[ExI] EP and Peak oil.

Jordan Hazen jnh at vt11.net
Sun Apr 6 02:10:03 UTC 2008

On Sat, Apr 05, 2008 at 01:01:52PM -0700, samantha wrote:
> On the other hand breeder reactors use fuel much more efficiently 
> producing less waste.  They can also use some current types of "nuclear 
> waste" in their fuel cycle.  If we are going to nuclear power there is 
> no question that breeders are desirable.  
> There are many kinds of reactors only some of which are initially fueled 
> with plutonium.    What is "conventional" seems to have been as much due 
> to the old anti-nuclear power hysteria than sound technical limitations.   
> > A breeder uses weapons grade plutonium as a fuel, and lots of it.
> That is not entirely accurate.  See 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breeder_reactor
> Many types of breeders can be built. 

I've always thought the molten-salt designs were particularly elegant.


They can be configured as breeders, with the ability to burn Thorium
(Th-U233 cycle) as well as U / Pu, and even heavier actinides from LWR
waste.  The coolant loop is low-pressure and chemically inert, hence
safer than water on both counts.

I could be a tad biased from having read Weinberg's book, though.

> >  Also, a
> > conventional reactor uses water as a coolant and to slow down the neutrons,
> > a breeder uses molten sodium that burns in the air and explodes in the
> > presents of water.
> There are different existing breeders with different cooling mechanisms 
> including using water.
> - samantha


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list