4 ms·
Two words: Thorium reactor.
by psswrdshmashwrd 11y ago
Two words: Thorium reactor.
- cstross 11y agoPlease explain how you would design a thorium reactor to produce 238Pu suitable for use in RTGs. Please explain how you would build a shiny new thorium reactor with 238Pu production capability on a budget competitive with the existing DoE 237Np -> 238Pu transmutation process in an existing research reactor.
- psswrdshmashwrd 11y agoPlease see: Liquid fluoride thorium reactor
- humbleMouse 11y agoYeah, weird why that is getting down-voted.
- PhantomGremlin 11y agoIt should get down-voted. The original post was two words. Okay, cute. But then the subsequent "explanation" was four words. There should have been at least a sentence or two of explanation. At the minimum there could have been a link to Wikipedia. That's common courtesy. Most people don't come to HN to spend decades learning obscure things, very slowly, from Zen masters.
- jobu 11y agoThe wikipedia page doesn't say much about Pu-238, but there is this under the "Proliferation resistance" bullet: "...LFTRs produce very little plutonium, around 15 kg per gigawatt-year of electricity (this is the output of a single large reactor over a year). This plutonium is also mostly Pu-238..." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor#Safety https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reacto... In a LFTR the fuels are dissolved in liquid salts, so the downside is it may be very difficult to separate out the Pu-238 for use.
- jb55 11y agoTake a look at http://www.thoriumenergyalliance.com/downloads/plutonium-238.pdf http://www.thoriumenergyalliance.com/downloads/plutonium-238... for how it could be done
- rexignis 11y agoEvery time someone gets all giggly about Thorium I'm suspicious. Could you provide some documentation about why this is a viable option in space?
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- psswrdshmashwrd 11y agoI agree thorium isn't without its problems, but the end byproduct of a lftr reactor is plutonium.
- oppositelock 11y agoLFTR's produce 239Pu (among a mess of other stuff), that's the stuff that goes BOOM in nuclear bombes, not 238Pu that glows warmly to make power for spacecraft.
- Roodgorf 11y agoAs Jobu points out from Wikipedia: he second proliferation resistant feature comes from the fact that LFTRs produce very little plutonium, around 15 kg per gigawatt-year of electricity ... This plutonium is also mostly Pu-238. According the article this seems like quite a bit more than is currently being produced, is it not viable for use in RTGs for some reason? Or is the cost of a LFTR over the course of a year less cost effective than the current method of Np to Pu? I have very little knowledge of the science here, I'm just not sure what all I'm missing.
- Vexs 11y agoAFAIK it's because they last a long time with very small amounts of reactants, are low maintenance, and are potentially very small. I mean, it kinda makes sense but RTGs are better for space applications because you really don't need massive amounts of power in space, plus the whole "power forever with no effort" aspect; they might as well be perpetual motion engines.
- obfk 11y agoThe Thorium Dream (Documentary): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQ9Ll5EX1jc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQ9Ll5EX1jc
- Symmetry 11y agoI have no idea what you're getting at here. If you mean we should use a Thorium reactor to generate Plutonium then others have explained why that's impossible. If you mean that we should use a Thorium reactor instead of a Plutonium RTG then that also wouldn't work, the smallest reactor is still way heavier than an RTG.