Energy From Thorium Discussion Forum

It is currently Apr 23, 2017 10:50 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sep 06, 2008 7:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 9:18 pm
Posts: 1961
Location: Montreal
U.S., India nuclear deal approved
Sep 06, 2008 07:33 AM
The Associated Press

VIENNA–The Nuclear Suppliers Group approved a contentious U.S. plan to sell peaceful nuclear material technology to India, delegates at the 45-nation talks said Saturday.

The officials, who met in Vienna, spoke to the Associated Press on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the closed door proceedings.

But they said the talks overcame misgivings expressed by Austria, Ireland and New Zealand. One delegate said Saturday's session produced "a total consensus" on the deal, which would reverse more than three decades of U.S. policy toward India.

India has tested atomic weapons and refused to sign international nonproliferation treaties.

The U.S. needed approval from the nuclear group, which governs the legal trade in nuclear components and technology.

The deal still also needs authorization from U.S. Congress, and the Bush administration has been racing to get acceptance before lawmakers recess for the rest of the year to devote time to their re-election campaigns.

Austria issued a statement saying it lifted its objections after India pledged Friday not to touch off a new nuclear arms race or share sensitive nuclear technology with other countries. Austria's government called that pledge "decisive.''

Before the nuclear group approved the deal, U.S. officials had contended that selling peaceful nuclear technology to India would bring the country's atomic program under closer scrutiny and boost – not undermine – international nonproliferation efforts.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sep 06, 2008 4:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jul 24, 2007 11:10 pm
Posts: 19
Wow, so which companies are the best candidates to leverage off these developments?

India's top nuclear civil servant, Anil Kakodkar, has stated that India intends to go continue with its 3-stage nuclear development program (ie. thorium power)

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/200 ... 300300.htm


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sep 06, 2008 6:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 9:18 pm
Posts: 1961
Location: Montreal
sanman wrote:
India's top nuclear civil servant, Anil Kakodkar, has stated that India intends to go continue with its 3-stage nuclear development program (ie. thorium power)

In the last posted issue of Nuclear India Anil Kakodkar talks about the "negative effects of early thorium introduction."
Quote:
Introduction of thorium without going to FBRs is extremely counter productive, since the installed power capacity with thorium and plutonium being used together in thermal reactors will be unable to rise beyond a rather insignificant value, considering the total Indian requirement. This is illustrated in Figure-8.

Its interesting that the caption in the figure mentions MSRs, while Kakodkar's article makes no mention of them at all.....

Image

He also bemoans the extremely low fuel burnup of thorium-based fuel, that is feasible with the minimum enrichment of 1.8% in PHWRs (about 2.5-times natural uranium enrichment level), which makes recycling totally impractical, and which therefore implies higher fissile loading requirements, which run counter to the needs of a rapid capacity expansion program.

What he neglects to mention is that an HW-MSR with fuel enrichment lower than 1.8% could achieve essentially unlimited fuel burnup, with uranium fuel, thanks to on-line processing.
The low fissile loading would thus allow India to have the rapid capacity expansion program that is otherwise impossible with solid-fueled thermal reactors. It must also be pointed out that this is equally impossible with LFTRs, particularly those w/o graphite moderator, due to their high fissile loading -- comparable to FBRs (but without the benefit of the short fissile doubling time).

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sep 08, 2008 3:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Apr 19, 2008 1:06 am
Posts: 2188
Anil Kakodkar's problem is a shortage of fissile feed in reactors. He or his successor may go for some type of MSR once this problem is sorted out. Right now he is busy constructing a fast reactor that works . I have a feeling that Indian MSR if and when built might be a chloride(Cl37) salt fast spectrum. The current research focus is on metallic fuel in fast reactors for higher breeding ratio.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sep 08, 2008 9:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 9:18 pm
Posts: 1961
Location: Montreal
jagdish wrote:
Anil Kakodkar's problem is a shortage of fissile feed in reactors. He or his successor may go for some type of MSR once this problem is sorted out. Right now he is busy constructing a fast reactor that works .

Yeah... problem is that the fast reactor is not much good without reprocessing plants.

With an MSR, you get it in a single package, and a lot simpler (& less expensive) than trying to reprocess oxide or carbide fuels - the current developmental FBRs.

One would think that a country like India would be more cost-conscious, than the rich western nations..... But seeing that India is also dumping money down the ITER hole may perhaps cause one to reconsider ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Apr 09, 2017 7:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Posts: 3153
Location: Alabama
Why the India-US nuclear deal is turning out to be a dud


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Apr 09, 2017 3:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Nov 14, 2013 7:47 pm
Posts: 539
Location: Iowa, USA
Quote:
GE built or designed all the three Fukushima reactors that suffered core meltdowns, yet the US firm went scot-free, despite a fundamental design deficiency in the reactors.


What design deficiency are they referring to? The reactors survived the earthquake and flooding, failing only when cooling was lost. The cooling would not have been lost had the tidal wall been built high enough, the reactor NOT been shutdown, or any of a number of things outside the reactor been properly designed and operated. There was nothing fundamentally wrong with the reactors. The failures were in the choice of siting and infrastructure. TEPCO knew about these issues, as did the government regulators, but nothing was done. GE did nothing wrong.

_________________
Disclaimer: I am an engineer but not a nuclear engineer, mechanical engineer, chemical engineer, or industrial engineer. My education included electrical, computer, and software engineering.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group