Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 
Send Topic Print
Thorium power (Read 93453 times)
Bobby.
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 102442
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Thorium power
Reply #165 - Feb 16th, 2024 at 9:45pm
 

Thorium Problem - Why it may never Happen.


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
John_Taverner
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2212
Gender: male
Re: Thorium power
Reply #166 - Jun 21st, 2024 at 11:48am
 
If it ever happens, I will be amazed. As far as I'm concerned they can build one in my backyard, but who would finance it? Any financial institutions that did so would be authors of their own demise.



Back to top
 
72+Adelaide+Street  
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 102442
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Thorium power
Reply #167 - Aug 22nd, 2024 at 11:44am
 
It's Happening - China Launches World's First Thorium Nuclear Reactor



Aug 19, 2024


0:00 The Thorium Opportunity
1:45 How Do Molten Salt Reactors Work?
6:32 Ad Read
7:56 Why Is Thorium So Compelling?
11:37 The World's First Thorium Salt Reactor
18:35 Conclusion


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 102442
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Thorium power
Reply #168 - Aug 22nd, 2024 at 2:51pm
 

There are many severe technical problems:
corrosion of pipes and
the molten salt has to be cleaned out continuously  from contaminants that stop the reaction -
but that is what makes it safe -  it's walk away safe.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 102442
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Thorium power
Reply #169 - Aug 22nd, 2024 at 8:29pm
 

Let's hope China has solved the problems with Thorium
and we can then see large Thorium power stations -
it would be the end of dirty fossil fuels and the start of a new Thorium age.  Smiley
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 102442
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Thorium power
Reply #170 - Sep 8th, 2024 at 7:35am
 
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-06/china-building-thorium-nuclear-power-stat...

China to build first-ever thorium molten salt nuclear power station in Gobi Desert



By Will Jackson

    Topic:Nuclear Energy

...



Fri 6 Sep

In short:

China is planning to build the world's first-ever nuclear power station using molten salt as the fuel carrier and coolant, and thorium as a fuel source.

Experts say the reactors are "inherently safer" than traditional nuclear reactors and have other advantages, but scientists have long struggled with challenges such as the corrosive nature of the superheated radioactive salts.
What's next?

Construction on the research facility is due to start next year with operation expected in 2030, followed by full-scale production.

China is planning to build a nuclear power plant on the edge of the Gobi Desert that would be the first in the world to use molten salt as the fuel carrier and coolant.

It would also be the first to use the radioactive metallic element thorium — named after the Norse god — as a fuel source instead of the uranium traditionally used in nuclear reactors.

Molten salt reactors are considered "inherently safer" than traditional water-cooled reactors, but face additional challenges such as the corrosion caused by the superheated radioactive salts and issues with waste disposal.

Plans for the thorium molten salt reactor (TMSR), first revealed by the South China Morning Post, were detailed in an environmental assessment report that was briefly posted to the website of the Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics (SINAP) before being taken down.

According to the report, a prototype TMSR at the same location, which was designed to produce 2 megawatts of thermal energy but no actual electricity, achieved criticality in October last year.

Building on the results of the prototype, the new facility will produce 60MW of heat that will be used to generate 10MW of electricity and hydrogen as part of a larger renewable and low-carbon energy research hub.

The project would "drive the development of a large number of materials and high-end equipment manufacturing technologies", the report said.

It cited advantages to molten salt reactors, including "high inherent safety, low nuclear waste, physical prevention of nuclear proliferation and better economics".



Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 102442
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Thorium power
Reply #171 - Sep 19th, 2024 at 10:03pm
 

Not Thorium but Fusion - China is ahead in the race:


https://edition.cnn.com/2024/09/19/climate/nuclear-fusion-clean-energy-china-us/...

With the money China is putting into research, the tokamak concept is rapidly evolving.
China’s EAST tokamak in Hefei held plasma stable at 70 million degrees Celsius —
five times hotter than the core of the sun — for more than 17 minutes,
a world record and an objectively astonishing breakthrough.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Aurora Complexus
Senior Member
****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 343
New South Whales
Gender: male
Re: Thorium power
Reply #172 - Oct 3rd, 2024 at 9:17pm
 
Bobby. wrote on Sep 19th, 2024 at 10:03pm:
Not Thorium but Fusion - China is ahead in the race:


<snip link>

With the money China is putting into research, the tokamak concept is rapidly evolving.
China’s EAST tokamak in Hefei held plasma stable at 70 million degrees Celsius —
five times hotter than the core of the sun — for more than 17 minutes,
a world record and an objectively astonishing breakthrough.


I frankly don't trust what Chinese scientists publish. They are suckers for Great China propaganda.

90 million degrees for 6 minutes is quite impressive also. That's the WEST reactor in France, though forum rules prevent me from posting a link.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Aurora Complexus
Senior Member
****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 343
New South Whales
Gender: male
Re: Thorium power
Reply #173 - Oct 3rd, 2024 at 9:34pm
 
Fusion is the long future. Fusion will make all our current attempts to "bridge the gap" between fossil fuels and sustainability, look a bit silly. But how far off is fusion, really? Haven't the prophets and the technicians been telling us it is twenty years away, for sixty years now?

Even if fusion as our main power source, is just twenty years away, it won't be our only power source.

There is still plenty of opportunity for nuclear fission power. What's the worst that could happen? We invest in a power source which does not return its investment cost before it is rendered obsolete?

Nuclear fission power is actually very safe. Per megawatt hour it kills far fewer people than coal or rooftop solar. Even wind power isn't very safe. The strike against nuclear fission power has always been the creation of long-lasting nuclear waste.

The Thorium fuel cycle produces less troublesome waste. There is short-halflife "waste" which after reprocessing is simply put back into a reactor. The actual waste is long halflife, and which can be buried with no more risk than the uranium ores which fuel the uranium-based reactors. We could even dispose of our existing waste (transuranics) by burning them as fuel.

Since China was mentioned before, it's relevant that they are also building thorium reactors.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 102442
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Thorium power
Reply #174 - Oct 3rd, 2024 at 9:53pm
 
Aurora Complexus wrote on Oct 3rd, 2024 at 9:34pm:
Fusion is the long future. Fusion will make all our current attempts to "bridge the gap" between fossil fuels and sustainability, look a bit silly. But how far off is fusion, really? Haven't the prophets and the technicians been telling us it is twenty years away, for sixty years now?

Even if fusion as our main power source, is just twenty years away, it won't be our only power source.

There is still plenty of opportunity for nuclear fission power. What's the worst that could happen? We invest in a power source which does not return its investment cost before it is rendered obsolete?

Nuclear fission power is actually very safe. Per megawatt hour it kills far fewer people than coal or rooftop solar. Even wind power isn't very safe. The strike against nuclear fission power has always been the creation of long-lasting nuclear waste.

The Thorium fuel cycle produces less troublesome waste. There is short-halflife "waste" which after reprocessing is simply put back into a reactor. The actual waste is long halflife, and which can be buried with no more risk than the uranium ores which fuel the uranium-based reactors. We could even dispose of our existing waste (transuranics) by burning them as fuel.

Since China was mentioned before, it's relevant that they are also building thorium reactors.



see my posts  #6 and #7.

Thorium is really difficult to use -
it must be "cleaned" all the time.

Fusion is a bit of a dream - I think.



Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Aurora Complexus
Senior Member
****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 343
New South Whales
Gender: male
Re: Thorium power
Reply #175 - Oct 3rd, 2024 at 10:05pm
 
Bobby. wrote on Oct 3rd, 2024 at 9:53pm:
Aurora Complexus wrote on Oct 3rd, 2024 at 9:34pm:
Fusion is the long future. Fusion will make all our current attempts to "bridge the gap" between fossil fuels and sustainability, look a bit silly. But how far off is fusion, really? Haven't the prophets and the technicians been telling us it is twenty years away, for sixty years now?

Even if fusion as our main power source, is just twenty years away, it won't be our only power source.

There is still plenty of opportunity for nuclear fission power. What's the worst that could happen? We invest in a power source which does not return its investment cost before it is rendered obsolete?

Nuclear fission power is actually very safe. Per megawatt hour it kills far fewer people than coal or rooftop solar. Even wind power isn't very safe. The strike against nuclear fission power has always been the creation of long-lasting nuclear waste.

The Thorium fuel cycle produces less troublesome waste. There is short-halflife "waste" which after reprocessing is simply put back into a reactor. The actual waste is long halflife, and which can be buried with no more risk than the uranium ores which fuel the uranium-based reactors. We could even dispose of our existing waste (transuranics) by burning them as fuel.

Since China was mentioned before, it's relevant that they are also building thorium reactors.



see my posts  #6 and #7.

Thorium is really difficult to use -
it must be "cleaned" all the time.


I'm aware. But I'm also aware that existing Uranium reactors were easily adapted to burn Plutonium. They just mixed it with other metals which were converted to fuel, or to useless elements which didn't outright poison the reactor.

We just don't know if purpose built thorium reactors would "fail gracefully" or need fuel reprocessing. The Canadians and (behind their wall of bullshit) the Chinese, are are only engineering sources on the Thorium fuel cycle.

If "we just don't know" was a good enough reason not to try, we would never have had nuclear power at all. On the upside, we would never have had nuclear weapons.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Oct 3rd, 2024 at 10:27pm by Aurora Complexus »  
 
IP Logged
 
Aurora Complexus
Senior Member
****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 343
New South Whales
Gender: male
Re: Thorium power
Reply #176 - Oct 3rd, 2024 at 10:25pm
 
Bobby. wrote on Mar 1st, 2018 at 5:11am:
FShu,
Quote:
Sir Bobby, excellent questions to which my answers are given in detail below. Cleaning the salt: To complete the breeding cycle, there are two salts that require cleaning.  The fuel salt requires the removal of fission products that would absorb neutrons needed to maintain the chain reaction, with an excess of neutrons from each fission of U-233 that goes toward the conversion of Th-232 into Th-233.  The last species becomes U-233 after two beta-decays.   The most important  fission product to remove is Xe-135, which has a huge cross section (2 million times greater than normal) for capturing neutrons.  The isotopes of Kr are also abundantly represented in fission products and are important to remove for the same reason.  Fortunately, both are noble gases that will bubble out of the liquid salt if we sparge a carrier noble gas like helium into the pump bowl.  Next, the fissile U-233 needs to be reclaimed before further cleaning of the fuel salt.  Sparging fluorine gas, F2, into small samples of fuel salt will convert UF4 into UF6.  While UF4 is a liquid at temperatures characteristic of the fuel salt, UF6 is a gas and will, if encouraged, bubble out of the molten salt.  This step also removes compounds of volatile fission products like dangerous I-131 with an 8-hr half-life .  To separate the UF6 from the other volatile species, the vapor is passed through a powder of NaF-BeF2, which will adsorb the UF6 while letting the other gases through to be bottled and stored as radioactive nuclear waste.  By then passing hydrogen gas, H2, though the powder, the trapped UF6 is converted back to UF4 with the release of 2 molecules of HF gas for each molecule of UF4 or UF6.  The NaF-BeF2-UF4 can be put back into the reactor core as clean fuel salt, while the 2HF can be converted by electrolysis to F2 + H2.  The recycled F2 can be used to convert a new batch of UF4 to UF6 that is trapped in fresh NaF-BeF2, while the recycled H2 can be used to convert the UF6 trapped in NaF-eF2-UF6 into a new batch of cleaned fuel salt, NaF-BeF2-UF4. Where does the fresh NaF-BeF2 come from?  The small samples of fuel salt into which we sparge fluorine gas, F2, has not only NaF-BeF2, but also non-volatile fission products, some of which are extremely radioactive.  The high radioactivity will steadily try to increase the temperature of the fuel salt.  If we pump down the pressure above the contaminated fuel salt, we can vacuum-distill the fuel salt so that NaF-Be2 boils away as a gas once the temperature gets above 1000 C.  This vacuum distillation produces gaseous NaF-BeF2, which will become a liquid and then a solid as it cools down.  The pure solid NaF-BeF2 is what is made into a powder to capture the UF6 in the previous paragraph.  The non-volatile fission products left behind need to be divided into very small parcels, so that their large surface-to-volume ratios allow them to be cooled, and then converted from fluoride forms into safer oxide or silicate forms.  We put the parcels of solid oxide or silicate fission products into cold storage for up to five years, before fusing them with non-radioactive glasses to be buried for, say, three hundred years until the radioactivity decays to safe background levels. Blanket salt When we write UF4 or UF6 in the above, the U we are assuming is mostly U-233 (with a little accompanying U-232).  Natural uranium is mostly U-238 with a little U-235 mixed in.  Where do we get the U-233? The answer is from the blanket salt, which is either NaF-BeF2-ThF4 or, more simply, NaF-ThF4, with natural thorium being almost pure Th-232.  When Th-232 is irradiated by neutrons generated in the reactor core in excess of what is needed to maintain the chain reaction, the Th-232 can capture a neutron and become Th-233.  After two beta decays, the Th-233 turns into U-233.  In the blanket salt, the U-233 is in the form of UF4.  To separate the UF4 from the rest of the blanket salt, we remove a small batch of the blanket salt from the pool for off-line processing.  The processing consists of sparging F2 into the small sample, whiich converts the UF4 into UF6 that bubbles out of the blanket salt.  Unlike uranium, thorium does not have any valence state higher than +4, so the thorium stays as ThF4 and remains as a liquid in the cleaned blanket, salt which can be put back into the pool. As before, a powder of NaF-BeF2 can capture the UF6, with the combination turned into fuel salt by the methods described earlier.  Indeed, to prevent the cleaned fuel salt from dropping in U-233 concentration, we should add the UF6 extracted from the blanket salt as a supplement to the UF6 that comes from cleaning the fuel salt to make up whatever was lost by fission reactions in the core. In this way, the reactor becomes a breeder, which is self-sustaining in its fuel requirements as long as we have enough thorium in the blanket salt.


Bobby, I can understand that you find this frightening. But many things in biology and physics are frightening to amateurs (like myself.)

Are you less alarmed about nuclear weapons, now that the processes of fission and fusion are common knowledge?

If you don't trust engineers, who have a university education to even call themselves an engineer, and years of specialized work experience before they're allowed to make critical decisions, then maybe you should drop out of our technological civilization.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 102442
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Thorium power
Reply #177 - Oct 3rd, 2024 at 10:31pm
 
Aurora Complexus
Quote:
Bobby, I can understand that you find this frightening. But many things in biology and physics are frightening to amateurs (like myself.)

Are you less alarmed about nuclear weapons, now that the processes of fission and fusion are common knowledge?

If you don't trust engineers, who have a university education to even call themselves an engineer, and years of specialized work experience before they're allowed to make critical decisions,




Uranium just sits there and keeps on producing energy -
it's much simpler.

Thorium poisons its own reaction and has to be cleaned.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Aurora Complexus
Senior Member
****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 343
New South Whales
Gender: male
Re: Thorium power
Reply #178 - Oct 3rd, 2024 at 11:28pm
 
Bobby. wrote on Oct 3rd, 2024 at 10:31pm:
Aurora Complexus
Quote:
Bobby, I can understand that you find this frightening. But many things in biology and physics are frightening to amateurs (like myself.)

Are you less alarmed about nuclear weapons, now that the processes of fission and fusion are common knowledge?

If you don't trust engineers, who have a university education to even call themselves an engineer, and years of specialized work experience before they're allowed to make critical decisions,




Uranium just sits there and keeps on producing energy -
it's much simpler.

Thorium poisons its own reaction and has to be cleaned.


This is a problem for engineers and accountants.

Uranium does not just "sit there" it produces transuranic waste. Thorium produces U-233 which is quite unstable, ie the waste (whether in the reactor, in reprocessing, or in storage) is a problem for fewer years. They both have ex-processing long term waste, but from experience the waste of thorium reactors is a lot less problematic.

Now at the opposite extreme, fusion creates two kinds of waste: reactant waste, and containment waste. The waste created directly by fusion is all very low on the table. For instance tritium (Hydrogen-3) which is useful as fuel, H-3 likewise. But there are also heavier elements which have to be treated as waste. Containment waste is more problematic. Before we can engineer "clean fusion" we need to achieve dirty fusion, with neutrons escaping confinement and hitting something. Well anyway, my intention is not to attack fusion. It's a promising future technology, but anyone who calls it "clean" is ignorant of every fusion reactor ever.

I think you should look at the differences between French and US nuclear fission programs. The US has the "cheap and dirty" method of storing nuclear waste in reactor buildings. France reprocesses waste, getting a lot back as usable reactor fuel.

In neither case is it fair to say nuclear fuel "just sits there". It runs out (poisons itself,) and the reactor has to go offline while it's replaced with new fuel. Whether it's practical for a thorium reactor to be offline half of the time, is really a question for accountants. Other costs like secure disposal, have to be accounted.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 102442
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Thorium power
Reply #179 - Oct 3rd, 2024 at 11:46pm
 

Quote:
Uranium does not just "sit there" it produces transuranic waste.


But as an example -
the Yanky nuclear powered subs use 20% enriched Uranium and
they go for 30 years without having to touch them.

A Thorium reactor can't go for 30 hours without cleaning the molten salt.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 
Send Topic Print