Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post - New Global Energy documentary needs your support

SeeGeeWhy · 11-21-2011, 02:37 PM

Shawnski, it seems you're reading my posts as if I am an opponent to the LFTR, quite the opposite.

The fuel in the LFTR is not resitricted to ThF4, ThO2, or other forms of Thorium, that's the beauty of it! (and subesquently the reason it is able to use old nuclear wastes as you've stated in this thread already) One of the problems is that, while this element is abundant, and one of its naturally occuring forms is a waste stream of REE mining - the simple fact is that no one is set up to produce commercial quanitites of it for use in power generation. That takes investment, approval and a market to sell it to. People like Kirk are trying to create a market for this fuel by designing something that will utilize it, but as it stands right now, it is a chicken and egg scenario - this is where governments usually step in so that the process can get kick started... why its not happening in North America with something that has as tremendous potential as the LFTR is beyond me (as we've discussed, Russia, France and China are making R&D investments into this tech). Second, the carrier salt in the primary loop needs to have a specific isotope of Lithium so it doesn't absorb too much of the beta decay radiation (the aspect of the reaction that keeps the Thorium fissile). This is a problem specifically because the current means of enriching the lithium salt is based on a mercury leaching process that is the opposite of environmentall friendly. There are promising alternatives, but again... investment, ownership of IP, government approval (especially given that one of the by-products of the lithium enrichment process is a lithium isotope that is a controlled product because of its use in increasing payload of nuclear warheads, among other uses) all need to happen in order for this FLiBe salt to be produced in any meaningful commercial quantities... that's what I am getting at that the supply chain for the fuel and salt require as much work as the reactor itself.

EDIT: I should add that IThEMS folding is actually tragic but I do not think it is related to this technology being infesible... I simply found their company structure and revenue projections compelling... and that they would have been a natural partner for Flibe given that both firms are privately funded. The exciting part for me was the amount of credible talent that two independent firms were attracting for this technology, worlds apart. Part of me was also pleased to see that General Electric was not part of the mix as they can be monsters with their patents. This technology needs to see the light of day. Sadly due to the regulation related with things like this, the "gamer" scenario that you describe can happen - as a matter of fact it is very probable that the minds behind these designs have the technical challenges licked, but they are fighting the interia generated by an entire industry that is centred around the Uranium-Plutonium fuel cycle, all the miners, patents, manufacturers, engineering, weapons and military benefits... etc.. The policitcal will is not great enough at this point and that's why the average person needs to be made aware of the potential of the Thorium-Uranium fuel cycle (or as I like to call it - the way nuclear should have been) in order to create an entirely new and independent political and public will to push it into reality.

U-233 can also be produced through an enrichment process - the ORNL stockpiles were created as such and it would be foolish to simply eliminate them without proper utilization.

Sounds like you've done a lot of reasearch on your own on this... you might enjoy this paper:
http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publica...E_1450_web.pdf

Also, here is a great site summarizing the variety of nuclear reactor designs that are on the drawing board today... it would certainly be great if this sort of innovation was allowed to see the light of day, but its not really going anywhere meaningful. Personally, my money is on the LFTR.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf33.html

For something more to the point of the film and less about Thorium/Nuclear, here is an interesting article that discusses the relationship between growth in energy demand and its link to the "constant growth economy" - a paradigm that has been causing us trouble for years.
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/...-bunkty-to-me/

11-21-2011, 02:37 PM	#63
SeeGeeWhy #1 Goaltender Join Date: Mar 2006 Exp:	Shawnski, it seems you're reading my posts as if I am an opponent to the LFTR, quite the opposite. The fuel in the LFTR is not resitricted to ThF4, ThO2, or other forms of Thorium, that's the beauty of it! (and subesquently the reason it is able to use old nuclear wastes as you've stated in this thread already) One of the problems is that, while this element is abundant, and one of its naturally occuring forms is a waste stream of REE mining - the simple fact is that no one is set up to produce commercial quanitites of it for use in power generation. That takes investment, approval and a market to sell it to. People like Kirk are trying to create a market for this fuel by designing something that will utilize it, but as it stands right now, it is a chicken and egg scenario - this is where governments usually step in so that the process can get kick started... why its not happening in North America with something that has as tremendous potential as the LFTR is beyond me (as we've discussed, Russia, France and China are making R&D investments into this tech). Second, the carrier salt in the primary loop needs to have a specific isotope of Lithium so it doesn't absorb too much of the beta decay radiation (the aspect of the reaction that keeps the Thorium fissile). This is a problem specifically because the current means of enriching the lithium salt is based on a mercury leaching process that is the opposite of environmentall friendly. There are promising alternatives, but again... investment, ownership of IP, government approval (especially given that one of the by-products of the lithium enrichment process is a lithium isotope that is a controlled product because of its use in increasing payload of nuclear warheads, among other uses) all need to happen in order for this FLiBe salt to be produced in any meaningful commercial quantities... that's what I am getting at that the supply chain for the fuel and salt require as much work as the reactor itself. EDIT: I should add that IThEMS folding is actually tragic but I do not think it is related to this technology being infesible... I simply found their company structure and revenue projections compelling... and that they would have been a natural partner for Flibe given that both firms are privately funded. The exciting part for me was the amount of credible talent that two independent firms were attracting for this technology, worlds apart. Part of me was also pleased to see that General Electric was not part of the mix as they can be monsters with their patents. This technology needs to see the light of day. Sadly due to the regulation related with things like this, the "gamer" scenario that you describe can happen - as a matter of fact it is very probable that the minds behind these designs have the technical challenges licked, but they are fighting the interia generated by an entire industry that is centred around the Uranium-Plutonium fuel cycle, all the miners, patents, manufacturers, engineering, weapons and military benefits... etc.. The policitcal will is not great enough at this point and that's why the average person needs to be made aware of the potential of the Thorium-Uranium fuel cycle (or as I like to call it - the way nuclear should have been) in order to create an entirely new and independent political and public will to push it into reality. U-233 can also be produced through an enrichment process - the ORNL stockpiles were created as such and it would be foolish to simply eliminate them without proper utilization. Sounds like you've done a lot of reasearch on your own on this... you might enjoy this paper: http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publica...E_1450_web.pdf Also, here is a great site summarizing the variety of nuclear reactor designs that are on the drawing board today... it would certainly be great if this sort of innovation was allowed to see the light of day, but its not really going anywhere meaningful. Personally, my money is on the LFTR. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf33.html For something more to the point of the film and less about Thorium/Nuclear, here is an interesting article that discusses the relationship between growth in energy demand and its link to the "constant growth economy" - a paradigm that has been causing us trouble for years. http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/...-bunkty-to-me/ Last edited by SeeGeeWhy; 11-21-2011 at 02:45 PM.