Energy From Thorium Discussion Forum

It is currently Jun 23, 2018 5:34 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Oct 09, 2014 8:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Apr 19, 2008 1:06 am
Posts: 2230
Christopher Calder wrote:
Forgive me if I am being redundant. Has the Terrestrial Energy (name of company) Integral Molten Salt Reactor (IMSR) been covered on this forum? I did a search and could not find it listed.

See: http://nextbigfuture.com/2014/10/how-te ... olten.html

and the company website at

http://terrestrialenergy.com/imsr-technology/


Please look up
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4016&hilit=IMSR%2C
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3961
David LeBlanc, the nuclear brain of the IMSR has posted in reply to his mention in the first topic. He referred to the other thread regarding use of nuclear heat. It is as close to official statement on the subject as is available.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 24, 2014 5:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jan 29, 2014 4:05 am
Posts: 269
Location: Vitoria-ES-Brazil
Terrestrial Energy "days" away from finishing its pre conceptual design report...
Even when that report is completed, that doesn't mean the report will be public (fully or partially).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEUAZQKTcVc

_________________
Looking for companies working to change the world.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 27, 2014 12:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Apr 19, 2008 1:06 am
Posts: 2230
I have always wondered why the nuclear energy is used only as a fraction converted to electric power. The nuclear steam or heated gas from an MSR could be used profitably as process heat. Imagine the intellectual value of nuclear steam being used for softening tight oil or bitumen for extraction of fuel. It is likely to be well guarded as intellectual property.
If the steam temperature is high enough, it could be also be used for in situ hydrous pyrolysis of kerogens in the strata underground to syngas and condensible chemicals, making the extraction that much easier. It will do away with the need for burning a part for heating it as process heat.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 27, 2014 2:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jan 29, 2014 4:05 am
Posts: 269
Location: Vitoria-ES-Brazil
New video where the Chairman of Terrestrial gives a speech to the Economic Club of Canada in it Hugh McDiarmid states the pre conceptual design report is finished.
Graphite moderator
No mention of the core salt chemical composition yet.
Apparently they're ready to being the process of convincing the CNRC to allow Terrestrial to build the first demonstrator / proof of concept 80MWt (probably MWt since they are more focused on process heat than on producing electricity), while selecting the site to build it on.

This speech is also focused on generating interest in the main round of financing (paying for building the first reactor, tens of times the total $$$ raised so far, even with all partnerships providing parts for free to be in the consortium that will supply parts for the reactor).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8K3ezyrioA

Encouraging news, hopefully in a year or two that report can be made available to the public.

_________________
Looking for companies working to change the world.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Dec 12, 2014 9:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Jan 29, 2014 4:05 am
Posts: 269
Location: Vitoria-ES-Brazil
Terrestrial Energy Announces Letter of Intent with Canadian Nuclear Laboratories

http://www.marketwired.com/press-releas ... 975898.htm

_________________
Looking for companies working to change the world.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 03, 2015 9:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Jul 14, 2011 9:22 pm
Posts: 31
Location: Forest Park, GA
I'm a big fan of Dr. LeBlanc, and am holding out on his IMSR as being a game-changer.

That said, I keep running into opinionated PhDs (imagine that) that aren't so optimistic.
Specifically, several of the are saying that the good doctor is underestimating the engineering challenge of actually whipping together an MSR as opposed to a paper reactor.

So if Terrestrial goes through with building the prototype, how big of an engineering challenge are we talking here?
I mean, a pot, a pump, and a pipe, right? Or am I missing something?

Is he perhaps at a major disadvantage from not carrying out this experiment in the middle of a national lab, like the MSRE?
Who's actually going to welding pipes, purifying the salts, and laying the concrete here?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 03, 2015 10:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Apr 19, 2008 1:06 am
Posts: 2230
Building an MSR is a challenging task. The terrestrial engineering has concentrated on essentials instead of going for Optimums like a breeder. That gives it a better chance. Goodwill of the government concerned is always required.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 04, 2015 2:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 9:18 pm
Posts: 1947
Location: Montreal
Vince Hughes wrote:
Is he perhaps at a major disadvantage from not carrying out this experiment in the middle of a national lab, like the MSRE?

They're looking to partner with Chalk River Lab.

Nothing ever happens very quickly over there, so don't hold your breath.

Quote:
http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/terrestrial-energy-announces-letter-of-intent-with-canadian-nuclear-laboratories-1975732.htm
December 10, 2014 09:00 ET
Terrestrial Energy Announces Letter of Intent with Canadian Nuclear Laboratories


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 04, 2015 12:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Nov 28, 2009 9:38 am
Posts: 38
jaro wrote:
They're looking to partner with Chalk River Lab.

Nothing ever happens very quickly over there, so don't hold your breath.


They are contracting for "research and development work that is required to bring the company's Integral Molten Salt Reactor (IMSR) to the engineering blueprint stage, expected in late 2016." That's two years from now. Two years seems fairly fast relative to the pace of most nuclear tech development.

We can speculate the Chalk River work will not require fundamentally new discoveries, but instead will involve testing and verification of older discoveries and well-understood models. If that's true, it would help to shorten the time in the lab and make the lab's work path more predictable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 08, 2015 1:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Apr 19, 2008 1:06 am
Posts: 2230
Another thread has been started with the Forbes news of ORNL supporting the development of IMSR. I think that it should be copied here.
Terrestrial Energy's new reactor design - IMSR


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 12, 2015 2:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jan 29, 2014 4:05 am
Posts: 269
Location: Vitoria-ES-Brazil
Vince Hughes wrote:
I'm a big fan of Dr. LeBlanc, and am holding out on his IMSR as being a game-changer.

That said, I keep running into opinionated PhDs (imagine that) that aren't so optimistic.
Specifically, several of the are saying that the good doctor is underestimating the engineering challenge of actually whipping together an MSR as opposed to a paper reactor.

So if Terrestrial goes through with building the prototype, how big of an engineering challenge are we talking here?
I mean, a pot, a pump, and a pipe, right? Or am I missing something?

Is he perhaps at a major disadvantage from not carrying out this experiment in the middle of a national lab, like the MSRE?
Who's actually going to welding pipes, purifying the salts, and laying the concrete here?


If Terrestrial's IMSR doesn't pan out, probably nobody else will, since this is the simplest, more down to earth MSR design proposed. Dr LeBlanc stated design goal was to simplify everything to the maximum extent possible both to reduce costs and regulatory barriers.

Of course there are potential execution issues and funding that could make them fail where others might succeed.

_________________
Looking for companies working to change the world.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 21, 2015 8:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Jul 14, 2008 3:12 pm
Posts: 5053
Vince Hughes wrote:
I'm a big fan of Dr. LeBlanc, and am holding out on his IMSR as being a game-changer.

That said, I keep running into opinionated PhDs (imagine that) that aren't so optimistic.
Specifically, several of the are saying that the good doctor is underestimating the engineering challenge of actually whipping together an MSR as opposed to a paper reactor.


I can understand this opinion. Partly it is because Dr. Leblanc has only shown the tip of the iceberg. He's keeping a lot of cards close to heart. Very worried about IP details getting out so the images and info made public is oversimplified.

But partly this is also how engineering works. You don't go and bother yourself with every nut, washer, blind flange, and expansion vessel in the conceptual design stage. You identify critical path trajectory and design accordingly. Then you go into detailed design, it is an iterative process, stuff gets added on.

Nobody is claiming it is easy. Hey, if it were easy, anyone could do it, and we'd be out of a job. What fun would that be?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 24, 2015 12:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Jul 14, 2011 9:22 pm
Posts: 31
Location: Forest Park, GA
Since we now know Terrestrial has partnered with ORNL, does this exclude the previous negotiation with Chalk River, or are they working with both labs?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 24, 2015 1:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jul 14, 2008 3:12 pm
Posts: 5053
Vince Hughes wrote:
Since we now know Terrestrial has partnered with ORNL, does this exclude the previous negotiation with Chalk River, or are they working with both labs?


Both. ORNL is for independent review and expertise.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 27, 2015 12:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Apr 19, 2008 1:06 am
Posts: 2230
Terrestrial has taken a short cut to a viable MSR. It is a uranium burner with low fissile consumption. The fissile requirement is low compared to a LWR. Once the MSR is established, optimistically in a decade, someone can have fast MSR for used fuel and DU burning.
The Indian AHWR design is also short of a breeder. For a thorium breeder, heavy water coolant and a core and blanket configuration a la the Shippingport experiment may be required.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

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:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group