Comments on: The Atomic Show #040 - Thorium power - interview with Kirk Sorensen http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/12/06/the-atomic-show-040-thorium-power-interview-with-kirk-sorensen/ A show about atomic energy Fri, 8 Aug 2008 00:56:19 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Michael Allison http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/12/06/the-atomic-show-040-thorium-power-interview-with-kirk-sorensen/#comment-77444 Michael Allison Fri, 11 Jul 2008 20:50:32 +0000 http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/12/06/the-atomic-show-040-thorium-power-interview-with-kirk-sorensen/#comment-77444 What is the difference between a Thorium reactor and a fast neutron or integral fast reactor? What is the difference between a Thorium reactor and a fast neutron or integral fast reactor?

]]> By: john deleo http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/12/06/the-atomic-show-040-thorium-power-interview-with-kirk-sorensen/#comment-27084 john deleo Sun, 11 Mar 2007 20:34:55 +0000 http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/12/06/the-atomic-show-040-thorium-power-interview-with-kirk-sorensen/#comment-27084 do you think investing in thorium laden land is a practical idea? do you think investing in thorium laden land is a practical idea?

]]> By: Kirk Sorensen http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/12/06/the-atomic-show-040-thorium-power-interview-with-kirk-sorensen/#comment-21280 Kirk Sorensen Mon, 08 Jan 2007 04:37:51 +0000 http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/12/06/the-atomic-show-040-thorium-power-interview-with-kirk-sorensen/#comment-21280 Hi, I just wanted to invite everyone who's interested in this subject to participate in the <a href="http://www.energyfromthorium.com/forum/" rel="nofollow">Energy from Thorium Discussion Forum</a> <a href="http://thoriumenergy.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">Energy from Thorium Weblog</a> Hi, I just wanted to invite everyone who’s interested in this subject to participate in the

Energy from Thorium Discussion Forum

Energy from Thorium Weblog

]]> By: Alessio http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/12/06/the-atomic-show-040-thorium-power-interview-with-kirk-sorensen/#comment-20505 Alessio Mon, 01 Jan 2007 15:50:36 +0000 http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/12/06/the-atomic-show-040-thorium-power-interview-with-kirk-sorensen/#comment-20505 Thanx Rod for your response.To use in existing LWR is certainly the best thing to do in the short time However,it could be interesting to look at other strategies;for example I found some numbers in these docs regarding thorium use in LWR and German pebble beds http://www.iaea.org/inis/aws/fnss/abstracts/abst_te_1319_18.html http://www.nea.fr/html/science/docs/1976/neacrp-l-1976-169.pdf "Near breeding" is achievable in pebble bed reactors (conversio ratio in the order of 0,97 in the uranium 233-thorium cycle),while in LWR according to the second doc "the 233U-232Th fuel consumes only 12 kg/TWh of uranium (85 kg/TWh of 235U in a conventional uranium fuel)". I'm not very sure about the uranium cycle value (85 kg/TWh ?),but it's important to note that thorium is not only an "other" energy source,but definitely a "better" energy source than uranium Thanx Rod for your response.To use in existing LWR is certainly the best thing to do in the short time
However,it could be interesting to look at other strategies;for example I found some numbers in these docs regarding thorium use in LWR and German pebble beds

http://www.iaea.org/inis/aws/fnss/abstracts/abst_te_1319_18.html
http://www.nea.fr/html/science/docs/1976/neacrp-l-1976-169.pdf

“Near breeding” is achievable in pebble bed reactors (conversio ratio in the order of 0,97 in the uranium 233-thorium cycle),while in LWR according to the second doc
“the 233U-232Th fuel consumes only 12 kg/TWh of uranium (85 kg/TWh of 235U in a conventional uranium fuel)”. I’m not very sure about the uranium cycle value (85 kg/TWh ?),but it’s important to note that thorium is not only an “other” energy source,but definitely a “better” energy source than uranium

]]> By: Rod Adams http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/12/06/the-atomic-show-040-thorium-power-interview-with-kirk-sorensen/#comment-7063 Rod Adams Mon, 11 Dec 2006 09:41:43 +0000 http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/12/06/the-atomic-show-040-thorium-power-interview-with-kirk-sorensen/#comment-7063 Alessio: It is certainly possible to compare HWR and HTR fuel economies and to add in comparisons to other coolant possibilities. There are probably papers on Kirk's <a href="http://thoriumenergy.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">Energy from Thorium</a> blog that do a reasonable job in making those kinds of reactor distinctions. For my money, the more interesting question is the overall practicality and profitability of the application. Though it may not be the most "fuel efficient" use, there is a serious company (<a href="http://www.thoriumpower.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=121550&p=irol-irhome" rel="nofollow">Thorium Power, Ltd.</a> with a plan to use thorium in existing light water reactors because it sees that as a significant market - there are 440 operating light water reactors in the world that all need fuel on a regular (if some infrequent) basis. There is certainly also opportunity for thorium in pebble bed reactors - after all, the second German pebble bed reactor was called the THTR - Thorium High Temperature Reactor. However, any company that wants to sell thorium based fuel soon will not spend too much time on this yet, since there is a tiny market for pebble bed reactor fuel. Alessio:

It is certainly possible to compare HWR and HTR fuel economies and to add in comparisons to other coolant possibilities.

There are probably papers on Kirk’s Energy from Thorium blog that do a reasonable job in making those kinds of reactor distinctions.

For my money, the more interesting question is the overall practicality and profitability of the application. Though it may not be the most “fuel efficient” use, there is a serious company (Thorium Power, Ltd. with a plan to use thorium in existing light water reactors because it sees that as a significant market - there are 440 operating light water reactors in the world that all need fuel on a regular (if some infrequent) basis.

There is certainly also opportunity for thorium in pebble bed reactors - after all, the second German pebble bed reactor was called the THTR - Thorium High Temperature Reactor. However, any company that wants to sell thorium based fuel soon will not spend too much time on this yet, since there is a tiny market for pebble bed reactor fuel.

]]> By: Alessio http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/12/06/the-atomic-show-040-thorium-power-interview-with-kirk-sorensen/#comment-7062 Alessio Mon, 11 Dec 2006 08:44:43 +0000 http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/12/06/the-atomic-show-040-thorium-power-interview-with-kirk-sorensen/#comment-7062 Of course I don't forget molten salt reactors Of course I don’t forget molten salt reactors

]]> By: Alessio http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/12/06/the-atomic-show-040-thorium-power-interview-with-kirk-sorensen/#comment-6179 Alessio Sat, 09 Dec 2006 20:56:52 +0000 http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/12/06/the-atomic-show-040-thorium-power-interview-with-kirk-sorensen/#comment-6179 It's clear from the discussion above that essentially only two kind of reactors can use thorium cycle: CANDU heavy water reactor and HTGR in the form of "pebbles" or block type like those developed in Germany and Us.LWR (like Shippingport experience showed) are not excluded,but if I understood correctly,are less efficient So is it possible to compare HWR and HTR fuel economy regarding thorium use? IMHO,heavy water is a better moderator than graphite,although helium or other gases allow higher temperatures/thermal efficiencies;on the other hand,HTR have higher burn-ups than HWR which enhance conversion/breeding.However,HWR fuels are far simpler than TRISO to reprocess. It's not worthless to note that India choices heavy water reactor to developed its ambitious thorium strategy,of course without forget fast breeders program http://in.rediff.com/news/2005/aug/25nuke.htm http://www.indiaenews.com/business/20061205/31242.htm It’s clear from the discussion above that essentially only two kind of reactors can use thorium cycle: CANDU heavy water reactor and HTGR in the form of “pebbles” or block type like those developed in Germany and Us.LWR (like Shippingport experience showed) are not excluded,but if I understood correctly,are less efficient
So is it possible to compare HWR and HTR fuel economy regarding thorium use?
IMHO,heavy water is a better moderator than graphite,although helium or other gases allow higher temperatures/thermal efficiencies;on the other hand,HTR have higher burn-ups than HWR which enhance conversion/breeding.However,HWR fuels are far simpler than TRISO to reprocess.

It’s not worthless to note that India choices heavy water reactor to developed its ambitious thorium strategy,of course without forget fast breeders program
http://in.rediff.com/news/2005/aug/25nuke.htm
http://www.indiaenews.com/business/20061205/31242.htm

]]>