That's brilliant*! It's as simple as plumbing molten lead through dozens of control mechanisms and heat exchange units.
*(If you can sort out the cold spots, hot spots, direct the flow of salts in all parts of the reactor, separate spent fuel from fresh fuel with low loss, shield the radiation, rapidly change the reactor output in response to a sudden shift on energy demand (such as a substation failing), sustain the fuel cycle, and do it all for less than the unit cost of coal power)
@dougaragon - Totally agree - great reason to do a Thorium Energy FLASH MOB as a media event. Gotta happen - everything else is far too s ---l----o---w---!
It would be neat to see a modular-scalable approach that can go into a dormant status to use during repair cycles or during times of growth or emergency as a supplement to a legacy economy.
@azezel2311 - Yep, That is on the CAD drawing board. We are thinking about how to get about a 10 megawatt system to fit into 2 containers. This could be used by industry or municipalities to support their operations, or the Military could use it on forward operating bases to eliminate the need for so much expensive and dangerous to transport fossil fuels
@ThoriumAlliance What about a core chamber approach made of cylinders that would inflate like a balloon? The idea currently in my head would be based on a standardized part about the size of of a rail or semi freight unit that could roll off an assembly line and down the existing infrastructure to the operation site.
@ThoriumAlliance With the military it might be better to transport semi container fuel cells from regional command sites. Same with the small to midsized ships. They would have a hatch that would unbolt and pull the fuel assembly out to be swapped every 6 months.
China burns more coal then we do and produces electricity at 3 cents KWH. They are not going give up burning coal unless they have a cheaper energy source. This is the only source I've seen which could produce electricity that cheaply.
If we replace OUR coal plants with LFTRs, we could save trillions of dollars over the next couple decades and cut our co2 in half.
But wait, don't most LFTR designs (along with almost every other nuclear plant design) call for the core being underground? If you do that, then gravity is a passive containment mechanism for many of the gaseous fission products.
That's brilliant*! It's as simple as plumbing molten lead through dozens of control mechanisms and heat exchange units.
*(If you can sort out the cold spots, hot spots, direct the flow of salts in all parts of the reactor, separate spent fuel from fresh fuel with low loss, shield the radiation, rapidly change the reactor output in response to a sudden shift on energy demand (such as a substation failing), sustain the fuel cycle, and do it all for less than the unit cost of coal power)
NBoole 5 days ago
"shouldn't the sun be rising behind me?" - epic
artdeco101010 3 weeks ago
I would go with free piston stirling cycle engines instead of turbines. That would make the plant even more "safer, smaller, cheaper". Go Sunpower!
ufoengines 3 weeks ago
The future energy source, support it!! Get the word out!!!
dougaragon 8 months ago
@dougaragon - Totally agree - great reason to do a Thorium Energy FLASH MOB as a media event. Gotta happen - everything else is far too s ---l----o---w---!
fargonebewdy 8 months ago
How do you pump molten salt?
migkillertwo 11 months ago
@migkillertwo
With a pump. An electric one is pretty good.
Canadazeus 11 months ago
It would be neat to see a modular-scalable approach that can go into a dormant status to use during repair cycles or during times of growth or emergency as a supplement to a legacy economy.
azezel2311 1 year ago
@azezel2311 - Yep, That is on the CAD drawing board. We are thinking about how to get about a 10 megawatt system to fit into 2 containers. This could be used by industry or municipalities to support their operations, or the Military could use it on forward operating bases to eliminate the need for so much expensive and dangerous to transport fossil fuels
ThoriumAlliance 1 year ago
@ThoriumAlliance What about a core chamber approach made of cylinders that would inflate like a balloon? The idea currently in my head would be based on a standardized part about the size of of a rail or semi freight unit that could roll off an assembly line and down the existing infrastructure to the operation site.
azezel2311 1 year ago
@ThoriumAlliance With the military it might be better to transport semi container fuel cells from regional command sites. Same with the small to midsized ships. They would have a hatch that would unbolt and pull the fuel assembly out to be swapped every 6 months.
azezel2311 1 year ago
China burns more coal then we do and produces electricity at 3 cents KWH. They are not going give up burning coal unless they have a cheaper energy source. This is the only source I've seen which could produce electricity that cheaply.
If we replace OUR coal plants with LFTRs, we could save trillions of dollars over the next couple decades and cut our co2 in half.
bigpchamber 1 year ago
Awesome! I love the size of the footprint.
But wait, don't most LFTR designs (along with almost every other nuclear plant design) call for the core being underground? If you do that, then gravity is a passive containment mechanism for many of the gaseous fission products.
zassounotsukushi 1 year ago
@zassounotsukushi
Yeah, we want to go underground too
ThoriumAlliance 1 year ago