5 ms·

They can have their own problems. The THTR-300 for instance is one of the few commercial HTGR we had. They had several operational problems like water leaking i

They can have their own problems. The THTR-300 for instance is one of the few commercial HTGR we had. They had several operational problems like water leaking into the primary circuit (which could lead to hydrogen and oxygen buildups at that temperature). The decommissioning currently is a huge mess. Sadly the English wikipedia doesn't have as much information as the German one about it.

trhway 12y ago
impressive - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble-bed_reactor#AVR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble-bed_reactor#AVR " There exists currently no dismantling method for the AVR vessel, but it is planned to develop some procedure during the next 60 years and to start with vessel dismantling at the end of the century." German methodical planning :)
- detaro 12y ago
  As long as it is relatively secure, monitoring it and otherwise keeping away is probably an ok strategy. At least the half-lifes are only in the decades if I remember correctly.
rmason 12y ago
People have been trying for twenty years to find $300 million in government funding to create a new reference design of a modern thorium reactor. TVA's old reactor which ran until the seventies was based on forties research. But the past three presidents have not made it a national priority. China and India have funded research and so has one private individual, Bill Gates.
- Russell91 12y ago
  It just vexes me that thorium research is not a national priority. How can a technology that, by many estimates, has at least a 50% chance of being a viable replacement of all energy needs over the next 1000 years not be worthy of the US investment? We lose hundreds of billions of dollars per year in oil imports. Why is that not worth avoiding?
  - mark-r 12y ago
    It's because nuclear reactors, of any kind, are politically untenable at the moment. Especially unproven designs. Nobody's going to allow one to be built in their back yard, no matter how promising the technology.
  - perlgeek 12y ago
    I'm not familiar with Thorium reactors at all, so forgive me for asking: how much long-lived nuclear waste do they produce? Because we have no viable way to do with that.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - dognotdog 12y ago
      The idea is that not only do they not produce long-lived waste, but some designs can even recycle the 'spent' fuel from conventional reactors.
      - CurtMonash 12y ago
        Is this in models -- molten salt? -- where the fuel circulates in liquid form?
    - Gravityloss 12y ago
      They use about 1/200th amount of fuel compared to current uranium reactors, so the amount of total waste is small. About 1 tonne thorium per one gigawatt-year. And the wastes they produce have a far smaller portion of long lived isotopes, because the reactor controls very well what substances receive neutrons. Here's the best image comparison I could find. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mAg4r-09gm0/TdZeWHzJWEI/AAAAAAAAAh4/8X7A1Wd1NAE/s1600/comparison+in+fuel+cycles.jpg http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mAg4r-09gm0/TdZeWHzJWEI/AAAAAAAAAh... http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mAg4r-09gm0/TdZeWHzJWEI/AAAAAAAAAh4/8X7A1Wd1NAE/s1600/comparison+in+fuel+cycles.jpg http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mAg4r-09gm0/TdZeWHzJWEI/AAAAAAAAAh...
    - fordiman 12y ago
- _delirium 12y ago
  Norway has also put a bit of money into thorium reactor R&D, with a small modern experimental reactor currently operating on a 5-year trial: http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/160131-thorium-nuclear-reactor-trial-begins-could-provide-cleaner-safer-almost-waste-free-energy http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/160131-thorium-nuclear-re...
  - jonsen 12y ago
    In fact it is an old test reactor from the 1950ies. What they have done, though, which is still very cool, is use thorium instead of uranium in a conventional nuclear reactor.
- fordiman 12y ago
  Gates isn't working on Thorium; the TWR is a uranium / plutonium reactor.
darklajid 12y ago
That amazing piece of technology is in my birth town (or city, if you're generous). While I never actively followed the plant's history, I do remember quite a bit of resistance, reports about potential 'leaks' and talks about it being not reliable enough.

trhway 12y ago

impressive - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble-bed_reactor#AVR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble-bed_reactor#AVR " There exists currently no dismantling method for the AVR vessel, but it is planned to develop some procedure during the next 60 years and to start with vessel dismantling at the end of the century." German methodical planning :)

detaro 12y ago
As long as it is relatively secure, monitoring it and otherwise keeping away is probably an ok strategy. At least the half-lifes are only in the decades if I remember correctly.

rmason 12y ago

People have been trying for twenty years to find $300 million in government funding to create a new reference design of a modern thorium reactor. TVA's old reactor which ran until the seventies was based on forties research. But the past three presidents have not made it a national priority. China and India have funded research and so has one private individual, Bill Gates.

Russell91 12y ago
It just vexes me that thorium research is not a national priority. How can a technology that, by many estimates, has at least a 50% chance of being a viable replacement of all energy needs over the next 1000 years not be worthy of the US investment? We lose hundreds of billions of dollars per year in oil imports. Why is that not worth avoiding?
- mark-r 12y ago
  It's because nuclear reactors, of any kind, are politically untenable at the moment. Especially unproven designs. Nobody's going to allow one to be built in their back yard, no matter how promising the technology.
- perlgeek 12y ago
  I'm not familiar with Thorium reactors at all, so forgive me for asking: how much long-lived nuclear waste do they produce? Because we have no viable way to do with that.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - dognotdog 12y ago
    The idea is that not only do they not produce long-lived waste, but some designs can even recycle the 'spent' fuel from conventional reactors.
    - CurtMonash 12y ago
      Is this in models -- molten salt? -- where the fuel circulates in liquid form?
  - Gravityloss 12y ago
    They use about 1/200th amount of fuel compared to current uranium reactors, so the amount of total waste is small. About 1 tonne thorium per one gigawatt-year. And the wastes they produce have a far smaller portion of long lived isotopes, because the reactor controls very well what substances receive neutrons. Here's the best image comparison I could find. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mAg4r-09gm0/TdZeWHzJWEI/AAAAAAAAAh4/8X7A1Wd1NAE/s1600/comparison+in+fuel+cycles.jpg http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mAg4r-09gm0/TdZeWHzJWEI/AAAAAAAAAh... http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mAg4r-09gm0/TdZeWHzJWEI/AAAAAAAAAh4/8X7A1Wd1NAE/s1600/comparison+in+fuel+cycles.jpg http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mAg4r-09gm0/TdZeWHzJWEI/AAAAAAAAAh...
  - fordiman 12y ago
_delirium 12y ago
Norway has also put a bit of money into thorium reactor R&D, with a small modern experimental reactor currently operating on a 5-year trial: http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/160131-thorium-nuclear-reactor-trial-begins-could-provide-cleaner-safer-almost-waste-free-energy http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/160131-thorium-nuclear-re...
- jonsen 12y ago
  In fact it is an old test reactor from the 1950ies. What they have done, though, which is still very cool, is use thorium instead of uranium in a conventional nuclear reactor.
fordiman 12y ago
Gates isn't working on Thorium; the TWR is a uranium / plutonium reactor.

darklajid 12y ago

That amazing piece of technology is in my birth town (or city, if you're generous). While I never actively followed the plant's history, I do remember quite a bit of resistance, reports about potential 'leaks' and talks about it being not reliable enough.