Oh really?
After searching around, it seems that there are no tech breakthroughs needed... just possibly a more than average replacements schedule, in dealing with the extreme core environment. Well worth the extra trouble!
Imagine that, just 5,000 tons of thorium could be used to replace all the Billions of tons of FF's and the many tens of thousands of tons of uranium (globally per year).
Hmmm, no wonder... there's hardly any money at all... in that!
Oh, (Edit)
There are far less wastes from LFTR (or any closed cycle reactor) because they actually consume (almost) all the fuel. The LWR (and its kind should be outlawed right now) and most fossil fuels usage should also be outlawed in favor of advanced liquid fuels based nuclear.
Yes, I believe that it ain't nice to put XSCO2 into mother nature's air!
Edit (again). The energy density of such advanced (and non high pressure, meltdown proof) nuclear is like a million x that from FF's. Therefore, if FF's still net positive EROEI, how could you ever say thorium couldn't?
Before you say things like that, you need to realize exactly what the numbers are (or at least do a mathematical exaggeration approach like I just did).
Ok, perhaps you're thinking that "it ain't fair to use FF's in mining machinery, thus it would take more energy invested to make batteries needed to replace the ice diesel engines. However, that reasoning would be wrong too... The LiFePO4 battery lasts 2,000 cycles (much more if not completely charged and discharged all the time), and thus would use WAY less energy per unit of work, and also because the electric motor is about 4 times more efficient (in cars, anyways).
LFTR's and LiFePO4's are both the best and are both being given over to China... go figure (greeeeeddy big and old fashioned) business interests are clearly doing everything they can to snuff out the future we should have already had!
