Energy From Thorium Discussion Forum

It is currently Apr 23, 2018 3:55 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 100 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Oct 13, 2015 2:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Posts: 3533
Location: Alabama
TerraPower has been working on a molten chloride fast-spectrum reactor design. Details to come in a few days.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 13, 2015 6:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Apr 19, 2008 1:06 am
Posts: 2227
I hope it is one up on UK Moltex!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 13, 2015 7:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: May 18, 2011 9:19 pm
Posts: 66
+1

Looking around for links to John Gilleland presentation at UCB, noting how many times Dr. Greenspan told them "No, that will not work" when iterations of the traveling wave reactor concept were offered up by Terrapower team for review/comment.

So, optimistically, this inspires confidence (they know enough to go ask for credible expert options/review/comment)

On the outside looking in, there's no way to know how much focus continued (continues?) to be allocated to the traveling-wave idea (my uninformed best guess on this is it's an idea that gets more complicated and expensive the deeper you get into it) versus simpler and almost certainly more feasible/efficient molten fuel alternatives ..

But wouldn't it be fantastic to have serious, well funded efforts making strong swift progress toward workhorse thermal MSR designs AND fast MSRs ..

http://terrapower.com/pages/partners

https://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/people/ehud_greenspan


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 14, 2015 2:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Apr 19, 2008 1:06 am
Posts: 2227
TerraPower have tied up with China for building their sodium cooled reactor. However, the Chinese have MSR project of their own.
The Australians, on the other hand, are considering used fuel storage for storage fee.
http://atomicinsights.com/atomic-show-2 ... oundation/
I hope they can sell the ideas of reprocessing and burning the used fuel in fast MSR to the Australians!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 14, 2015 5:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Sep 02, 2009 10:24 am
Posts: 507
Kirk Sorensen wrote:
TerraPower has been working on a molten chloride fast-spectrum reactor design. Details to come in a few days.


Given that they have a fast reactor design already, would it not make more sense to work on a thermal design - unless they think a fast design is easier and cheaper than a thermal design.

I'm looking forward to seeing their concept.

jagdish wrote:
I hope it is one up on UK Moltex!


Moltex estimate a cost of $1,000/KW for the nuclear island and $1,000/KW for the steam island.

Are you hoping TerraPower can beat that?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 14, 2015 9:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Mar 08, 2015 4:34 pm
Posts: 12
Oh dang... I wonder what made them pick chlorides?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 14, 2015 1:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sep 01, 2009 1:01 pm
Posts: 51
Chlorides? Perhaps he continues to angle for DOE funding, utilizing funds put aside for PWR/BWR spent fuel disposal? As I recall, this was part of the reason for settling on the liquid sodium fast reactor (Traveling/Stationary Wave) design. Now, he is interviewed in the pages of Atlantic Magazine, promoting government funding/involvement in energy (incl.nuclear) innovation. A chloride MSR could conceivably be configured as a "waste burner", correct? http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... le/407881/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 15, 2015 2:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Posts: 3533
Location: Alabama
Jeff Latkowski is presenting the concept at ORNL right now.

No technical details on the reactor were disclosed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 15, 2015 4:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sep 22, 2013 2:27 pm
Posts: 262
I would not raise too many expectations....Most of the concepts stay very visionary

If I have a look on the MSFR concept made by Euratom which is perhaps the best of the concepts during the last 40 years the most of the funds where put on nuclear calculations, safety and theoretical evaluations of the reprocessing of the fuel. Things already known were put in a modern form or became more accurate. The engineering was given an extremly low priority.

From my point of view the engineering is the key to bring the MSFR and the MCFR ahaed. It is make a suitable design of the whole power plant starting with the hx to pumps, gaskets instrumentations, used fuel tanks, reprocessing equipment.

Further it is to start such tests as...
-Long term corrosion and radiation studies on molybdenum alloys for an MCFR.
-The plating out of noble fission products as a strong plating out in the primary circuit is a threat to these concepts (decay heat)
- How to get the remains of the salt out of the primary circuit for maintenance
- Which equipment can be used for the fuel treatment and reprocessing in view of the enormous decay heat.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 16, 2015 6:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 9:18 pm
Posts: 1950
Location: Montreal
Kirk Sorensen wrote:
Jeff Latkowski is presenting the concept at ORNL right now.

No technical details on the reactor were disclosed.

It's probably some two years ago now, that I posted about the possibility of modifying an SFR with vented fuel -- like TerraPower's TWR -- to use fuel tubes filled with molten salts instead of U/Pu/Zr metal rods or MOX ceramic pellets.
Back then TerraPower was offering positions for people to work on molten salts.

This version of TWR requires SiC fuel tubes for the salt, but all the rest of the reactor is still plain old stainless steel, including vessel with redan, pumps, heat exchangers, etc.

A big advantage is the vertical mixing in the fuel tubes -- where before the solid fuel left lots of bred Pu in the top & bottom part of the active core unused (TWR shuffles fuel radially, but can't do much about the top & bottom....).
It's a logical next step.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 17, 2015 11:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Sep 02, 2009 10:24 am
Posts: 507
jaro wrote:
It's probably some two years ago now, that I posted about the possibility of modifying an SFR with vented fuel -- like TerraPower's TWR -- to use fuel tubes filled with molten salts instead of U/Pu/Zr metal rods or MOX ceramic pellets.


Isn't that what Moltex are proposing?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 17, 2015 12:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 9:18 pm
Posts: 1950
Location: Montreal
alexterrell wrote:
jaro wrote:
It's probably some two years ago now, that I posted about the possibility of modifying an SFR with vented fuel -- like TerraPower's TWR -- to use fuel tubes filled with molten salts instead of U/Pu/Zr metal rods or MOX ceramic pellets.


Isn't that what Moltex are proposing?

Well, if Moltex changed from salt coolant to Sodium, then "yes".
Haven't heard of any such change though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 17, 2015 12:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sep 02, 2009 10:24 am
Posts: 507
jaro wrote:
alexterrell wrote:
jaro wrote:
It's probably some two years ago now, that I posted about the possibility of modifying an SFR with vented fuel -- like TerraPower's TWR -- to use fuel tubes filled with molten salts instead of U/Pu/Zr metal rods or MOX ceramic pellets.


Isn't that what Moltex are proposing?

Well, if Moltex changed from salt coolant to Sodium, then "yes".
Haven't heard of any such change though.


True enough - there might be a few advantages to a molten salt / sodium hybrid, but once you start with a molten salt fuel, it probably makes sense to stick with a molten salt coolant.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 18, 2015 12:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Apr 19, 2008 1:06 am
Posts: 2227
jaro wrote:
Kirk Sorensen wrote:
Jeff Latkowski is presenting the concept at ORNL right now.

No technical details on the reactor were disclosed.

It's probably some two years ago now, that I posted about the possibility of modifying an SFR with vented fuel -- like TerraPower's TWR -- to use fuel tubes filled with molten salts instead of U/Pu/Zr metal rods or MOX ceramic pellets.
Back then TerraPower was offering positions for people to work on molten salts.

This version of TWR requires SiC fuel tubes for the salt, but all the rest of the reactor is still plain old stainless steel, including vessel with redan, pumps, heat exchangers, etc.

A big advantage is the vertical mixing in the fuel tubes -- where before the solid fuel left lots of bred Pu in the top & bottom part of the active core unused (TWR shuffles fuel radially, but can't do much about the top & bottom....).
It's a logical next step.

It would be a good idea to replace a whole bundle of fuel with a tube filled with liquid fuel. You will require only a few hundred per reactor with cooling improved.
You could provide an absorbent plug of charcoal/graphite at the top to trap neutron-poison fission gases.
You could also use some low melting fuel like ThCl4-UCl4 or ThCl4-PuCl3.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 18, 2015 2:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Posts: 3533
Location: Alabama
I've been told that the TerraPower chloride reactor design has no core internals, so it's not at all like the Moltex design.

Moltex, by the way, was rather poorly received at the ORNL MSRE 50th meeting. No one could figure out, even if you could get fuel in tubes to work, why would you want to do it? And Ian Scott's talk, while passionate, was unconvincing. He spent the whole talk trying to make his case that salt-in-tubes could actually work without saying why you would want it to work.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 100 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  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:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group