|
Post by ebrainsh on Aug 31, 2015 20:24:12 GMT
IS THORIUM MOLTEN SALT GENERATION THE NEXT BIG THING
And can the technology scale down for use in transportation and home use? As always, your insights and knowledge is respected and appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by ebrainsh on Aug 31, 2015 20:30:27 GMT
BTW...This question has nothing to do with with global temperature fluctuations. For me anyway, It's all about the abundance of cheap energy.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Aug 31, 2015 21:16:08 GMT
|
|
|
Post by flearider on Sept 1, 2015 0:17:44 GMT
the prob seems to be if something happens and the salt cools ... then the pipes solidify and you foooked ...
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 1, 2015 1:52:28 GMT
Thorium molten salt is beset with technological problems of the kind that Uranium does not have, where currently Uranium is so abundant and so cheap it makes investing in Thorium technology a bit pointless. Given the nature of humans it is at least possible Thorium molten salt will one day be viable economically but at the moment it is science fiction and while Uranium is not yet exhausted and is currently nowhere near being exhausted it is just easier to stick with Uranium.
Thorium reactors make more sense for places like India and China, but whatever they create they still have to be able to create it more economically than buying fuel or technology from the west.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Sept 1, 2015 3:08:59 GMT
The largest detrement to thorium is that the by-products are not usable to make atomic bombs.
It is cheaper and more plentiful than uranium.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Sept 1, 2015 4:18:56 GMT
The problem is that the green movement is not about a solution its about control.
Its hard to believe that the two trillion dollars thrown at obviously poor technologies could not have been foreseen, wind and solar. Their attribute was always control of the masses.
Thorium is clean and potentially cheap energy. If we don't at least understand this technology China and India will be generating electricity at 7 cent per Kwh on demand 95% duty cycle and we will be stuck with intermittent coal fired backup 20 cents per Kwh electricity. Our incomes will slide as they sail past.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 1, 2015 5:41:05 GMT
I did a bit of a study on Thorium reactors a few years ago via one of those long running 'arguments'. I was convinced the average person talking about thorium has not investigated the problems and considered that currently there is a huge amount of cheap uranium available. Thorium could be as cheap as water but that does not solve the problems involved in building a reactor cheaper than you can one with a different fuel.
The idea our problems are caused by a conspiracy is attractive but in this case it was easy to see the claims do not add up.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Sept 1, 2015 10:08:29 GMT
Its no conspiracy, its just that the existing nuclear technology was an integral part of the arms program. the world is less comfortable with nuclear waste and critical reactors than it once was. Problem is Thorium is undeveloped. Fuel cost in each is small but Thorium promises lower build cost due to the non critical reactor and time to consent construction.
China and India will go first and we will watch while constraining existing nuclear, gas fracing and building Don Quixote's dream world.
Whether you buy the CAGW story or not there will be a world post fossil fuel and our current chosen mix of "green energy" is not going to allow our economies to thrive. Thorium needs to be understood and in the Trillion dollar mix it demands a budget.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 1, 2015 12:36:17 GMT
Its no conspiracy, its just that the existing nuclear technology was an integral part of the arms program. the world is less comfortable with nuclear waste and critical reactors than it once was. Problem is Thorium is undeveloped. Fuel cost in each is small but Thorium promises lower build cost due to the non critical reactor and time to consent construction. China and India will go first and we will watch while constraining existing nuclear, gas fracing and building Don Quixote's dream world. Whether you buy the CAGW story or not there will be a world post fossil fuel and our current chosen mix of "green energy" is not going to allow our economies to thrive. Thorium needs to be understood and in the Trillion dollar mix it demands a budget. I am assuming you do not realise a Thorium 'reactor' is a Uranium233 breeder reactor and the Thorium U233 breeder cannot operate without the presence of an already up and running reactor. Critical just means a self sustaining nuclear chain reaction.
|
|
|
Post by phydeaux2363 on Sept 1, 2015 18:15:21 GMT
Its no conspiracy, its just that the existing nuclear technology was an integral part of the arms program. the world is less comfortable with nuclear waste and critical reactors than it once was. Problem is Thorium is undeveloped. Fuel cost in each is small but Thorium promises lower build cost due to the non critical reactor and time to consent construction. China and India will go first and we will watch while constraining existing nuclear, gas fracing and building Don Quixote's dream world. Whether you buy the CAGW story or not there will be a world post fossil fuel and our current chosen mix of "green energy" is not going to allow our economies to thrive. Thorium needs to be understood and in the Trillion dollar mix it demands a budget. I am assuming you do not realise a Thorium 'reactor' is a Uranium233 breeder reactor and the Thorium U233 breeder cannot operate without the presence of an already up and running reactor. Critical just means a self sustaining nuclear chain reaction. If what you are saying, Mr. Andrew, is that to initiate an LFTR reaction, a substantial quantity of U-233 or enriched uranium is needed, than I think you are right on the money. That certainly is true and is one of the challenges of an extensive LFTR building program. Once the thorium reaction begins, however, I believe it is self sustaining, and produces U 233 which may be able to be segregated to start other LFTRs. You are correct, though, that getting enough U 233 or U 235 to start the LFTRs is a significant challenge. Some have suggested using enriched Uranium (or even Plutonium) from decommissioned nuclear weapons to initiate the reaction in LFTRs, but I'm pretty sure there's not enough of that material available right now to bring enough LFTRs on line to make a difference if you think fossil fuel combustion is destroying the ecosystem. Given that LFTRs are U233 breeders, however, over the long term this technology could be an answer.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Sept 2, 2015 5:49:28 GMT
again there is little evidence of a rush. and lets be sure two trillion dollars has only impacted several percent of the electrical needs and that has taken approaching two decades. The Chinese and the Indians will amuse us with wind and solar plants but when the crunch comes they will have the low-cost network to power their economy.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 2, 2015 6:16:35 GMT
again there is little evidence of a rush. and lets be sure two trillion dollars has only impacted several percent of the electrical needs and that has taken approaching two decades. The Chinese and the Indians will amuse us with wind and solar plants but when the crunch comes they will have the low-cost network to power their economy. I think if you study the topic of power from Thorium you will realise Thorium is beset with technological problems and all of those who claim Thorium is the answer and Trillions should be spent to get it to work are acting in a similar manner to those who claimed in the 1950's it would not be necessary to have electric meters for consumers once nuclear power was implemented. You need to consider todays reality. Thorium breeds Uranium233 and therefore in principle enables a nuclear future to be sustained far longer than one provided only by the available Uranium, however right now there is plenty of Uranium available and so the whole big deal of using Thorium to create more Uranium makes very little economic sense. There are pluses and minuses for Thorium power. There is no overwhelming case to proceed and currently the promised technologies are a long way off. I think it can also be said that Thorium power appeals to many of those who think that big oil prevented economic electric cars, and that really we could all have a much easier life if only those other people were not preventing it. You are saying Thorium needs to be understood. Essentially it is understood but we just do not have the technologies available to enable it to work in the supposedly simpler molten reactor method.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Sept 2, 2015 9:02:34 GMT
Remember the stone age did not finish because they ran out of stones.
Anyone who professes to know the future is a fool but I do know that Thorium is a candidate as are many other possible candidates for a growing need for energy that is usable. QED
We may be privileged to see what happens.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Sept 23, 2015 3:37:43 GMT
One can only hope this isn't too far away.
|
|