DOCSLIB.ORG

Nonproliferation Role of 231Pa and 232U from a Fusion Breeder for the Thorium Molten Salt Reactor

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nonproliferation Role of 231Pa and 232U from a Fusion Breeder for the Thorium Molten Salt Reactor Nonproliferation role of 231Pa and 232U from a fusion breeder for the thorium molten salt reactor Ralph Moir! ! Vallecitos Molten Salt Research! 607 E. Vallecitos Rd., Livermore,! CA 94550 USA! [email protected]! www.ralphmoir.com/! ! Thorium Energy Alliance 2014 Conference (TEAC6) May 29, 2014, Chicago! ! ! Incentives for molten salt reactors are so great that one" asks why the reactor has not already been developed? 5/13/14 Abstract" !Initial and makeup 233U fuel for a thorium molten salt reactor can be produced in a fusion breeder with 2.4% 232U that will make this fuel “self-protected” by its strong gamma radiation according to IAEA standards. 232U significantly contributes towards nonproliferation of nuclear weapons use. Fusion technology even early in its development towards a commercial power plant nevertheless can produce 233U by neutron capture in 232Th and simultaneously produce both 231Pa and 232U in a neutron reaction having a 6 MeV threshold making fusion’s 14 MeV neutrons uniquely well suited for this purpose. The 231Pa can make 232U by neutron capture in the fusion breeder in large enough quantity to make the simultaneously produced 233U self protected with 2.4% 232U. Excess 231Pa can be extracted and exported to fission reactors where by neutron capture 232U is made in situ for nonproliferation purposes. When the fission reactor’s conversion ratio of fertile to fissile approaches unity (breeding or isobreeding) its fissile 233U is produced internally with too little 232U nonproliferant made to satisfy the 2.4% rule because fission’s neutrons are below the 6 MeV threshold. In this case, as the conversion ratio approaches unity, 231Pa is supplied so that the production of 232U by neutron capture in 231Pa keeps 232U/233U=2.4%. ! ! In the long term, producing 233U by fusion breeding avoids the need for isotope enrichment facilities to be greatly expanded thus contributing to nonproliferation. In the short term, before fusion bred 231Pa, 232U and 233U become available, the required fissile material can come from enriched 235U with enough 238U to be denatured for nonproliferation or can come from plutonium from spent fuel.! Key words: molten salt reactor, thorium, fusion breeder, 231Pa, 232U, 233U nonproliferation! 5/13/14 2 Nonproliferation strategy #1 § The Denatured Molten Salt Reactor (DMSR) dilutes 233U and 235U with enough 238U to be below weapons grade.! § 233U/U<13%! § 235U/U<20%! § Also safeguards and emphasize openness and transparency! Recommendation to MSR developers:! Initially go for DMSR! 5/13/14 3 With denaturing 238U builds up and Th drops off. With 233U from fusion 232Th would not drop off and 238U would not build up. 120,000! ! 232 100,000! Th! Th inventory! 80,000! 235U 20%! 233U! U238inventory! DMSR! 60,000! Inventory, kg Inventory, U238 inventory! makeup! Fusion makeup! 40,000! Th inventory! 20,000! 238U! 0! 0! 5! 10! 15! 20! 25! 30! t, years! DMSR=ORNL/TM-7207! 4 5/13/14 With denaturing 233U and 235U reach steady values in about 3 y. DMSR-235U startup & makeup! 4,000! ! U235inventory! U233inventory! 3,000! Pu239inventory! 233 2,000! U! 1,000! 235 Fissile inventory, kg inventory, Fissile U! 239Pu! 0! 0! 5! 10! 15! 20! 25! 30! Time, y! 5/13/14 5 Nonproliferation strategy #2 2nd Gen MSR § Spike the fissile 233U with fusion produced 2.4% 232U, a strong gamma and heat generator making the material undesirable for weapons.! § Employ safeguards and emphasize openness and transparency! Recommendation to MSR developers: Generate a market for 233U, 232U and 231Pa! Recommendation to fusion developers: Design a fusion breeder for 233U, 232U and 231Pa! 5/13/14 6 The reaction paths that lead to 232U with % for each route for the (Li/MS, Be/MS) blankets •(0.3%, 0.1%)! •(0.03%, 0.01%)! •(16%, •(84%,98%)! 2%)! 233U is produced in the following reaction ! 232 233 233 " 233 " 5/13/14 n+ Th! Th! Pa + e ! U + e 7 231Pa and 232U are produced in the following reactions 232 233 233 •1 ! n+ Th! Th! Pa + e" n+ 233Pa ! 2n + 232Pa!232U + e" Fast n 232Th 233Th 233Pa e" 233U e" •2 ! + ! ! + ! + n+ 233U ! 2n+ 232U Fast 232 231 231 " •3 ! n+ Th ! 2n+ Th! Pa + e Fast n+ 231Pa!232Pa!232U + e" 5/13/14 8 Fusion is unique for producing 231Pa & 232U" Threshold cross-sections ! !Fusion ! for producing 232U ! 100% neutrons > 6 MeV)! N(E) fission spectra! ! ! N(E) fusion spectra/5! 0.4! 2.5! Th232 n,2n! ! !Fission ! Pa233 n,2n! 2.0! 0.3! U233 n,2n! 1.5! 3% neutrons > 6 MeV).! 0.2! 1.0! 0.1! 0.5! (n,2n) cross section, barns (n,2n) cross section, 0! 0.0! Fission and fusion neutron spectra Fission and fusion 0! 5! 10! 15! 20! Neutron energy, MeV! 5/13/14 9 231Pa and 232U are produced in a fusion blanket of Li followed by a Li Th molten thorium molten salt. salt kg PR = 4.318 F ! Pfusion (MW ) MWfusion ! y 231 § Fn,2n = 0.0246 Pa 32,800 y half-life 233 233 § Fn, g = 0.515 Pa 27.0 d half-life, decays to U 5/13/14 10 Revenues from 231Pa and 232U at assumed value per gram 231 kg Pa $82, 000 231 PR = 0.1062 Pfusion (MW ) " Pnuclear (MW ) for $1000 / g of Pa MWfusion ! y MWnuclear ! y 233 kg Pa $130, 000 233 = 2.224 Pfusion (MW ) " Pfusion (MW ) for $60 / g of U MWfusion ! y MWfusion ! y 233 kg Pa $103, 000 233 = 1.72 Pnuclear (MW ) " Pnuclear (MW ) for $60 / g of U MWnuclear ! y MWnuclear ! y 1 GWe; Pnuclear/Pfusion=1.3! 5/13/14 11 Revenues from electricity and isotopes 0.48! Q! 4.8! 48! ! 0.2! 0.2! 50 $/MWeh! ! ! Breeding! revenues! 0.1! DC=0,BDC=0.5! 0.1! ! Electrical! DC=BDC=0.5! 0.1 $/Wnuc y! revenues! ! 0! Breeding revenues! 0! $/Wnuclear-year M=2.1! no DC! Annual revenues/nuclear power revenues/nuclear Annual -0.1! -0.1! 1! 10! 100! MQ! Q=fusion power/input power= Gain! 5/13/14 12 Cost for isotopes depends on electricity sales/purchases (Q) 1000! ! 50 $/MWeh! etadc=0.0 100! Pa sales 231 1.25 $/Wnuclear! 10! 1.5 $/Wnuclear! U, $/g no 2.0 $/Wnuclear! 233 1! 0.1! 1! 10! 100! Q! Q=fusion power/input power= Gain! 5/13/14 13 The value of 233U can be corrected for the 231Pa sales. 150! 233U=150 $/g without 231Pa sales ! 100! U, $/g U, 233 100 $/g 50! Value of Value 50 $/g 0! 0! 1000! 2000! 3000! Value of 231Pa, $/g! 5/13/14 14 Supply 233U + 2.4% 232U to MSR for startup and makeup fissile For conversion ratio (CR)>0.75! 232U/233U falls below 2.4%! 0.1! 0.08! ! U 0.06! 233 U/ 0.04! 232 IAEA "self protected"! 0.02! by 2.6 MeV gamma rays! 0! 0! 0.2! 0.4! 0.6! 0.8! 1! Conversion ratio, CR! 5/13/14 15 For CR>0.75 supply 231Pa to MSR as well as 233U. Then 232U/233U # 2.4% for any CR.! 0.1! 7! 6! 0.08! 5! 231Pa ! 0.06! 4! 232U/233U! kg/y! 0.04! 3! 232U/233U! 2! 0.02! 231Pa/y! 1! 0! 0! 0! 0.5! 1! Conversion ratio, CR! 1 GWe! 5/13/14 16 For startup on 239Pu (or 235U), 239Pu is replaced~2 y with 233U without 232U 1500! 233U! inventory, inventory, 1000! 233U, CR=0.75! ! Pu 0.9! kg 239 1! 500! 239Pu! Pu239! U and U and 0! 233 0! 1! 2! 3! Time, y! Assume 1500 kg/1 GWe! 5/13/14 17 For startup on 239Pu or 235U an initial supply of 232U and 231Pa is needed. 232U/233U builds up to 2.4% 15 years starting with 231Pa=25.5 kg.! 0.04! 232 40! ! U! 232U, kg! 0.03! 232U/233U! 30! 0.02! 20! CR=0.75! 232U/233U 0.9! 0.01! 1! 10! self-protection! U232, CR=0.8! 0! 0! 0! 5! 10! 15! 20! Time, y! 35 kg 232U initially would keep 232U/233U $ 2.4%! Otherwise we have a problem.! 5/13/14 18 6840 kg/y 233U is extracted by fluorination and 150 kg/y 231Pa by reductive extraction 3000 MW fusion! 5/13/14 19 Conclusions Nonproliferation strategy #1 First generation MSR should use denatured uranium (235U/U<0.2)! Also safeguards and emphasize openness and transparency! ! 5/13/14 20 Nonproliferation strategy #2 2nd gen MSR when fusion is available § Spike the fissile 233U with fusion produced 2.4% 232U, a strong gamma and heat generator making the material undesirable for weapons.! § Employ safeguards and emphasize openness and transparency! Recommendation to MSR developers: Generate a market for 233U, 232U and 231Pa! Recommendation to fusion developers: design a fusion breeder for 233U, 232U and 231Pa! See my website for details 5/13/14 ! 21 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • How Nuclear and Thorium Will Be Key in Green Steel & Decarbonizing Our Industrial Partners
    Thorium Energy Alliance News Letter 5.20.2021 How Nuclear and Thorium will be Key in Green Steel & Decarbonizing our Industrial Partners Steel is often a commodity we take for granted in our everyday lives, but it is critical to our modern life and is all around us in one fashion or another. Our cars are one obvious example, but think of all the reinforcing steel hidden in concrete roads and buildings, the towers and transformers that make up our electrical grid, to the stainless-steel appliances and cookware in our kitchens. We wouldn't be here without steel. The world average per capita use of steel is 229 kg (505 lbs) and as developing nations such as China and India modernize their way of life, increased steel production will have to meet these needs. Forming steel from iron ore has only seen modest gains in efficiency since the mid 1800s and even today the average ton of steel creates 1.9 tons of CO2. As steel production ramps up in the decades ahead, the industry will emit more and more CO2 emissions. Just south of Chicago on the southern tip of Lake Michigan sits the Gary Steel Works that has been in operation since 1908. Image Public Domain National Archives at College Park, via Wikimedia Commons How can Nuclear and Thorium provide a pathway forward for decarbonizing the iron and steel industry? The solution lies in the elegant chemical reduction of iron ore via pure hydrogen instead of the traditionally used fossil fuels. Named Hydrogen Direct Reduction of Iron (HDRI), the process uses hydrogen to directly reduce the iron oxide ores (Hematite and Magnetite) to pure metallic iron, which in turn is used to make steel.
    [Show full text]
  • Thorium Reactors
    Thorium reactors Asgard’s fire Thorium, an element named after the Norse god of thunder, may soon contribute to the world’s electricity supply Apr 12th 2014 | From the print edition WELL begun; half done. That proverb—or, rather, its obverse—encapsulates the problems which have dogged civil nuclear power since its inception. Atomic energy is seen by many, and with reason, as the misbegotten stepchild of the world’s atom-bomb programs: ill begun and badly done. But a clean slate is a wonderful thing. And that might soon be provided by two of the world’s rising industrial powers, India and China, whose demand for energy is leading them to look at the idea of building reactors that run on thorium. Existing reactors use uranium or plutonium—the stuff of bombs. Uranium reactors need the same fuel-enrichment technology that bomb-makers employ, and can thus give cover for clandestine weapons programmes. Plutonium is made from unenriched uranium in reactors whose purpose can easily be switched to bomb-making. Thorium, though, is hard to turn into a bomb; not impossible, but sufficiently uninviting a prospect that America axed thorium research in the 1970s. It is also three or four times as abundant as uranium. In a world where nuclear energy was a primary goal of research, rather than a military spin-off, it would certainly look worthy of investigation. And it is, indeed, being investigated. India has abundant thorium reserves, and the country’s nuclear-power program, which is intended, eventually, to supply a quarter of the country’s electricity (up from 3% at the moment), plans to use these for fuel.
    [Show full text]
  • “Rapid Computational Path for Commercialization of Sustainable
    Rapid Computational Path for Sustainable and Renewable Nuclear Energy using Metallic Thorium Fuels Presented at the Second Thorium Energy Conference @ Google Inc 3-30-10 9:30 a.m. 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway Mountain View CA 650 253 0000 Thorenco is pleased to announce results of its studies. I am Rusty Holden Thorenco’s manager. Encouraging results have been obtained from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Our research employs thorium to shift the nuclear energy paradigm to a new one that is sustainable and renewable. When thorium-232 is used in nuclear fuels instead of uranium-238, plutonium and transuranic issues are avoided. When metallic fuels are used, fission products can be easily removed from used fuel. The renewable and sustainable paradigm shift moves thorium into the mainstream of nuclear science. Without thorium, the paradigm shift is impossible. With thorium, much cleaner nuclear energy is deliverable. It is sustainable because used thorium fuel is used over and over again after it is stripped of fission products. It lacks the transuranics that uranium-238 generates. The cycle is renewable because fissile uranium-233 is produced and merchantable heat is produced both commercially meaningful scalable quantities. Our research has uncovered pathways for the next generation of nuclear reactors. Our computations show that metallic thorium fuels greatly reduce the production of undesirable plutonium isotopes and the other unwanted long-lived transuranic isotopes during reactor operations. We also have insight that the rate of neutron multiplication in metallic fuel can be controlled by passive features to prevent overheating calamities. We anticipate that used metallic thorium fuel rods will be easily recycled using existing zone refining techniques.
    [Show full text]
  • Thorium : Energy Cheaper Than Coal
    Thorium : Energy Cheaper than Coal Thorium : Energy Cheaper than Coal ( 2012) page 1 of 430 Robert Hargraves Thorium : Energy Cheaper than Coal Thorium : Energy Cheaper than Coal ( 2012) page 2 of 430 Robert Hargraves Thorium : Energy Cheaper than Coal THORIUM: Energy Cheaper than Coal Robert Hargraves Copyright 2012 by Robert Hargraves Thorium : Energy Cheaper than Coal ( 2012) page 3 of 430 Robert Hargraves Thorium : Energy Cheaper than Coal Robert Hargraves has written articles and made presentations about the liquid fluoride thorium reactor and energy cheaper than coal - the only realistic way to dissuade nations from burning fossil fuels. His presentation "Aim High" about the technology and social benefits of the liquid fluoride thorium reactor has been presented to audiences at Dartmouth ILEAD, Thayer School of Engineering, Brown University, Columbia Earth Institute, Williams College, Royal Institution, the Thorium Energy Alliance, the International Thorium Energy Association, Google, the American Nuclear Society, and the Presidents Blue Ribbon Commission of America's Nuclear Future. With coauthor Ralph Moir he has written articles for the American Physical Society Forum on Physics and Society: Liquid Fuel Nuclear Reactors (Jan 2011) and American Scientist: Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors (July 2010). Robert Hargraves is a study leader for energy policy at Dartmouth ILEAD. He was chief information officer at Boston Scientific Corporation and previously a senior consultant with Arthur D. Little. He founded a computer software firm, DTSS Incorporated while at Dartmouth College where he was assistant professor of mathematics and associate director of the computation center. Robert Hargraves graduated from Brown University (PhD Physics 1967) and Dartmouth College (AB Mathematics and Physics 1961).
    [Show full text]
  • Thorium Energy Alliance
    Thorium http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf62.html Thorium (July 2008) Thorium is much more abundant in nature than uranium. Thorium can also be used as a nuclear fuel through breeding to uranium-233 (U-233). When this thorium fuel cycle is used, much less plutonium and other transuranic elements are produced, compared with uranium fuel cycles. Several reactor concepts based on thorium fuel cycles are under consideration. Thorium is a naturally-occurring, slightly radioactive metal discovered in 1828 by the Swedish chemist Jons Jakob Berzelius, who named it after Thor, the Norse god of thunder. It is found in small amounts in most rocks and soils, where it is about three times more abundant than uranium. Soil commonly contains an average of around 6 parts per million (ppm) of thorium. Thorium occurs in several minerals, the most common source being the rare earth-thorium-phosphate mineral, monazite, which contains up to about 12% thorium oxide, but average 6-7%. Monazite is found in igneous and other rocks but the richest concentrations are in placer deposits, concentrated by wave and current action with other heavy minerals. World monazite resources are estimated to be about 12 million tonnes, two thirds of which are in heavy mineral sands deposits on the south and east coasts of India. There are substantial deposits in several other countries (see table). Thorite is another common mineral. A large vein deposit of thorium and rare earths is in Idaho. Thorium-232 decays very slowly (its half-life is about three times the age of the earth) but other thorium isotopes occur in its and in uranium's decay chains.
    [Show full text]
  • Thorium Advances in 2020
    Thorium Energy Alliance News Letter 12.30.2020 Thorium Advances in 2020 2020 has posed many unprecedented challenges to everyone's life and we hope this message finds you healthy and well as we say goodbye to 2020 and look forward to the new Year. The Thorium Energy Alliance was able to use this time to make major updates to our website, we've added a new Thorium Encyclopedia Section and have kept busy with various projects. We've made huge strides developing the ANS Standards for Molten Salt Reactor Safety Design Criteria and Functional Performance Requirements. We've continued our legislative efforts and initiated some R&D into Thorium and related Rare Earth Minerals (more below). We've also initiated projects to expand Thorium-based government funding opportunities through various programs. We are looking forward to even more progress in the new year as we plan out our goals and milestones for 2021 and are grateful to all the support and encouragement our membership has shown during this past year. Unfortunately, 2020 didn't allow us to host our annual TEA Conference this year but we are looking ahead to next year when we can meet in person at TEAC2021. Most importantly, we are excited to continue advancing Thorium with you in 2021 and beyond. Internship Available: One of our stated goals for 2021 is to increase our Social Media presence and we are looking for someone who is seeking an internship type role to assist us getting that off the ground. We will also be looking for similar help for a position in grant writing.
    [Show full text]
  • Petition of George Berka to Revise The
    Page 1 of 2 PRM-50-117 20 84 FR 36036 As of: 9/23/19 3:30 PM Received: September 22, 2019 Status: Pending_Post PUBLIC SUBMISSION Tracking No. 1k3-9cc2-44b0 Comments Due: October 09, 2019 Submission Type: Web Docket: NRC-2019-0063 Criteria to Return Retired Nuclear Power Reactors to Operations Comment On: NRC-2019-0063-0003 Criteria to Return Retired Nuclear Power Reactors to Operations Document: NRC-2019-0063-DRAFT-0020 Comment on FR Doc # 2019-15934 Submitter Information Name: Ray Sundby Address: 6100 ROCKROSE DR NEWARK, CA, 94560 Email: [email protected] General Comment The procedure and criteria required to return retired nuclear power reactors to operations should be as streamlined as possible. Life on our planet as we know it is dying from fossil fuel pollution and the related global warming and ocean acidification. We need as much clean CO2 free energy generation as we can get and we need it as soon as we can get it. For supporting documentation see George Erickson's book Unintended Consequences. I fully agree with his comment and attachments related to this proposed rule. I have attached a pdf copy of his book. A link to a website where it can be downloaded for free is http://unintended- consequences.org/. https://www.fdms.gov/fdms/getcontent?objectId=0900006483faaaf9&format=xml&showorig=false 09/23/2019 Page 2 of 2 Attachments 20190822 Unintended Consequences https://www.fdms.gov/fdms/getcontent?objectId=0900006483faaaf9&format=xml&showorig=false 09/23/2019 To The Reader Because of the increasing frequency and severity of the damage caused by Climate Change, I have decided to make this 2019 update of Unintended Consequences:…, my fifth pro-science book, available FREE to the public – even though the 2017 version sold on Amazon for about $23.00.
    [Show full text]
  • Molten Salt Reactors Resource Requirements and Proliferation-Risk Attributes of Single-Fluid and Two-Fluid Designs
    Molten Salt Reactors Resource Requirements and Proliferation-Risk Attributes of Single-Fluid and Two-Fluid Designs Edward B. McClamrock and Alexander Glaser Princeton University ABSTRACT. Molten salt reactors (MSRs) are often advocated as a radi- cal but worthwhile alternative to traditional reactor concepts based on solid fuels. This article builds upon the existing research into MSRs, most of it carried out at Oak Ridge National Laboratory until government-sponsored research was canceled in the 1970s, to model and simulate the operation of various types of MSRs using the MCNP5 Monte Carlo neutron trans- port code. Types of molten salt reactors considered include thorium-fueled single-fluid and two-fluid breeder reactors with a focus on those designs using denatured fuels. The paper analyzes specifically the resource utiliza- tion and basic proliferation-risk attributes compared to those of standard light-water reactors.1 Background Molten salt reactors (MSRs), in which fissile and fertile nuclear materials are dissolved in a liquid carrier salt, were originally proposed in the late 1940s. Oak Ridge National Laboratory under Alvin Weinberg later spearheaded the research and development effort and first conceived MSRs as a compact, relatively light-weight reactor design to power airplanes.2 Following the termination of the aircraft-propulsion project in 1961, Oak Ridge continued its research into molten salt reactors for electricity production, which led to the Molten Salt Reactor Experiment (MSRE, 8 MWt, 1965{1969) and the concept for a prototype Molten Salt Breeder Reactor (MSBR, 1000 MWe, never built), which would have been based on the thorium fuel cycle. Research on the technology was terminated in 1976 due to a lack of government funding.
    [Show full text]
  • Molten Salt Reactors History
    Molten Salt Reactors By Thomas J. Dolan The accidents at Three Mile Island (TMI), Chernobyl, and Fukushima Daiichi were caused by evaporation of coolant, steam explosion, and hydrogen generation. They would not have occurred in a molten salt reactor (MSR), which can operate at low pressure without generating steam or hydrogen. MSRs with solid fuels, such as ceramic pebbles developed for HTGRs, could operate safely at high temperature and low pressure. Liquid fueled MSRs could process the fuel online to adjust reactivity and remove some fission products, reducing core radioactivity, avoiding solid fuel clad damage, and extending core life. Either the U-239Pu fuel cycle or the Th-233U fuel cycle could breed additional fissile fuel. MSRs could burn actinides from used light water reactor (LWR) fuel, reducing the need for geological high-level waste disposal. We will discuss MSR history, solid and liquid fuel reactors, tritium, salt processing systems, nonproliferation, reactor design projects, international cooperation, and development issues. 1 History Alvin M. Weinberg, Director of Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), led the development of liquid fuel MSRs. ORNL built the Aircraft Reactor Experiment (ARE) that used liquid fuel of NaF-ZrF4-UF4 (53-41-6 in mol%), flowing through fuel tubes, with BeO moderator, Inconel structure, and liquid Na coolant. It operated successfully at 860 °C, 2.5 MWth, for 100 hours in 1954. ORNL operated the 8 MWth Molten Salt Reactor Experiment (MSRE) burning liquid 7LiF- BeF2-ZrF4- (65-29-5-1 mol%) fuel at 650 °C from 1965-1969. The molten salt flowed vertically upwards through graphite moderator tubes, Figure 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Project Number: IQP-BJS-TP11 ADOPTION of THORIUM POWER
    Project Number: IQP-BJS-TP11 ADOPTION OF THORIUM POWER An Interactive Qualifying Project Report Submitted to the Faculty Of the WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Science By Cara L. DiIorio David J. Knight Matthew P. Mancuso Date: March 2, 2012 Approved: Professor Brian J. Savilonis, Major Advisor Professor David I. Spanagel, Co-Advisor 1 Table of Contents Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... 4 Glossary of Terms.......................................................................................................................................... 5 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 7 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................. 8 The History of Commercial Nuclear Power ................................................................................................... 9 Development of Uranium Reactors: A General Overview ...................................................................... 17 Research and Development of Thorium Nuclear Power ...........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Elysium Molten Chloride Salt Fast Reactor (Mcsfr)
    ELYSIUM MOLTEN CHLORIDE SALT FAST REACTOR (MCSFR) Ed Pheil Chief Technology Officer Founder March 2017 1 How to Achieve Disruptive Technological Change Step 1: Believe Disruption is Possible 2 ELYSIUM INDUSTRIES Background • 32 years at Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory • MARF Prototype Operations/Trained students • Reactor Design/Support for 9 Ship Classes • Los Angeles, Trident, CGN, CVN, Seawolf, Virginia, Columbia, NR-1, Astute, Other • Start up testing for 15 reactors • Los Angeles, Trident, NR-1, Virginia • Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter • All coolants and other cooling methods investigated • Elysium Team has over 300 years of reactor design experience covering all engineering disciplines 3 ELYSIUM INDUSTRIES Our Technology Elysium Molten Salt Reactor Concept • Rated electric output 1000 MWe (~40% efficiency) • Chloride fuel salt • Fast spectrum neutron flux • Fuel flexibility with DU, LEU, SNF, RGPu, WGPu, Th, Unat • Core outlet temperature of > 600 ºC • Core inlet temperature of ~ 500 ºC • Low reactor operating pressure • Structural components made from code qualified materials • Superheated Steam Rankine power cycle We chose a reactor design that is both compelling but can also be developed in a shorter period of time ELYSIUM INDUSTRIES 4 Our Technology Elysium Molten Salt Reactor – Flexible Power • Max. Power • 1000 MWe, 8 Loops, 8 Heat Exchangers, 8 Pumps • Full Flow Pumps • Power System: 1 large turbine or 8 smaller turbines • 250 Mwe, 2 Loops, 2 Heat Exchangers, 2 Pumps • Full Flow Pumps • Power System: 1 or 2 turbines • 125 Mwe,
    [Show full text]
  • Thorium Molten-Salt Nuclear Energy Synergetic System: THORIMS-NES
    Thorium Energy Alliance Conference March 29-30, 2010, Mountain View, CA, USA: -What-What isis “Thorium“Thorium Molten-Molten-SaltSalt NuclearNuclear EnergyEnergy SynergeticSynergetic System:System: THORIMS-NESTHORIMS-NES ”” ?? (Establishing(Establishing SIMPLEST SIMPLEST Breeding Breeding Nuclear-Fuel Nuclear-Fuel Cycle) Cycle) Dr. Kazuo FURUKAWA President of the International Thorium Molten-Salt Forum e-mail:[email protected] 1 Agenda International Thorium Molten-Salt Forum A) Basic Principle of Fission Energy Industry Technologies B) Selection of specific Fuel-Cycle System C) Path to realize the Th–U Breeding Fuel-Cycle D) Development strategy for realizing the “Simplest” Th-U Breeding Fuel-Cycle Conclusions: Ref) "A road map for the realization of global-scale thorium breeding fuel cycle by single molten-fluoride flow", K. Furukawa, et al, Energy Conversion and Management 49 (2008) 2 International Thorium Molten-Salt Forum "International Thorium Molten-Salt Forum" is a Non-Profit-Organization, which was registered to the local government of Japan in October, 2008. The members are researchers and engineers besides citizens, who are interested in the Molten Salt Reactor and related thorium cycles. At this moment, 20 domestic members and 10 foreign members from USA, France, Russia, Ukraine, Czech and so on. There are other 50 domestic people who are supporting occasionally. We will proceed research and design besides education, in order to promote Molten Salt Reactor and related thorium cycles. Dr. Kazuo Furukawa (President of the Forum) 3 Activity of our Forum 1) So far, we held 3 seminars in 2009, inviting the above people. 2) Also, we provided lectures to the public/university.
    [Show full text]