thorium Reactor

Posted by: jgw

thorium Reactor - 07/27/19 07:48 PM

https://youtu.be/XMuxjHLLk0E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAiHtrWHxK0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyDbq5HRs0o
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: thorium Reactor - 07/30/19 03:06 AM

Thank you for this!
Posted by: jgw

Thorium Reactor - 08/04/19 10:30 PM

You are welcome. Its really time that this technology starts getting used. I am not against the windmills, etc. but this stuff is super safe, won't kill birds and fish, is reliable and, as far as I am concerned, should actually be replacing the large, very dangerous, reactors we have right now (I think we are actually building another one of those!).

Its also interesting that the entire rest of the world is moving on, and into, this technology. You know, them foreign devils like India, France, etc. We used to compete, now we dispair, I fear.
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Thorium Reactor - 08/05/19 12:13 AM

Originally Posted By: jgw
You are welcome. Its really time that this technology starts getting used. I am not against the windmills, etc. but this stuff is super safe, won't kill birds and fish, is reliable and, as far as I am concerned, should actually be replacing the large, very dangerous, reactors we have right now (I think we are actually building another one of those!).

Its also interesting that the entire rest of the world is moving on, and into, this technology. You know, them foreign devils like India, France, etc. We used to compete, now we dispair, I fear.


I think you were responding to the thorium thread and it landed here by mistake?
Posted by: Greger

Re: Thorium Reactor - 08/05/19 10:41 PM

I fixed it!
Posted by: Greger

Re: Thorium Reactor - 08/05/19 10:50 PM

Quote:
Its also interesting that the entire rest of the world is moving on, and into, this technology.
meh...several places are trying to figure out how to actually build one but so far nobody's got one up and running.

Any day now....
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Thorium Reactor - 08/05/19 11:21 PM

Originally Posted By: Greger
Quote:
Its also interesting that the entire rest of the world is moving on, and into, this technology.
meh...several places are trying to figure out how to actually build one but so far nobody's got one up and running.

Any day now....


Thorium? China, India and UK all have running thorium nukes right now.
Or were you talking about fusion?
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Thorium Reactor - 08/06/19 01:40 AM

Oak Ridge had one running for years, back in the 60's. They tried lots of different variations, but then the government shut the whole thing down. I think it was politics (like GE lobbyists), not any technical roadblocks.

One thing the first video mentioned is that you can use the reaction to extract U-233 and make bombs with it. But he failed to mention that is difficult and dangerous because of the inevitable U-232 contamination. That makes it give off deadly gamma rays, so you can't use a glovebox to machine it. You need robots, else humans die. Any bomb you make has a very limited shelf-life for the very same reason: It decays and you get more U-232 which fissions spontaneously. It's a LOT safer to not extract the U-233 and let it do all that inside the reactor to make electricity.

I think India and China can handle 1960's technology, so I predict success for them and any other country that tries it. I bet China ends up making little reactors they sell all over the world. Hopefully they will sell them to us.
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Thorium Reactor - 08/06/19 02:32 AM

Originally Posted By: pondering_it_all
Oak Ridge had one running for years, back in the 60's. They tried lots of different variations, but then the government shut the whole thing down. I think it was politics (like GE lobbyists), not any technical roadblocks.

One thing the first video mentioned is that you can use the reaction to extract U-233 and make bombs with it. But he failed to mention that is difficult and dangerous because of the inevitable U-232 contamination. That makes it give off deadly gamma rays, so you can't use a glovebox to machine it. You need robots, else humans die. Any bomb you make has a very limited shelf-life for the very same reason: It decays and you get more U-232 which fissions spontaneously. It's a LOT safer to not extract the U-233 and let it do all that inside the reactor to make electricity.

I think India and China can handle 1960's technology, so I predict success for them and any other country that tries it. I bet China ends up making little reactors they sell all over the world. Hopefully they will sell them to us.


It was shelved because we were forced to make a Sophie's Choice.
The military wanted the U/Pl fuel cycle for weapons potential, the energy people wanted thorium fuel cycle.
The administration did not want to invest in both and the needs of the military won out. It was the Cold War era.

In retrospect we should have forced the administration to lay out funds for both.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Thorium Reactor - 08/06/19 04:23 AM

Thorium just wasn't as exciting as Uranium. Reactors had to be bigger, better, faster, etc. If they ran on the edge, so much the better. It was a Cold War contest, that lead directly to Chernobyl. Each of their reactors was 20 times as big as anything in the West. They used a plutonium-production design that ran on the hairy edge. The operators had to do a constant balancing act to keep them from melting down.

There is something very appealing in a safe design, like making a Cessna fly straight and level if the pilot drops dead or just steps away. That's the molten salt thorium reactor. You could just have all the operators walk away, and it would keep on chugging along at the same output. It can't run away, because the fissionable material is constantly created by the neutron source. If anything went massively wrong, the core would get hot enough to melt the "freeze plug" and all the molten salt fuel would run down into the reservoir, out of the neutron field. All fission would then stop.

Designing software and a bit of electronic hardware, that was always my central aim. To make it do something reasonable if neglected, and to prevent anything dangerous. My friend and I designed a 30 amp power supply for water purification. If at the beginning of a 60 Hz half-cycle, it detected the current was rising too fast it would shut off for that half-cycle. Result? A BIG power supply that would shut off if the lines got shorted together. Not even a tiny spark!
Posted by: Greger

Re: Thorium Reactor - 08/06/19 04:30 PM

Quote:
China, India and UK all have running thorium nukes right now.

Show me a picture of one...

Can't can ya. because there isn't one. There is not a single operating molten salt thorium reactor in the world.
Posted by: jgw

Re: Thorium Reactor - 08/06/19 05:09 PM

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi...ow/59407602.cms

google "picture of thorium reactor"
Posted by: Greger

Re: Thorium Reactor - 08/06/19 05:56 PM

That's a fast breeder reactor. While there are some thorium salts involved it is NOT a molten salt reactor.

Google "molten salt thorium reactor" pictures. All you get is diagrams.

India doesn't have much uranium and nuclear fuel is expensive. But they have lots of thorium which can be fed to certain reactors. The fast breeder creates more fuel(radioactive material) than it uses. It can actually create more fuel for itself than it can burn.

Call it fuel if you want, it sounds like radioactive waste to me.

Lotsa folks working on, it tons of money being spent, best guess is maybe 15 years before one gets hooked up to the grid.

Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Thorium Reactor - 08/06/19 11:07 PM

Originally Posted By: Greger
That's a fast breeder reactor. While there are some thorium salts involved it is NOT a molten salt reactor.

Google "molten salt thorium reactor" pictures. All you get is diagrams.

India doesn't have much uranium and nuclear fuel is expensive. But they have lots of thorium which can be fed to certain reactors. The fast breeder creates more fuel(radioactive material) than it uses. It can actually create more fuel for itself than it can burn.

Call it fuel if you want, it sounds like radioactive waste to me.

Lotsa folks working on, it tons of money being spent, best guess is maybe 15 years before one gets hooked up to the grid.



Oak Ridge just restarted their Thorium project again after forty years.