[ExI] cost of SBSP and thorium

[Eugen Leitl]

On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 04:54:11PM +0100, BillK wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Brent Neal wrote:
> > This is confusing to me as well. Making fluoride salts of actinides is a well known technology.
> > Molten salt reactors have existed, as has been pointed out here, for years. The only thing I can
> > figure is that there are some issues with fuel handling and heat management that we were
> > cavalier about in the 60s that need to be dealt with now. But that's not a 2-decade problem,
> > that's a half-decade problem…
> >
> >
> 
> LFTRs are different in almost every way to existing reactors. There is
> a difference between building a small test reactor and building a full

Thorium is not fissible, but fertile. A thorium MSR must be kickstarted
with fissibles, and have sufficient breeding factor. This has never been
tested.

In order to validate all aspects of a new design you need to observe a commercial-scale
pilot for a decade. Before you cannot make any claims about
that particular design nevermind an envelope of designs.

This is elementary. Failure to realize this demonstrates you have no
business opening your mouth on things nuclear. Because you have got no
clue. 

> size production reactor. To build a standard nuclear power station
> takes 5 to 10 years *after* all the haggling over sites and permits,
> planning, design, etc.
> 
> For a list of LFTR design problems, see:
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor#Design_challenges>
> 
> It is no use hand-waving and saying that the Oak Ridge test has
> already solved these problems. The Chinese and other researchers won't
> believe you. They will have to build their own test plant first.
> 
> So, allow 10 years for a test build and problem solving. Then a few
> years for designing a full-size power station and getting quotes for
> the actual build. Then 5 to 10 years for a production build.
> 
> It could easily take 20 years.

In 20 years, the demand gap is 20 TW. You've missed the goal
by 20000 new reactors. You're too late. Buh-bye.

Oh, and where do you think the ~40 kT of U-233 is coming from?