China operationalizes world's first thorium reactor

[phoenix2020]

China builds world’s first thorium reactor with US secret files

After years of research and US data analysis, China has built a working thorium reactor and run it through a successful fuel reload.

interestingengineering.com

Online searches can brief you on the potential advantages of this new source of energy, but in short, there are many. It's only 2MW so still quite small, but it's operationalized with the ability to replace the molten salt while the reactor remains operational, which was one of the final remaining problems to solve. Sounds like they'll now move on to developing a 10MW demonstrator.

Very impressive work.

 

[Lursa]

China builds world’s first thorium reactor with US secret files

After years of research and US data analysis, China has built a working thorium reactor and run it through a successful fuel reload.

interestingengineering.com

Online searches can brief you on the potential advantages of this new source of energy, but in short, there are many. It's only 2MW so still quite small, but it's operationalized with the ability to replace the molten salt while the reactor remains operational, which was one of the final remaining problems to solve. Sounds like they'll now move on to developing a 10MW demonstrator.

Very impressive work.

New to me. How safe is it?

China can be very careless regarding safety and the environment.

 

[phoenix2020]

New to me. How safe is it?

China is notoriously careless regarding safety and the environment.

A thorium reactor is inherently safer than conventional nuclear reactors. It's a low pressure system (no steam explosions), with low risk of meltdown (the thorium's default state is already a liquid form), produces far fewer radioactive and weaponizable elements, have lower decay heat, no hydrogen produced (aka no Fukushima) and more. On paper it should be far safer and more widely deployable.

One of China's top use cases for these reactors is actually container ships. One would never entertain a uranium fission reactor for commercial shipping vessels.

Also, thorium is widely available, quite common, quite inexpensive.

 

[Phys251]

China builds world’s first thorium reactor with US secret files

After years of research and US data analysis, China has built a working thorium reactor and run it through a successful fuel reload.

interestingengineering.com

Online searches can brief you on the potential advantages of this new source of energy, but in short, there are many. It's only 2MW so still quite small, but it's operationalized with the ability to replace the molten salt while the reactor remains operational, which was one of the final remaining problems to solve. Sounds like they'll now move on to developing a 10MW demonstrator.

Very impressive work.

I really, really wish we would invest in thorium reactors here. We just had to let China take the lead, didn't we?

 

[phoenix2020]

I really, really wish we would invest in thorium reactors here. We just had to let China take the lead, didn't we?

Yeah, it's not much of a priority in the western world, although Norway kicked the tires on some experimentation for a while. The two nations pursuing this hardest are China and India (which has massive thorium reserves). There are a small handful of US and Canadian private companies working on the technology but nowhere near the funding necessary to keep up with China and India.

 

[Lursa]

A thorium reactor is inherently safer than conventional nuclear reactors. It's a low pressure system (no steam explosions), with low risk of meltdown (the thorium's default state is already a liquid form), produces far fewer radioactive and weaponizable elements, have lower decay heat, no hydrogen produced (aka no Fukushima) and more. On paper it should be far safer and more widely deployable.

One of China's top use cases for these reactors is actually container ships. One would never entertain a uranium fission reactor for commercial shipping vessels.

Also, thorium is widely available, quite common, quite inexpensive.

Thank you. Waste produced? Toxicity? Disposal?

 

[phoenix2020]

Thank you. Waste produced? Toxicity? Disposal?

I believe the main waste products are elements like Cesium-137 and Strontium-90 that have half-lives in the 30 year range, which is much shorter than what I'll call today's conventional nuclear waste. Their radioactive emissions are also much less energetic. The molten salts are still chemically reactive when expended so you still need some neutral, non-reactive storage container for the waste, but unlike existing waste, it's all fairly neutral / safe within ~300 years which is an easier problem to handle than waste continues to pose a threat for 10x to 100x as long. So in short, much less dangerous, can't be weaponized, and decays to a state of harmlessness orders of magnitude more quickly.

 

[Lursa]

I believe the main waste products are elements like Cesium-137 and Strontium-90 that have half-lives in the 30 year range, which is much shorter than what I'll call today's conventional nuclear waste. Their radioactive emissions are also much less energetic. The molten salts are still chemically reactive when expended so you still need some neutral, non-reactive storage container for the waste, but unlike existing waste, it's all fairly neutral / safe within ~300 years which is an easier problem to handle than waste continues to pose a threat for 10x to 100x as long. So in short, much less dangerous, can't be weaponized, and decays to a state of harmlessness orders of magnitude more quickly.

Thanks. What about thermal pollution? Waterways? Even in the US we ignore that unfortunately.

 

[phoenix2020]

Thanks. What about thermal pollution? Waterways? Even in the US we ignore that unfortunately.

That's a big advantage here! There's no primary water loop - since the thorium (e.g. the fuel) is in a molten salt format already, well, that's your heat conveyer loop. The secondary loop is probably a sealed system (another salt I imagine b/c the thermal transfer properties are so good) and maybe there's a tertiary water loop for emergencies but it would not see primary duty cycle use. So, it's much improved there as well.

 

[Deuce]

Thanks. What about thermal pollution? Waterways? Even in the US we ignore that unfortunately.

We do not, in fact, ignore that in the US. Our nuclear plants occasionally have to throttle down when their cooling source (usually a river) gets too low, because now the heat they're dumping in becomes too large of a factor.

 

[Slartibartfast]

China builds world’s first thorium reactor with US secret files

After years of research and US data analysis, China has built a working thorium reactor and run it through a successful fuel reload.

interestingengineering.com

Online searches can brief you on the potential advantages of this new source of energy, but in short, there are many. It's only 2MW so still quite small, but it's operationalized with the ability to replace the molten salt while the reactor remains operational, which was one of the final remaining problems to solve. Sounds like they'll now move on to developing a 10MW demonstrator.

Very impressive work.

Yet we are here in the dark ages having to listen to antivax people

 

[Lursa]

We do not, in fact, ignore that in the US. Our nuclear plants occasionally have to throttle down when their cooling source (usually a river) gets too low, because now the heat they're dumping in becomes too large of a factor.

Why, specifically, are they "throttling down?"

 

[reinaert]

I believe the main waste products are elements like Cesium-137 and Strontium-90 that have half-lives in the 30 year range, which is much shorter than what I'll call today's conventional nuclear waste. Their radioactive emissions are also much less energetic. The molten salts are still chemically reactive when expended so you still need some neutral, non-reactive storage container for the waste, but unlike existing waste, it's all fairly neutral / safe within ~300 years which is an easier problem to handle than waste continues to pose a threat for 10x to 100x as long. So in short, much less dangerous, can't be weaponized, and decays to a state of harmlessness orders of magnitude more quickly.

Could it launched towards the sun*, or is it a cost problem?



* - only partially tongue-in-cheek

 

[StillBallin75]

I really, really wish we would invest in thorium reactors here. We just had to let China take the lead, didn't we?

Nah. Drill baby drill

 

[Gordy327]

I really, really wish we would invest in thorium reactors here. We just had to let China take the lead, didn't we?

That's what happens when science is not promoted, supported, or funded. Because politicians want to keep the populace stupid, especially with the current administration.

 

[BabaVoss]

China is moving forward in many scientific disciples.
Meanwhile, the US is floundering, cutting spending, R&D, and people in science and higher education - while trump plays at whatever his ego tugs him toward.

 

[Helix]

I've been interested in this technology since I first learned about it. I hope that it's successful.

 

[Gordy327]

China is moving forward in many scientific disciples.
Meanwhile, the US is floundering, cutting spending, R&D, and people in science and higher education - while trump plays at whatever his ego tugs him toward.

I remember some years ago China was making progress in treating spinal cord injuries using stem cells. Meanwhile, the Bush administration put limits on stem cell research, which only slows our scientific progress.

 

[tharock220]

I believe the main waste products are elements like Cesium-137 and Strontium-90 that have half-lives in the 30 year range, which is much shorter than what I'll call today's conventional nuclear waste. Their radioactive emissions are also much less energetic. The molten salts are still chemically reactive when expended so you still need some neutral, non-reactive storage container for the waste, but unlike existing waste, it's all fairly neutral / safe within ~300 years which is an easier problem to handle than waste continues to pose a threat for 10x to 100x as long. So in short, much less dangerous, can't be weaponized, and decays to a state of harmlessness orders of magnitude more quickly.

My understanding is that shorter half lives mean faster decay and more decay products by extension.

I get that the time period needed for storage is shorter, but the tradeoff is a more dangerous waste product no?

 

[Gordy327]

My understanding is that shorter half lives mean faster decay and more decay products by extension.

I get that the time period needed for storage is shorter, but the tradeoff is a more dangerous waste product no?

Once something decays, it's not longer hazardous. A shorter half life means a shorter duration of radioactivity, which is a good thing.

 

[tharock220]

Once something decays, it's not longer hazardous. A shorter half life means a shorter duration of radioactivity, which is a good thing.

For the same mass, a shorter half life usually implies greater radioactivity though. You've got a faster rate of decay which means more gamma emmissions in the same amount of time.

 

[phoenix2020]

For the same mass, a shorter half life usually implies greater radioactivity though. You've got a faster rate of decay which means more gamma emmissions in the same amount of time.

Yes, but that only means greater radioactivity versus uranium and plutonium waste products if the two are both equally energetic to start with. They are not, by far.

 

[WillyPete]

Glad to see they're getting traction. Ample fuel, no meltdown risk. It's difficult to see the downsides, but the anti-nuclear lobby is strong.

We had an experimental thorium reactor in the 60s, as I recall.

It has many advantages over the uranium, but it doesn't lend itself to weaponization, and that was the major priority back then.

 

[tharock220]

Yes, but that only means greater radioactivity versus uranium and plutonium waste products if the two are both equally energetic to start with. They are not, by far.

I'm just talking about the radioactivity of the waste products themselves. Cesium-137 and strontium-90 are fairly nasty.

 

[phoenix2020]

Glad to see they're getting traction. Ample fuel, no meltdown risk. It's difficult to see the downsides, but the anti-nuclear lobby is strong.

We had an experimental thorium reactor in the 60s, as I recall.

It has many advantages over the uranium, but it doesn't lend itself to weaponization, and that was the major priority back then.

Exactly.

The main disadvantage is that you don't gain the efficiencies of scale that you do with the uranium cycle when you're maintaining a parallel nuclear weapons development program.

That said, there are some engineering challenges:

1. Molten thorium salt is corrosive to that needs to be managed

2. Thorium itself is not fissile, so it has to be converted by U-233 via proton bombardment. This is an extra step that has to be developed and managed, and U-233 comes with its own challenges for management, storage and security.

But, I think these are solvable problems over time.