Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Aker's nuclear Accelerator Driven Thorium Reactor wins prestigious Energy Award
pennenergy.com ^ | November 18, 2010

Posted on 01/07/2011 9:47:41 PM PST by Straight Vermonter

Aker Solutions' Accelerator Driven Thorium Reactor™ (ADTR) has won the prestigious Energy Award at this year's IChemE (Institution of Chemical Engineers) Innovations and Excellence Awards. The Energy Award recognizes the best project or process to demonstrate innovation in renewable energy, alternative energy sources, efficient energy use or the development of energy production methods that reduce energy and water intensity.

More about the ADTR(TM) power station

The Accelerator Driven Thorium Reactor™ (ADTR) power station is the name given by Aker Solutions for the company's new design of a nuclear power station. Given world-wide expansion in nuclear power generation, driven by many countries to combat climate change and meet growth in energy demand, the ADTRTM provides the ideal solution to use thorium as an alternative fuel to uranium.

Aker Solutions has developed the concept design of a 600MWe ADTR™ power station with Nobel Prize winner Professor Carlo Rubbia of CERN. The design is an accelerator driven, thorium fuelled, lead cooled, power producing, fast reactor. Thorium is an abundant mineral deposit; there is 3 to 5 times more thorium in the world than uranium. One tonne of mined thorium produces as much energy as 200 tonnes of mined uranium, or 3,500,000 tonnes of mined coal. Thorium has non-proliferation benefits as it does not require the expensive enrichment process often associated with military use.

The ADTR™ power station can be configured to burn radioactive wastes from current uranium fuelled reactors, thus reducing the long term waste burden and environmental risks with waste storage. The ten year fuel cycle gives the ADTR™ significant economic benefits over current uranium fuelled nuclear reactors.

A key advantage of accelerator driven, sub-critical systems over conventional nuclear reactors, is that the accelerator is the main source of reactor control; turn off the accelerator and the reaction reduces virtually instantaneously. This system also enables simple load following control capability.

"This technology offers the potential to supply even small grids from compact 600MW reactors constructed safely underground," says Gary Mandel, executive vice president of Aker Solutions' Process and Construction business.

The ADTR™ power station is targeted at the global energy market, aligning itself with fourth generation nuclear reactor concepts that will come to fruition by 2030.


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: nuclear; nukes; thorium; thorium232
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-43 next last
The article is actually a press release by the company so bear that in mind. They are being purchased by a US engineering company so hopefully they can bring some of that technology here to the states.

Aker 'yes' to Jacobs Engineering Group bid

1 posted on 01/07/2011 9:47:43 PM PST by Straight Vermonter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: buckrodgers

ping


2 posted on 01/07/2011 9:48:43 PM PST by Straight Vermonter (Posting from deep behind the Maple Curtain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter

This is a big story. The combination of thorium reactors and supercapacitor vehicles could end the petroleum economy and OPEC.


3 posted on 01/07/2011 10:10:29 PM PST by wendy1946
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter

bflr


4 posted on 01/07/2011 10:12:50 PM PST by Captain Beyond (The Hammer of the gods! (Just a cool line from a Led Zep song))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter
I just had a visit by a PhD promoting a fusion approach. Currently (in My opinion) there are two methodologies that may work. one is the ITER project in France funded by the US, UK GM etc. it uses two isotopes and two accelerators, and a very large and complex containment structure.

The PhD who visited me (interested in my tunneling experience) method uses 16 isotopes, and 16 cheap medical accelerators hitting a detrium pellet coated with Lithium, and H3 gas to syphon off the energy and 4 - 5 smaller containment chambers.

Both methods claim they can generate fusion power by 2018. No radiation or waste. Question is? which method is best. Both have web sites ITER and fusionpowercorporation.

5 posted on 01/07/2011 10:21:15 PM PST by stubernx98 (cranky, but reasonable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter

If it were perfected tomorrow, the Eco-Nuts would find something about it to riot over!

It’s pretty clear that some form of nuclear energy is the way to go, may not be the same tech we use now.

The sooner the better!

I want my 100 Octane alcohol free gas back, and I want it CHEAP!


6 posted on 01/07/2011 10:30:02 PM PST by Loyal Sedition (Loyal Sedition, often described as "To the right of Attila The Hun"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Loyal Sedition

Apparently we chose uranium over this, just for the nuke weapons.

We can only hope


7 posted on 01/07/2011 10:34:47 PM PST by mewykwistmas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mewykwistmas

Thorium bombs are not possible?


8 posted on 01/07/2011 10:57:57 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (I am in America but not of America (per bible: am in the world but not of it))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: stubernx98

Fusion reactions do throw off radiation... can’t be avoided. This sounds like a scam.


9 posted on 01/07/2011 11:00:51 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (I am in America but not of America (per bible: am in the world but not of it))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Loyal Sedition

Eco-nuts would whine about the liquid lead.


10 posted on 01/07/2011 11:01:26 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (I am in America but not of America (per bible: am in the world but not of it))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
Thorium bombs are not possible?

No, Thorium bombs are not possible, but there is a weapon hidden in the Thorium reactor scheme.

When Thorium captures a neutron, it eventually converts to Uranium 233. Just like the more widely known U-235, this is a fissile material which can be made into nuclear weapons.

And, separating U-233 from Thorium is easy compared to separating U-235 from U-238.

11 posted on 01/07/2011 11:14:17 PM PST by CurlyDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck; stubernx98; neverdem

Fusion reactions do throw off radiation... can’t be avoided. This sounds like a scam.

The “radiation” from fusion reactions is in the form of the high energy neutrons coming off the fusing ions, and of the very low enrgy decay products of the dueterium production (or tritium) used as the fuel.

Since the neutrons must be captured to heat up the water that actually produces the steam that produces the useable energy out of the plant, the neutron “losses” (absorbed into steel and concrete and piping and heat exchangers) “stays” in those “permanent” plant equipment. It isn’t “released” to the environment, and - unlike the fission fuel by products and decay products - is not a high radioactive gas or soluble chemical.

Yes - It is mildly radioactive. But manageable.


12 posted on 01/07/2011 11:32:34 PM PST by Robert A Cook PE (I can only donate monthly, but socialists' ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter

Sounds like it’ll work. After all, Cobalt Thorium G has has a half-life of 93 years...


13 posted on 01/07/2011 11:44:07 PM PST by kittycatonline.com
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CurlyDave

Hmmm, but what sort of quantities do you get?

100 Lb. of Thorium yields ? U-233?
Over what time frame?

Would it be an efficient source for U-235?


14 posted on 01/08/2011 12:32:39 AM PST by Loyal Sedition (Loyal Sedition, often described as "To the right of Attila The Hun"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter

Maybe this is what happened to the fish and the birds?

Or, how about that Large Hadron Collider?


15 posted on 01/08/2011 2:01:51 AM PST by ratsreek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Loyal Sedition

My 2007 Mustang GT takes regular gas....but, yes, ALCOHOL FREEEEEEEEEEEEE!


16 posted on 01/08/2011 2:07:36 AM PST by Puckster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: wendy1946
You'll still need petroleum. (Lubricants, plastics, pahrmaceuticals, etc.). In many areas electrics will not replace internal combustion engines for a very long time, if ever.

Pardon me for being a skeptic, but I remember how 'nuclear power generated electricity was going to be so cheap to produce that it would be free'...

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for developing alternate forms of energy generation and transport. What I reasonably fear is the sort of political climate which discards that which works for that which does not, and then mandates the latter. In the end, the marketplace should decide.

17 posted on 01/08/2011 2:25:08 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter
In fact, the latest thorium reactor designs to generate 1,000 MW are amazingly small, thanks to getting rid of a lot of the exorbitantly expensive cooling systems that conventional light-water reactors require. And unlike uranium-based reactors, a modern thorium reactor cannot have a "meltdown" and generates a very tiny fraction of the nuclear waste conventional reactors do.

It's small wonder why both India and China are aggressively developing thorium-based reactors, especially since thorium is far more available than uranium naturally.

18 posted on 01/08/2011 2:50:46 AM PST by RayChuang88 (FairTax: America's economic cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stubernx98

What’s going on with Polywell fusion? I’ve been monitoring this website ( http://iecfusiontech.blogspot.com/ ) for a few years to keep up but it’s been dead since the middle of last summer.


19 posted on 01/08/2011 3:04:06 AM PST by 6ppc (It's torch and pitchfork time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RayChuang88
It's small wonder why both India and China are aggressively developing thorium-based reactors, especially since thorium is far more available than uranium naturally.

And thorium is an unwanted byproduct of Rare Earth Metals refining, and one of the reason we were prevented mining them here. Since China at present has a stranglehold monopoly on supplying these critical metals, they likewise would love a thorium-to-energy solution.

20 posted on 01/08/2011 4:53:24 AM PST by Gorzaloon ("Mother...My Couric itches.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-43 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson