Political issues
To exploit the reactor's breeding potential to the fullest, the reactor must be co-located with a reprocessing facility. Nuclear reprocessing does not occur in the U.S. because no commercial provider is willing to undertake it. The regulatory risk and associated costs are very great because the regulatory regime has varied dramatically in different administrations.
Some U.S. Administration departments have feared that fuel reprocessing in any form could pave the way to the plutonium economy with its associated proliferation dangers.
A similar argument led to the shutdown of the Integral Fast Reactor project in 1994.[20] The proliferation risk for a thorium fuel cycle stems from the potential separation of uranium-233, which might be used in nuclear weapons,
we see this already with current proposed nuclear and coal plants,.. with the EPA, Dept of energy ect always moving the goal posts..
it is not a new concept.. and there were plans to proceed.. but someone not only moved the goal post, they effectively shut the idea down and made it hard to restart any program that would require reprocessing..
who moved the goalpost the last time this idea was started?
With the election of President Bill Clinton in 1992, and the appointment of Hazel O'Leary as the Secretary of Energy, there was pressure from the top to cancel the IFR. Sen. John Kerry (D, MA) and O'Leary led the opposition to the reactor, arguing that it would be a threat to non-proliferation efforts,
in 2001 it was part of the Bush energy plan.. but as soon as you say reactor.. it hit the usual roadblocks..
it should be thought through.. and at this point we would be again leading from the rear..
One disadvantage of any new reactor technology is that safety risks may be greater initially as reactor operators have little experience with the new design. Nuclear engineer David Lochbaum has explained that almost all serious nuclear accidents have occurred with what was at the time the most recent technology. He argues that "the problem with new reactors and accidents is twofold: scenarios arise that are impossible to plan for in simulations; and humans make mistakes".[5] As one director of a U.S. research laboratory put it, "fabrication, construction, operation, and maintenance of new reactors will face a steep learning curve: advanced technologies will have a heightened risk of accidents and mistakes. The technology may be proven, but people are not"