Thorium car: 480 000 km of autonomy!

Cars, buses, bicycles, electric airplanes: all electric transportation that exist. Conversion, engines and electric drives for transport ...
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 10/09/11, 20:37

It all depends on the fuel ( : Mrgreen: )

If you take unleaded "BP_2487", don't worry, it's confined! But with one more octane-isotopic degree (the "2488") your mill risks the "Burn out"( : Mrgreen: )

... and there, it is compulsory lead sinker in all the house, lead apron behind your keyboard and possible disturbances of the network by link yes-feed ...! ( : Mrgreen: )
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15995
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5189




by Remundo » 10/09/11, 22:40

yeap i see : Cheesy:
0 x
Image
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974




by Christophe » 11/09/11, 19:27

Obamot wrote:It all depends on the fuel ( : Mrgreen: )

If you take unleaded "BP_2487", don't worry, it's confined! But with one more octane-isotopic degree (the "2488") your mill risks the "Burn out"( : Mrgreen: )

... and there, it is compulsory lead sinker in all the house, lead apron behind your keyboard and possible disturbances of the network by link yes-feed ...! ( : Mrgreen: )


A little zero as a disguised personal attack right?

We will put that on the account of the aperitif of Saturday evening eh ...
0 x
User avatar
gildas
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 879
Registration: 05/03/10, 23:59
x 173




by gildas » 04/10/12, 13:57

The thorium reactors seem interesting:

This technology has considerable advantages over other designs. A priori, it eliminates or considerably reduces all of the criticisms made of the nuclear industry, namely safety, waste and low fuel reserves. There is no major technical obstacle but many theoretical or experimental elements to be confirmed on an industrial scale.
The safest reactor concept [edit]
Molten salt reactors meet all the safety requirements of the forum generation IV. According to Victor Ignatiev, a physicist at the Kurchatov Institute in Moscow, "The Thorium molten salt reactor ticks all the boxes for Safety guarantees"2. No other reactor concept tested guarantees such a high level of safety. The risk of an accident is considerably reduced, as are the consequences. The safety of the reactor is based on the laws of physics (gravity, thermal conduction) and no longer on equipment likely to be destroyed or to break down.
Ramping accidents with steam explosion as in Chernobyl are impossible in a molten salt reactor. The design of the reactor avoids runaway by ensuring a negative vacuum coefficient. The absence of pressurized water eliminates the risk of explosion of a vapor gas and hydrogen. The problem of the variation in reactivity due to the moderating effect of water is also eliminated.
Hearts can be drained in minutes in the event of an accident. A cap of salt is permanently kept frozen by a cold source; in the event of failure of the central unit, the heat of the surrounding salt melts it, the salt then flows by gravity into a tank designed to allow cold shutdown by thermal convection. A fuel melting accident like at Fukushima or Three Mile Island then becomes impossible. This system also makes it possible to restart the reactor once the rest of the plant has been repaired.
The fluorine salts are chemically and mechanically stable despite the high temperature and intense radioactivity. Fluorine combines ionically with practically all fission products (only tritium can escape), which practically avoids any dispersion of pollution even in the event of containment rupture. On-line reprocessing makes it possible to permanently eliminate this waste, the fuel remains relatively clean. Even in the event of an accident, dispersal into the biosphere is unlikely. The salts react very little with air and dissolve very poorly in water, there is no risk of uncontrollable fire as with a sodium reactor. The containment barrier formed by the salt is not affected by a possible failure of the rest of the plant. Even in the event of voluntary destruction of the tank (bombardment, attack), the radiological consequences remain very limited and without comparison with an attack of the same type in a solid fuel reactor.
There is no high pressure vapor in the core, but low pressure molten salts. The risks of steam explosions are eliminated and the reactor no longer needs a tank capable of withstanding pressures of the order of 70 to 150 bars as in the case of pressurized water reactors. Instead, a tank resistant to low pressure is sufficient to contain the molten salts. To resist heat and corrosion, the metal of the tank is an exotic alloy (Hastelloy-N) based on nickel. (Contrary to popular belief, it is not molten salt at high temperature which is corrosive, but certain fission products such as tellurium and selenium which are deposited on the metal walls of the primary circuit of the RSF and cause embrittlement of grain boundaries.) The quantities of alloys necessary for the construction of the reactor are reduced, the construction simpler and the cost lower.
Sufficient fuels for millennia [edit]
The RSF is the only system that makes efficient use of the thorium-based nuclear fuel cycle, this fuel is available in quantities 500 times greater than uranium 235 from conventional reserves. The estimated reserves of thorium3 are sufficient to meet all of the energy needs of humanity with a level of consumption comparable to the USA for at least 500 years. 500t of thorium would be enough to supply the USA for a year. There are deposits on the Moon. It should be noted that these reserves were only discovered following prospecting not explicitly targeting thorium but rare earths in which thorium is an extraction waste.
Fast spectrum RSFs are also very effective in using plutonium and could operate in a U238 / P239 breeder. In this case, the reserves amount to thousands of years just with the stocks of depleted uranium accumulated for 50 years. By mobilizing unconventional reserves (marine uranium) the reserves are several million years (4 billion years of reactors).


http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%A9act ... els_fondus

Thorium would not produce plutonium for atomic bombs (?).


...
0 x
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 04/10/12, 14:47

Read in English: these are molten salt reactors,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_reactor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium_fuel_cycle

not only thorium, but also with uranium, plutonium, sometimes from thorium and therefore perfect on paper, but full of dirt too!
To develop, because without military interest formerly, they were not studied, this to discover all the real technological difficulties !!!
Amazing and crazy to put this dirt in a car !!

Many of the research and development efforts in coming decades will be aimed at fixing these problems, as such some may be solved or their effect may be lessened. New problems are also likely to arise and may or may not be dealt with.

Little development compared to most Gen IV designs - much is unknown.
Need to operate an on-site chemical plant to manage core mixture and remove fission products.
Lithium containing salts will cause significant tritium production (comparable with heavy water reactors), even if pure 7Li is used.
Likely need for regulatory changes to deal with radically different design features.
Corrosion may occur over many decades of reactor operation and could be problematic

The thorium fuel cycle is a nuclear fuel cycle that uses the naturally abundant isotope of thorium, 232Th, as the fertile material. In the reactor, 232Th is transmuted into the fissile artificial uranium isotope 233U which is the nuclear fuel. Unlike natural uranium, natural thorium contains only trace amounts of fissile material (such as 231Th), which are insufficient to initiate a nuclear chain reaction. Additional fissile material or another neutron source are necessary to initiate the fuel cycle. In a thorium-fueled reactor, 232Th absorbs neutrons eventually to produce 233U. This parallels the process in uranium reactors whereby fertile 238U absorbs neutrons to form fissile 239Pu. Depending on the design of the reactor and fuel cycle, the 233U generated either fissions in situ or is chemically separated from the used nuclear fuel and formed into new nuclear fuel

There are several challenges to the application of thorium as a nuclear fuel, particularly for solid fuel reactors:

Unlike uranium, natural thorium contains no fissile isotopes; fissile material, generally 233U, 235U, or plutonium, must be added to achieve criticality. This, along with the high sintering temperature necessary to make thorium-dioxide fuel, complicated fuel fabrication. Oak Ridge National Laboratory experimented with thorium tetrafluoride as fuel in a molten salt reactor from 1964–1969, which was far easier to both process and separate from contaminants that slow or stop the chain reaction.

In an open fuel cycle (ie utilizing 233U in situ), higher burnup is necessary to achieve a favorable neutron economy. Although thorium dioxide performed well at burnups of 170,000 MWd / t and 150,000 MWd / t at Fort St. Vrain Generating Station and AVR respectively, [4] challenges complicate achieving this in light water reactors (LWR), which composes the vast majority of existing power reactors. In a once-through thorium fuel cycle the residual 233U is long lived radioactive waste.

Another challenge associated with the thorium fuel cycle is the comparatively long interval over which 232Th breeds to 233U. The half-life of 233Pa is about 27 days, which is an order of magnitude longer than the half-life of 239Np. As a result, substantial 233Pa develops in thorium-based fuels. 233 Pa is a significant neutron absorber, and although it eventually breeds into fissile 235U, this requires two more neutron absorptions, which degrades neutron economy and increases the likelihood of transuranic production.





Ah the crazy lobbies !!!


With simple, modern, without CO2 pollution, without radioactivity, without any consumption, perpetual, local, recovering the summer heat wasted too much to heat the winter operating since 2007 at:
www.dlsc.ca
you are deleting more than 30 nuclear reactors in France, for heating buildings, ecologically,
and on econology, almost all of you criticize by refusing, ridiculing, dreaming about deceptive and false montages, even by making insufficient Canadian wells !!
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Electric transport: cars, bicycles, public transport, planes ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 156 guests