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

So why did not the DOE choose an American thorium company. The canadian company is already getting funding from the canadian government. there are already several american thorium start ups?
1 posted on 01/31/2015 1:05:27 AM PST by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: ckilmer

Keystone related?


2 posted on 01/31/2015 1:08:17 AM PST by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ckilmer

Can you explain why there is no reference to “thorium” in the article? The fuel is said to contain uranium. However, the words “molten salt” are used, which is customarily used in a thorium reactor. Is this a different process?


6 posted on 01/31/2015 1:45:53 AM PST by Praxeologue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ckilmer
I answered my own question by reading the comments to the Forbes article. Here's one explanation:

No it was not powered by Th. It was a Uranium fueled reactor designed to prove the concept of liquid fuels. It worked beautifully and ORNL director Albert Weinberg did it because he believed that thorium could be used instead of uranium, with Th being better at breeding replacement fuel than uranium. Unfortunately the solid uranium fuel “lobby” wanted nothing to do with it as all their investments were geared to the idea of the early fast reactors that could breed plutonium for WMD and produce energy the MSR was killed off. For political, not technological reasons.

I don’t believe any MSR, be it uranium-fueled or the thorium-fueled LFTR variety that FliBe is working on (and the Chinese) will actually be developed beyond the first small R&D reactors in the United States. It’s a totally and absolutely hostile environment from a regulatory point of view. It doesn’t mean there won’t be major component manufacturing there, but FOK won’t be here, it’ll be elsewhere.

Other commenters had the same perspective.

What a pity. We are giving our energy future to the Chinese. We've already given them the Oak Ridges-developed technology as a starting point.

8 posted on 01/31/2015 2:22:55 AM PST by Praxeologue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ckilmer
Improvements in fundamental safety and operational designs increase efficiencies and lifespan, dramatically reduce the amount of waste generated and the time that it’s radioactive, and reduce the possibility of core meltdowns to almost zero.

hahahahah. Uhm ... To the author - the core of a "molten" salt reactor is already melted down. If its not melted down, its not working.

Something not mentioned in the article is that a LFTR can take what we now consider to be nuclear waste and use it as fuel - beat guns into plowshares as it were.

18 posted on 01/31/2015 5:38:49 AM PST by frithguild (The warmth and goodness of Gaia is a nuclear reactor in the Earth's core that burns Thorium)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ckilmer

Oh yeah, this should work out well. The Soviets used molten salt technology in their submarine reactors decades ago. Massive problems and dead sailors on a regular basis according to intel at the time...


19 posted on 01/31/2015 6:14:56 AM PST by Afterguard (Liberals will let you do anything you want, as long as it's mandatory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ckilmer

Meanwhile, the Chinese expect to build some 200 or so pebble bed reactors. They don’t generate as much energy, but are very safe, and are built on top of their eventual waste disposal site.

Basically, the nuclear material is mixed with, then baked into ceramic balls. Each ball is put into what looks like a giant egg carton, so the balls are located at just the right interval.

They produce a given amount of heat for a given length of time, which then heats inert carbon dioxide gas to run turbines. The carbon dioxide gas in non-corrosive, and does not itself become radioactive.

When the balls are exhausted, the floor beneath them opens, and they are dropped into a deep rock shaft, their permanent resting place. Then concrete is poured on top of them, and the building above them is dismantled.

So the question becomes, why use a thorium molten salt reactor instead of a pebble bed reactor?


20 posted on 01/31/2015 7:03:53 AM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy ("Don't compare me to the almighty, compare me to the alternative." -Obama, 09-24-11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ckilmer
why did not the DOE choose an American thorium company

Hey! Canadians are Americans (so are Mexicans)

27 posted on 01/31/2015 2:06:52 PM PST by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate "Republicans Freed the Slaves Month")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ckilmer

The reactor should come online in less than ten.

...

Considering all the wonderful claims, one has to wonder why it’s going to take ten years?


46 posted on 02/01/2015 8:50:05 PM PST by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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