See the Thorium Energy Alliance and Energy from Thorium for detailed scientific and engineering discussions, presentations, and conferences.
D. LeBlanc / Nuclear Engineering and Design 240 (2010) p.1649-1650 excellent technical journal article on MSR and LFTR.
See Kirk Sorensen @ MRU on LFTR on inherent safety vs. engineered safety systems, history of thorium reactors, how they work, and the benefits.
Google TechTalk – The Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor: What Fusion Wanted To Be
TEDxYYC – Kirk Sorensen – Thorium 4/22/2011
See Kirk Sorensen – Introduction to Flibe Energy @ TEAC3 for a short, very understandable description of how the reactor works, including converting Thorium to Uranium.
Kirk Sorensen @ PROTOSPACE Entertaining while explaining the science behind reactors. Thorium vs. Plutonium and Thermal vs. Fast. Medical and industrial uses of most fission byproducts from a LFTR. Safety systems. How much money a company would make from operating a LFTR. Engineering tasks to solve in building a LFTR. 2-1/2 hrs
Energy From Thorium: A Nuclear Waste Burning Liquid Salt Thorium Reactor, Kirk Sorensen
Thorium-Fueled Underground Power Plant Based On Molten Salt Technology, Ralph W. Moir and Edward Teller, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 2005
Fast Spectrum Molten Salt Reactor Options, Oak Ridge National Labs 2011, for reactor configuration; economics and safety; salt selection and salt processing technologies; fuel cycle options; uses of reactor high-temperature output; performance comparisons with existing reactor types; used fuel disposition, separations, and waste management; proliferation resistance.
The Thorium Problem – Danger of Existing Thorium Regulation to U.S. Manufacturing and Energy Sector. Gov’t treats thorium as some dangerous radioactive waste (it’s among the Least radioactive elements), preventing mining and production of rare earth elements essential for industry (from headphones to advanced batteries to windmill generators). The Dept. of Energy’s budget is over 60% for nuclear weapons, not for developing clean safe sustainable energy sources to power the country. Thorium laws prevent jobs in USA, forcing us to buy from China (almost a monopoly on rare earth element production).
Google Tech Talk — Energy From Thorium: A Nuclear Waste Burning Liquid Salt Thorium Reactor
Aim High! Thorium Energy Cheaper Than From Coal, by Robert Hargraves (available on Amazon)
Popular Science article, Next Gen Nuke Designs mainly about LFTR.
Dear Sir .
If the LFTR is so safe , self regulating , requires less shielding , Etc. does this mean we can finally put reactors in space ? what about the weightlessness do all the simple automatic safety features go out the window ? Since mass fractions really improve up in the 700s (ISP) is there some kind of chemical / nuclear hybrid possible like ethane/ oxygen difluoride switching to Ethane / Nuclear . for a SSTO
‘requires less shielding’: Radiation shielding is the same, for the same amount of fission. MSR doesn’t need the steam containment building, or the high-pressure pipes and safety systems (no water, so no water safety systems).
Kirk Sorensen, who “re-discovered” the book on molten salt reactors written decades earlier, was working for NASA researching ways to power space settlements (if I remember right, a Lunar colony).
Yes, MSR would work in space, with simple pumping through filtering systems. The gravity-fed “freeze plug melting and the fuel drains to storage tanks” wouldn’t work, but in space you wouldn’t have the earthquakes or tsunamis or most of the other situations where you would want that. For maintenance, simply pump the molten fuel/salt to the tanks. The fission rate is stabilized by thermal expansion, very little need for the drain tanks for emergencies.
In space, you might use chemical fuels because it is widely available in some locations. But nuclear fission is millions of times more energy per reaction than any chemical combustion. If you have to transport the materials (instead of local mining and manufacturing) you’d never do chemical combustion in space if you have simple reliable nuclear power.
Since hi temp molten salt is a better ( more compact ) heat exchanger and the low pressure means thinner walls ( more compact ) , same radiation in a smaller space should require less shielding ?
Isn’t there some way to retain the simplicity of the freeze plug drain like a ….. also a pump alone in space wouldn’t work .
I was thinking chemical / nuclear hybrid for a SSTO [single-stage-to-orbit craft] where you would need a higher thrust to weight ratio than nuclear alone, like the tri fuel engine the Russians are working on.
Sincerely , Robert
Radiation shielding is for the energy of the radiation, for each type of radiation. Radiation shielding required is not based on how much pressure. If the reactor is more compact, less volume of shielding, but the required thickness of the shielding is based on the energy.
Of course pumps work in space; if you don’t have gravity for removing the molten fuel/salt from the reactor core, you would use a pump.
A rocket would use something for propulsion mass (force = mass * acceleration). Nuclear fission would provide helium ions (alpha particles) at about 1/20 the speed of light, and heat for propelling whatever other mass was used. Since it’s so abundant, hydrogen would probably be used, but could be Anything. But you wouldn’t use anything for combustion, nuclear power is so much more energy per mass than any chemical reaction. “Alpha particles have a typical kinetic energy of 5 MeV (that is, ≈ 0.13% of their total energy, i.e. 110 TJ/kg) and a speed of 15,000 km/s. This corresponds to a speed of around 0.05 c.” and alpha particles “forward motion is effectively stopped within a few centimeters of air”. Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_decay
If I put a inch of lead around a basket ball it weighs more than a inch of lead aground a soft ball , less pressure means thinner walls witch helps shrink what you are shielding .
Pumps require the fluid to be at there inlet not floating some distance away so they need bladders , pistons , settling rockets surface tension screens Etc. If you are going to do that plus high temp molten salt pumps it starts looking like a lot of things to go wrong. KIS
The engine you described would not be work for a SSTO too low thrust to weight , also abundance is not a big factor in propellant choice . Sincerely , Robert
Is there an approximate size for a reactor or LFTR plant?