tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post2083325976040241633..comments2024-02-16T17:52:44.944-06:00Comments on The Nuclear Green Revolution: Scaling the Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor: The Big Lots Reactor and the Aim High ReactorCharles Bartonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01125297013064527425noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-10562847983517792632009-03-21T16:37:00.000-05:002009-03-21T16:37:00.000-05:00Excellent job Charles. The most important thing I ...Excellent job Charles. <BR/><BR/>The most important thing I learned form the LeBlanc lecture is the fact that we can build a once through MSR that produces high temperature high pressure steam using ¼ of the uranium requirement of conventional reactors.<BR/><BR/>The chemical reprocessing system design is the most problematic and time consuming aspect of developing a liquid fueled breeder reactor. Eliminating that system leaves a very simple reactor design that could be developed and tested in the minimal time span.<BR/><BR/>Given the abundant supply of affordable uranium from sea water these simple MSR’s could meet the worlds need quickly and for as long as necessary to allow R&D of a full blown breeder reactor.<BR/><BR/>I would also suggest combining the MSR concept with the floating plant concept so that we can provide high paying jobs selling these plants all over the world.<BR/><BR/>Bill HannahanAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-53667785449926550042009-03-20T13:49:00.000-05:002009-03-20T13:49:00.000-05:00For me, the Big Lot Reactor is a LFTR that has no ...For me, the Big Lot Reactor is a LFTR that has no moving parts; no pumps, no pipes, no heat exchanger, no operators, no maintenance requirements, and is a small nuclear battery at 70 MWt with heat pipe heat transfer interface to an external steam turboelectric generator. Deployed underground, its operational life time is 30 years. <BR/><BR/>It utilizes a thick hot pressed thorium carbide containment vessel with a thin stainless steel outer substrate to provide a combined U233 neutron breeding blanket and gamma shield. Heat pipes using potassium remove the heat from the core and blanket to the gen set. <BR/><BR/>The thorium blanket barrier would provide very high temperature resistance since the melting point of thorium carbide is about 2600°C. But the operating temperature of the Big Lot Reactor would only be about 500C.<BR/><BR/>A solid blanket would be impervious to the effects of corrosion; a large amount of thorium carbide can decompose at the inner edge of the blanket in a redux reaction to fluoride core salt without affecting the structural integrity of the blanket shell on the whole. <BR/><BR/>Almost all of the neutrons generated by the reaction would stay inside the reactor and be absorbed in the thorium blanket to produce a very pure U233 in solid suspension in the thorium carbide; that is, most blanket reaction products would be contained inside the crystal matrix of the blanket material including U232/233.<BR/><BR/><BR/>The carbon in the carbide would moderate and thermalize the reaction in the blanket increasing the efficiency of the blanket reaction producing a maximum amount of U233.<BR/><BR/>The blanket would be safe from proliferation. A small amount of uranium-238 carbide can be added to the solid blanket to increase the proliferation resistance of the solid blanket. Some plutonium would be produced but in very small amounts and it will degrade to very poor quality reactor grade levels as the blanket ages. <BR/><BR/>In order to get to this U233 that has been produced inside the very walls of this 200 ton reactor containment vessel, a proliferator must destroy and disassemble the reactor, lift its heavy reactor core out of a many meters deep reinforced aircraft crash proof hole in the ground, then cut the thorium up into small pieces while enduring heavy gamma radiation exposure, next reprocess these reactor pieces using isotopic separation since the U233 is denatured with enough U238 to make chemical separation of bomb grade U233 impossible, and do all this without being detected. Now, this is a tall order for any proliferator and may just be an impossible assignment.<BR/><BR/>With the U238 and a large amount of carbon present in the blanket, and the very massive size of the blanket segments, together with U-232 buildup over time producing hard gammas, the solid blanket will be very proliferation resistant. <BR/><BR/><BR/>To be clear, the main advantage of a solid breeding blanket integral to the very structure of the reactor itself is that proliferation of the U233 contained within is impossible without destroying the reactor.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Fabrication of the blanket is straight forward with much experience existing widely throughout the industry; the thorium in the thorium carbide is very inexpensive and can be recycled during the reprocessing of the blanket during the removal of the U233. <BR/><BR/>This recycling happens at the end of the service life of the BIG Lot reactor, the reactor vessel is sent back to the factory where it is reduced to liquid fluoride salts that become the feedstock of a next new Big Lot. This feedstock can only be used by the new Big Lot and not for bombs. The small amount of waste products are held at the factory for a few hundred years to cool down before they are mined for the many precious elements contained within like platinum and iridium!<BR/><BR/>The Big Lot can be deployed safely anywhere in the world, and can be manufactures cheaply, in the factory, and in high volumes.<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>AxilAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-34410528367443558172009-03-20T12:34:00.000-05:002009-03-20T12:34:00.000-05:00Charles Barton wrote:This brief study is based on ...Charles Barton wrote:<BR/><I>This brief study is based on the assumption that the major obstacle to replacing carbon based energy technology with post carbon based energy technology would be factors like materials availability, and labor and financing related costs.</I><BR/><BR/>These same factors are present no matter what we do, unless we decide to slide back to the pre-industrial civilization. I think it can be argued that the LFTR would minimize materials use and financing costs. Take materials, for example. Not only does the LFTR produce a lot of energy given the materials input, it can be placed near load centers so that long distance power transmission lines do not need to be constructed.<BR/><BR/>Charles Barton also wrote:<BR/><I>The answer is simple, knowledge of the potential of thorium/LFTR technology, and commitment to its development and use. The road is open, we have only to see it, and chose to follow it.</I><BR/><BR/>Simple does not mean easy. There is a big hurdle in overcoming the fear of radiation (promoted by the likes of Greenpeace). There is a big hurdle in overcoming government regulation that focuses excessively on safety while failing to see the dangers in NOT going forward with advanced nuclear energy. Don't get me wrong -- nuclear energy should be safer than what we are doing now, but making something as safe as possible only delays the deployment of safer energy sources. The net result is worse safety! Also, while we can still live in relative comfort using fossil fuels, there is a lack of foward thinking that needs to be overcome. It seems to take a crisis (like $4+ gasoline) to get people moving on solving problems, but by then years are necessary for the solutions to be implemented, all the while the pain continues.<BR/><BR/>The way forward is clear. But it will take bold initiatives by visionary leaders, much like the race to the moon, to move to the goal.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com