement, I say it because I think those are the actual factors influencing the situation.