Slashdot Mirror

Because the US foolishly abandoned it 50 years ago? China now has an aggressive LFTR program based upon our own extensive research, which is openly available. Once they put the finishing touches on it, they can lock us out by using our own regressive system for monopolizing ideas. Some make a habit of displacing their feelings onto China, but I'm having a difficult time blaming them for our own spectacular stupidity here. I'd suggest directing that anger at our own government for the stagnation of nuclear technology for several decades, helped by "environmental" groups in an unholy alliance with coal and now natural gas.

TerraPower's TWR didn't work out as envisioned, and is no great loss. Research on the MCFR is more promising, but the chloride chemistry is less developed, and it requires 10-15 times more fissile, which is very expensive. China is already pursing the better option, and have little use for it, nor is it the only fast MSR in development. LFTR needs only a small amount of fissile to start up, which could be affordably extracted from spent fuel, enabling a rapid expansion of nuclear power, while also eliminating the waste "problem".

Exactly...also the Sierra Club has been getting funding from fossil fuels for some time

Because the US foolishly abandoned it 50 years ago? China now has an aggressive LFTR program based upon our own extensive research, which is openly available. Once they put the finishing touches on it, they can lock us out by using our own regressive system for monopolizing ideas. Some make a habit of displacing their feelings onto China, but I'm having a difficult time blaming them for our own spectacular stupidity here. I'd suggest directing that anger at our own government for the stagnation of nuclear technology for several decades, helped by "environmental" groups in an unholy alliance with coal and now natural gas.

TerraPower's TWR didn't work out as envisioned, and is no great loss. Research on the MCFR is more promising, but the chloride chemistry is less developed, and it requires 10-15 times more fissile, which is very expensive. China is already pursing the better option, and have little use for it, nor is it the only fast MSR in development. LFTR needs only a small amount of fissile to start up, which could be affordably extracted from spent fuel, enabling a rapid expansion of nuclear power, while also eliminating the waste "problem".

As an actual link: Why the molten salt fast reactor (MSFR) is the “best” Gen IV reactor

That aside, it is a common misconception that only fast reactors can burn nuclear waste; it is the transuranic elements that drive waste concerns, and they will fission in thermal spectrum MSRs over time. The bulk of spent fuel is essentially natural uranium, which is harmless and can be easily separated and set aside. LFTR49 is the most effective and fastest way to transform of our stockpiles of spent fuel into useful energy and materials.

There is a large difference between the remarkable claims made for LFTR and those of TransAtomic (and some others) trying to take shortcuts with non-breeding designs. Some of the later face substantial skepticism even within the MSR community. The use of thorium in non-breeding designs is also questionable, as it makes the eventual processing more difficult.

LFTR's claims rest on sound science and successful experiments. Running an MSR on U233 has been demonstrated. Breeding thorium into U233 has been demonstrated in solid fuel, which is even more difficult. The chemical processing has also been demonstrated offline. The components of a LFTR have yet to be integrated, but they have been proven. The astounding efficiencies achievable are a result of the ability to breed and completely consume the fuel, which is possible because salts can't be damaged by radiation. For many reasons, salts are simply a superior fuel/coolant form for nuclear reactors.

In addition to the remarkable efficiency of LFTR, there is a more recent variant of LFTR adapted to be fueled by actinides from spent fuel, allowing it to destroy "nuclear waste" 90x faster. This is another remarkable claim with a solid basis. It arises from the realization that actinides in spent fuel are the long term concern, not what is essentially natural uranium. Separating out the (barely radioactive) uranium beforehand is trivial, and greatly speeds the process of destroying the hazardous component.

LFTR can do both. There is a more recent variant designed to consume spent fuel, using the excess neutrons to transform thorium into U233 for standard LFTRs. Unlike other pathways to sustainable nuclear energy, this one requires no uranium enrichment or mining; the fuel for each come exclusively from spent fuel and mine tailings respectively.

This is the most sensible path to address "nuclear waste", and can burn through the stockpiles 90x faster than the often proposed fast reactors. It is a common misconception that fast reactors are needed; they are only needed to consume the uranium in spent fuel, which alone is harmless. It is the actinide fraction which is dangerous and drives long term waste concerns, and it is easily separated and burned in a thermal spectrum LFTR.

Seriously? You argument pro Pu-239 is that it can be used as a weapon? I hope you are trolling, because if that's not the case you are either insane or a complete idiot.

If I had not mentioned its use as a weapon then I'd be accused of lying by omission, do you want me to lie?

The emphasis should be on the use as a fuel, especially for the use in molten salt breeder reactors like LFTR-49.
https://articles.thmsr.nl/the-...

LFTR-49 will burn plutonium as fuel and in the process produce U-233, a fuel worthless for making weapons. This makes plutonium far more valuable as a fuel than as a weapon. LFTR style reactors don't produce plutonium like current solid fuel reactors do. Depending on how the LFTR manages the transuranic elements it will produce no plutonium or produce plutonium so contaminated with lighter and heavier isotopes that it would be nearly worthless for weapon production.

The only way to destroy this plutonium is in a reactor. What some politicians would like to see is "downblend and dispose". This means taking the weapon grade and reactor grade plutonium we have and mixing it with a bunch of spent fuel and other stuff to make it hard to process back out, and then drop it in a hole. A hole by the way Democrats have been denying funds to dig.

So, what do you propose we do with all this plutonium that's been piling up? And the weapons with plutonium in them?

I suggest we use it as fuel. This can mean downblending as part of turning it into fuel to discourage it being diverted into weapons. Downblending alone does not prevent this from being turned into weapons in the future, as it only makes refining more expensive, not impossible. The only way to destroy it is consume it in a reactor. While we do that we may as well produce electricity, more fuel, valuable medical isotopes, and isotopes valuable for space exploration.

China is now leading our clean energy future. Here is an actual link for that, and related ones:

China spending US$3.3 billion on molten salt nuclear reactors ...
SINAP T-MSR Promotional Video
Why China’s 600 fte MSR program wants to cooperate ...

It should be mentioned that China's efforts stem from Kirk Sorensen's rediscovery and publication of the brilliant MSR work done at ORNL many decades ago, which was foolishly cancelled and lost in obscurity. He has since founded a company to further that work in the US, and there is a good overview of the vision here:

The Flibe Energy LFTR49: the triple ace in nuclear GEN IV design

China is now leading our clean energy future. Here is an actual link for that, and related ones:

China spending US$3.3 billion on molten salt nuclear reactors ...
SINAP T-MSR Promotional Video
Why China’s 600 fte MSR program wants to cooperate ...

It should be mentioned that China's efforts stem from Kirk Sorensen's rediscovery and publication of the brilliant MSR work done at ORNL many decades ago, which was foolishly cancelled and lost in obscurity. He has since founded a company to further that work in the US, and there is a good overview of the vision here:

The Flibe Energy LFTR49: the triple ace in nuclear GEN IV design

This is, of course, irrelevant to nuclear power. Pu-239 is produced for use in nuclear weapons only. A standard reactor doesn't produce Pu-239 any more than a gasoline engine produces plastics as a side-effect.

Huh?

In any operating nuclear reactor containing U-238, some plutonium-239 will accumulate in the nuclear fuel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Of course Pu-239 is produced in a reactor, that's what's called "reactor grade plutonium".

Reactor-grade plutonium/RGPu is the isotopic grade of plutonium that is found in spent nuclear fuel after the primary fuel, that of Uranium-235 that a nuclear power reactor uses, has (burnt up/burnup).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

It's not "reactor grade" only because it is produced in a reactor but because it's only use is in producing power in a reactor, it's worthless for weapons because it contains too much Pu-240 and/or Pu-238.

In a 2008 paper, Kessler et al. used a thermal analysis to conclude that a hypothetical nuclear explosive device was "technically unfeasible" using reactor grade plutonium from a reactor that had a burn up value of 30 GWd/t using "low technology" designs akin to Fat Man with spherical explosive lenses, or 55 GWd/t for "medium technology" designs.

According to the Kessler et al. criteria, "high-technology" hypothetical nuclear explosive devices(HNEDs), that could be produced by the experienced nuclear weapons states(NWSs) would be technically unfeasible with reactor-grade plutonium containing more than approximately 9% of the heat generating Pu-238 isotope.

What this reactor grade plutonium is good for is jump starting fourth generation nuclear power plants.
https://articles.thmsr.nl/the-...

Now what to do with those pesky spent reactors?

You cut them up into pieces and feed them into a Gen IV reactor. The radioactive bits get turned into energy and valuable medical isotopes.
https://articles.thmsr.nl/the-...

New reactors solve the problems of radioactive waste, energy shortages, and provide cures for nasty diseases that previous treatments have proven ineffective. Then there is the US Navy project to synthesize jet fuel and fuel oil from CO2 and hydrogen, both of which would be extracted from the sea.
https://www.nrl.navy.mil/news/...

Synthesized fuel using CO2 from the environment closes the carbon loop. This means no addition of CO2 to the atmosphere to fly a plane or propel a ship.

Targeted alpha therapy has the potential to eliminate omni-resistant bacteria, as well as inoperable cancers and viruses like HIV. It arms a targeting biomolecule with a potent alpha emitter that will ensure their destruction. Unlike with antibiotics and other drugs, there is no way for the offending organisms to evolve a resistance.

The technique has shown great promise, but research is limited by the availability of actinium-225 and bismuth-213, for which there are no good substitutes. Fortunately, they are a byproduct of energy from thorium, and this article also contains some detail on medical applications. Today though, there is only a very small amount to work with, from the dwindling remains of earlier thorium efforts.

These invaluable isotopes fall on the neptunium decay chain, which while once present in nature, went extinct on earth long ago. They are inextricably linked to the thorium fuel cycle, and LFTR is the ideal machine to reproduce their precursor in quantity, and allow its extraction during normal operation.

Faux-environmentalists love to misrepresent "spent fuel" as "nuclear waste", even though >96% of the former it is just unused fuel, with the balance rapidly decaying to stability. Readers should appreciate that nuclear is the only energy source to responsibly manage its waste, and that it is only possible because nuclear produces such a trivial amount of waste to start with. None of the resource-intensive "renewable" branded sources have even been asked to do so.

Many advanced reactors can recycle that "waste" into new fuel, but there is one approach that stands apart from the rest. LFTR49 can consume spent fuel 90 times faster than other approaches, while producing new fuel and incredibly valuable medical isotopes unique to the thorium fuel cycle. It is also the most thorough waste burner, yet has the simplest fuel reprocessing. Using thorium enables the plants to operate with a fraction of the fuel, allowing many more to be built with the given resource, and producing virtually no long-term waste.

Flibe Energy may not offer the lowest hanging fruit among advanced reactor designs, but LFTR is uniquely able to reap the full benefits of the thorium fuel cycle: breeding in the thermal spectrum and simple chemical reprocessing. This allows LFTR to truly close the nuclear fuel cycle and run efficiently and indefinitely on nothing but the thorium byproduct of existing rare-earth mining. The online chemical reprocessing allows extraction of many valuable isotopes, and even the "waste" heat from the plant can drive industrial processes like desalination or synfuel production. Revenue from such byproducts also provides an opportunity to reduce the cost of electricity produced.

For some time, Targeted alpha therapy has shown promise for treating difficult cancers, but it may also be used to kill antibiotic-resistant bacteria and pathogens like HIV. Once this capability is developed, the antibiotic arms race will end once and for all. The looming threat is very serious, and such promising research should be a high priority.

Unfortunately, there are artificial barriers that are retarding progress. The most attractive isotopes for use with TAT are Actinium-225 and Bismuth-213, which no longer exist in nature. Looking at the periodic table, one might be inclined to believe that other substitutes exist, but they simply don’t. The neptunium decay chain is unique in that it does not pass through radon or terminate in lead. Born in supernovae long ago, it was extinct in nature until relatively recently, when it was revived in the heart of nuclear reactors.

However, conventional reactors don’t produce much, and it is impractical to extract the short-lived isotopes from solid fuel rods sealed in a reactor core. Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors however, are the ideal machines for producing these life-saving medical isotopes. Meanwhile, LFTR safely transforms nuclear waste into abundant and inexpensive energy.

It is worth noting that Flibe Energy is the only company in the west pursuing this technology; others developing molten salt reactors are trying to take shortcuts which miss out on the greatest benefits of the thorium fuel cycle. LFTR is a comprehensive solution, which can finally close the fuel cycle, eliminating the need for uranium mining and enrichment. It is a more challenging design, but it doesn’t kick the can down the road; it fully addresses all rational concerns with nuclear technology, and offers many new opportunities.