Can anyone comment on the evolution of reactor designs and why the research with molten salt reactors, which seemed quite promising (50+ years ago!) didn't lead to productization? Was it due to engineering hurdles that seemed tough then, but now aren't as big of a deal? I'm very curious as to why the seemingly safer and self-sustaining solution was pushed aside.

Naturlich. There goes meine letzte post for tonight.

Bio organism markers? Its a lot easier for bacteria and such to migrate 10 miles down threw solid rock over a period of millions of years than to have us believe that all the oil that deep is from dead dinosaurs.

BTW - how did the dinosaurs get to the moons of Jupitor to generate methane seas?

Kool: It is VERY difficult (not impossible, but difficult) to use LFTRs for nuclear weapons production. A byproduct of ordinary use of U-235 (and PU-239), both with U-238 as "filler", is that they produce a nice amount of weapons-grade material in their normal operation, and breeder reactors set up to produce fuel also produce bomb material.

----------

Gen, so the implication would be that weapons production was the #1 choice when deciding which path to take? I'm cynical enough to admit that this would be an important factor, maybe even the most important, but surely there are other things that contributed. Plus the breeder reactors would be involved in the solution anyways, and they could still be used for weaponization.

I'm specifically interested in the engineering problems. I don't know enough about this tech to know what the down sides are. There must be some serious "cons" here, even though the "pros" sure like they should win out. How do you make pipes that won't corrode when filled with molten salts for a few decades? Even the tiniest bit of water getting in would be...bad. What about the fact that they engineers at Oak Ridge probably have mostly passed away by now. Do we need to re-learn and re-verify everything that they did, or has ongoing research proceeded without a large gap?

It was dual-use - they wanted one infrastructure for both power and weapons.

The materials required to safely handle the salt are exotic but already known.

----------

Another BBC documentary aired on SBS here in Australia recently, which examined the Nuclear industry more generally and ended on Weinberg's Thorium and Liquid Fuel reactor technology

http://www.sbs.com.au/documentary/video/....

Perhaps these are the winds of change?

Quote:

Have you heard of the Norwegian oil firm Statoil's two recent discoveries. Havis has at a minimum 200 million barrels of oil equivalent and Skurgard 400 minimum. The more optimistic estimates ( nearly always exceeded in time ) are 900 million barrels.

Do the math and tell us how many days supply 900 million barrels is.

We need Thorium reactors pronto.

----------

The future's bright, the future's orange.

@Kool:

KD covered it. They had a running demo reactor and when the decision came down they pulled the plug. The industry wanted something for both power and to make bomb material and an LSTR would not make enough for the tens of thousands of bombs the DOE wanted.

It's why France has so many of the damn things. They need bomb material for Force de Frappe.

"You can always count on Americans to do the right thingafter theyve tried everything else." -- Winston Churchill

I have not failed. Ive just found 10,000 ways that wont work -- Thomas Edison

There's some common ground in the above quotes.

----------

"The stock market isn't bullish, it's bull$hit." -- Alan King

Dan_Kurt wrote..

NOT IN THOUSANDS OF YEARS! THERE is no Peak Oil crisis.

There may well be abiogenic oil, but even if there is, the abiogenic thesis says nothing about the rate at which primordial hydrocarbons seep upwards.

We have been wildcatting wells for a long long time, in all kinds of locations, and the interval between big field discoveries is getting longer and longer.

This is not a peak oil thread. Its about another way to exploit nuclear energy and the way the energy could get used via liquid fuel preparation.

What about using Farnsworth Fusors to breed initial U233, to speed things up a bit?

Quote:

What about using Farnsworth Fusors to breed initial U233, to speed things up a bit?

Capital idea!

Burya_rubenstein wrote..

What about using Farnsworth Fusors to breed initial U233, to speed things up a bit?

Unnecessary, since an MSR is perfectly capable of running on other fuels. Also where do you get the energy to operate them from?

Just saw this video on LFTR that I thought you'd like. Might even want to spread it around for the uninformed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9M__yYbs....

----------

There are no gun free zones where free men tread.