3 ms·
Proliferation resistant reactors should probably be used. Like.... LFTR Basically, the normal operation of the reactor doesn't allow the production of weapons
by AtlasBarfed 2mo ago
Proliferation resistant reactors should probably be used.
Like.... LFTR
Basically, the normal operation of the reactor doesn't allow the production of weapons-useful nuclear isotopes.
You'll probably also need a smaller footprint reactor
Like.... LFTR
And you'll want something that can be turned on, shut off, and has natural anti-meltdown abilities in case hurricanes or other disasters threaten the ractor
Like ... LFTR
- acidburnNSA 2mo agoLFTRs make readily-available (liquid-form) weapons-grade Uranium-233 during protactinium separation. They're the least proliferation resistant reactor known to man. LFTR has a far larger core than a PWR. Neutron diffusion length in water is 5 cm. In LFTR graphite moderator it's 16. Many reactors including modern SMR LWRs can cool themselves passively without backup power. Especially when floating in seawater. Highly recommend doing PWRs for this application. Disclaimer: I'm trying to do this with PWRs.
- AtlasBarfed 2mo agoU-233: is this inaccurate? https://www.quora.com/Why-do-so-many-people-claim-thorium-breeders-produce-no-weapons-grade-waste-Th-232-produces-fissile-U-233 https://www.quora.com/Why-do-so-many-people-claim-thorium-br... I'm no expert on U enrichment, but if there's even just a little U-232 that mixes in with the U-233 then the gamma rays get pretty hard to handle? I guess the breeding process might produce a lot of pure U-233, but again to the point of the quora response... not a lot of U-233 was used in "real" weapons. I've never heard of MSRs being "large". The ORNL one fit in a closet, but that wasn't a breeder from thorium AFAIK. The penetration doesn't matter much if you have a blanket of Thorium to intercept neutrons.