Top-Rated Free Essay
Preview

The 21st Century Energy Solution: Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor

Powerful Essays
1325 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The 21st Century Energy Solution: Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor
The 21st Century Energy Solution: Liquid Flouride Thorium Reactor
Recently the spotlight has been set on renewable energies to assist with weaning off of greenhouse gas emissions, solving issues with energy independence, and to exploit their inherent renewability. Unfortunately our technology is not quite up to speed economically with our wish to rely completely on renewable energy, thus many non-renewable energies are recognized as viable options to power our economy (Fraser, 2011). The United States’ current position on diversifying with non-renewables consists of oil, natural gas, coal, and the less spoken of, nuclear power. Nuclear power is the process by which a reactor contains a slow explosion called fission, which gives off a positive net amount of energy that can be harvested. Of course the social stigma around nuclear is so strong that even if there were an undiscovered completely safe type of nuclear power plant, justifying the complex science would be challenging. After events such as Fukushima, Chernobyl, and Three Mile Island, the vast majority of society believes nuclear energy is nothing more than a death wish. Contrary to popular belief, a safer alternative in nuclear energy has been discovered and has been gaining popularity over the past few years despite the recent tragedy in Japan (Sorensen, 2011). Though newly rekindled, the non-mainstream nuclear power known as Molten Salt Reactor (MSR) was discovered in the 1960’s and had been proved to be a very attractive option to the more popular Light Water Reactor (LWR). It all began with nuclear physicist Alvin Weinberg, who would graduate from the University of Chicago soon become research director at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). Weinberg was given the freedom to experiment with designing multiple types of nuclear reactors including the prominent LWR’s that are in commercial use today. Subsequently Weinberg had noted the potential danger of a LWR and moved on to designing a safer nuclear power technology that he would end up supporting for the rest of his life. His research team at ORNL created a fluid fuel in a MSR, opposed to the traditional solid fuel in LWR’s, in order to decrease the pressure and overall danger of the system. To Weinberg’s delight, although this prototype MSR had corrosive issues because of the salt involved, Weinberg deemed this technology far more superior to LWR.
Furthermore, the worst part about current hatred for LWR’s is that although it can be a dangerous process, the technology is revolutionary and its power has potential that we are seriously unaware of. For now with our current state of knowledge about nuclear power combined with our world’s predicament with how we generate power so ineffectively, MSR’s must be and should have always been the government’s number one priority (Sorensen, 2011). This specific type of nuclear reactor is certainly on the minds of at least China, India, Brazil, Indonesia, South Korea, and Australia (Furukawa, 2008). Since these countries showed interest at least by 2008 it can be assumed that they are already in the process of construction. An example for our worst-case scenario would be for the United States to simply stand back and watch as the rest of the world capitalizes on the best power generating technology known to man. A technology that of course the United States developed and had in operation fifty years ago, but the idea simply faded away. As the majority of the US would like to go green, it may not be too early to claim the MSR as green nuclear power. Nuclear reactors do not emit greenhouse gases taking care of one of the three major concerns with the future of energy. Though observing an entire life cycle of Thorium and materials to make the power plant, there are transportation emissions involved. It turns out however, that Thorium is extremely accessible in the US as it is already mined concurrently with other rare earth minerals but is typically discarded for lack of utility. The United States has somewhere in the order of 15% of the world’s total Thorium stockpile at around 15 million tons (Bonometti, 2008). Even if we were to run out of Thorium, the Moon has even greater amounts that by the time we begin to hit peak Thorium it will surely be so far in the future that extracting moon materials would not be a challenge. As an investor this further assures a safe bet, but what is so safe about the LFTR design is that a meltdown or explosion is so much more unlikely to occur than in LWR systems. Since the carrier of thorium is a liquid, liquid fluoride, it allows standard pressure at high temperatures. Traditionally, in LWR, water had to cool down the solid fuel since it couldn’t handle the high temperatures because of high pressure, which had always been a fine line behind meltdowns (Sorensen, 2011). In the LFTR, the system can naturally correct an over heated system by melting a frozen salt plug at the base of the system to enter into an emergency cooling tank.
If LFTR technology has already been proved, proved to be safe, proved to be powerful, and proved to be available and cheap, then why doesn’t the world run on it? The technology itself seems to be a bit mysterious itself or maybe doubtful since it has already been ignored once before. What it comes down to is the timescale that nuclear reactors had been created. Back at Oak Ridge Laboratory where Weinberg had designed nuclear power he first designed the LWR, which happened to be more dangerous, but nevertheless reported his results. Quickly academics and politicians alike were astounded by the amount of power that could be generated through nuclear fission. Academics such as Weinberg understood the dangerous design of the LWR and proceeded to design safer alternatives, hence the MSR. Politicians on the other hand, had deadlines to meet, people to please, jobs to create, and the LWR went commercial. There is even a specific phone call between President Nixon and a California LWR director expressing swift actions to commercialize the technology before elections (Sorensen, 2011). As Weinberg fought the Nixon administration to stop continuing with LWR’s he was soon fired from the Oak Ridge Lab and so did the MSR department. Thus many scientists have since seen and admired his work and have finally had reason to express its various benefits once the inevitable failures of LWR ensued, for example, Fukushima.
In addition, it is important to note how resultant issues with LWR nuclear plants in the past have all been due to the intrinsic difficulty with handling a solid fuel at its required high pressure for fission to take place. In other words, none of those accidents would have happened if they would have simply listened to their founder, Weinberg, and chose to go with an MSR design. As the public is informed with this somewhat difficult science I imagine it will take about as long to understand the difference in types of nuclear reactors as it did for the majority of the population to understand the science behind the greenhouse effect. This is based on the fact that the same oil and coal industries will be threatened along with ill-educated environmentalists who will viciously support only renewable energy.

Works Cited
Bonometti, Joe. "The Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor: What Fusion Wanted To Be."
Lecture.GoogleTalk. 20 Jan. 2012. Youtube. Google, 18 Nov. 2008. Web. 20 Jan. 2012.
Engel, J. R. "Energy Citations Database (ECD) - - Document #5352526." Office of
Scientific and Technical Information, OSTI, U.S. Department of Energy. Oak Ridge National Lab, 19 Feb. 2009. Web. 02 Feb. 2012.
.
Furukawa, Kazuo. "A Road Map for the Realization of Global-scale Thorium Breeding
Fuel Cycle by Single Molten-fluoride flow." ScienceDirect, 4 Mar. 2008. Web. 25 Jan. 2012..
Fraser, Nicholas. "Re-thinking New Zealand’s Energy Policy: The Case for LFTR." New
Zealand Government, 2011. Web. 25 Jan. 2012..
Sorensen, Kirk. "The Thorium Molten-Salt Reactor: Why Didn 't This Happen (and Why
Is Now the Right Time?)." Lecture. GoogleTalk. 20 Jan. 2012. Youtube. Google, 16 Dec. 2011. Web. 20 Jan. 2012.

Citations: Database (ECD) - - Document #5352526." Office of Scientific and Technical Information, OSTI, U.S. Department of Energy. Oak Ridge National Lab, 19 Feb. 2009. Web. 02 Feb. 2012. . Furukawa, Kazuo. "A Road Map for the Realization of Global-scale Thorium Breeding Fuel Cycle by Single Molten-fluoride flow." ScienceDirect, 4 Mar. 2008. Web. 25 Jan. 2012.. Fraser, Nicholas. "Re-thinking New Zealand’s Energy Policy: The Case for LFTR." New Zealand Government, 2011. Web. 25 Jan. 2012.. Sorensen, Kirk. "The Thorium Molten-Salt Reactor: Why Didn 't This Happen (and Why Is Now the Right Time?)." Lecture. GoogleTalk. 20 Jan. 2012. Youtube. Google, 16 Dec. 2011. Web. 20 Jan. 2012.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Better Essays

    Brownson, J. (2014, May 25). Department of Energy and Mineral Engineering. Retrieved from Penn State University: https://www.e-education.psu.edu/eme810/node/593…

    • 854 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Eugene Robinson, author of “No Fail-Safe Option”, writes during the recent destruction of the Fukushima power plant, cautioning the use of nuclear power, and touching on the Chernobyl incident. He claims that the idea of nuclear energy, in spite of its benefits, is not worth the destruction and damage it could potentially cause.…

    • 257 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    1. Due by Day 7 . Nuclear Power . All energy sources have drawbacks. Even the clean hydropower option has negative ramifications. Weigh those against the possible consequences of developing nuclear power, a controversial alternative to fossil fuels. Discuss the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster as well as the 20th century Chernobyl nuclear meltdown in drawing conclusions about risk versus reward of nuclear energy use. The paper must be two to three pages in length and formatted according to APA style. You must use at least one ...…

    • 489 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Tucker Nuclear Summary

    • 411 Words
    • 2 Pages

    In order to remain at the forefront of technological innovation and industrial prowess, the United States must become cognizant that the use of nuclear energy is by far the most efficient policy regarding the creation of power despite the possible risks. This is the belief of William Tucker, the author of the New York Times published article, “Why I Still Support Nuclear Power, Even after Fukushima”.…

    • 411 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Three Mile Island Effects

    • 3565 Words
    • 15 Pages

    Todd H. Otis, A Review Of Nuclear Energy in the United States: Hidden Power, (New York, NY: Praeger Publishers,…

    • 3565 Words
    • 15 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Many people around the world ask themselves what are the disadvantages of adopting an alternative solution to solve the consumption of global nuclear energy? Based on what we have experienced through events with major disasters and the aftermath of many casualties, it has summed up to result in having failures outgrowing expectations. Therefore, global nuclear power usage is to be opposed due to the fact that it comes with high financial costs, nuclear waste management complications, and the fact that thousands in populations are mass numbers of casualties.…

    • 530 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Fission and Fusion

    • 532 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Article 2: “Should the world increase its reliance on nuclear energy?” The beginning of this article gives brief examples of the pros and cons of nuclear reactors from both sides. Opponents cite the case of the recent Japanese power plant disaster and dangers of Iran’s formation of nuclear power. Proponents argue that the backlash is overblown. They say how there have been no measured effects of human…

    • 532 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Edward Teller

    • 2290 Words
    • 10 Pages

    When nuclear fission was discovered in 1939, Teller quickly saw it enormous potential for both military and civilian use [13]. He recognises the use of nuclear power as a clean and inexpensive source compared to other alternatives. This may lead to a better environment protection as well. He also realised that nuclear energy will be really important towards the development for the 21st century, might even go up to 23rd or 24th century. Greater demand of energy for the upcoming society allowed nuclear energy to be one of the key sources for industrial and economical foundation. Major countries now days such as Japan, the United Kingdom and the USA have major use of nuclear energy because of its cheapness. Scientists also found out the large consumption of fossil fuel have largely affected the concentration level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. In Memoirs, Teller noted that, “Alternative energy sources, such as wind power and solar energy, are not quantitatively significant.” He thus saw nuclear power as a key option for the long term [13]. While working at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Teller contributed to some of the early reactor projects, and in 1947, he became the first chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission’s (AEC’s) Committee on Reactor Safeguards [13]. He always stresses the other scientist to be aware of the danger of hazards and chemicals. Then, he designed an…

    • 2290 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Three Mile Island

    • 3044 Words
    • 13 Pages

    Though we have had worries and issues on how to handle our power situation in the future, nuclear power has always been a sparkling prospect. It has been gleaming there just waiting to be tapped. After the bombs and destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki the world started to explore other avenues to use the science and power of atoms and came to discover nuclear power. Although this technology seemed like a god sent, there are inherent problems with the use and deployment of nuclear power. These problems have the potential to cause significant loss of life. In fact they have caused the loss of life before. Due to these issues, nuclear policy has always been a hotbed of debate. In actuality only several of the hundreds of reactors in existence have had problems. The first noteworthy accident and the one that will be discussed today was the accident at the Three Mile Island complex, here in the USA. Another accident occurred several years after at the Chernobyl compound. This accident which took place in the former USSR is the worse reactor accident to date and massive casualties were incurred. In addition to these; the earthquake and tsunami in Japan, which occurred earlier this month has put several reactors there in potentially an even worse place than Chernobyl. Focusing on Three Mile Island, this almost horrific accident occurred in the late seventies and was very close to going super critical (i.e. that is melting down). This accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear complex has greatly affected the United States of America and international nuclear policy. In the USA no reactors have been built since this accident. The accident reignited people’s fears of nuclear power. Stepping back for a minute, nuclear power first started evolving in the 1950’s. While research in this area had been done well before the fifties it was all for the purpose of academic and military use. This…

    • 3044 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Thorium

    • 362 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Molten Salt Reactor that use thorium has fuel are known since the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in the 1960s build a reactor of this type. The reactor work 1960 until the 1965 that was stop by funding cuts. The reason that the government stops this experiment was because this energy fuel was discovered on the cold war and the primary objective for United States on that time was to increase his nuclear weapons, the waste that thorium reactors produce cannot be turned into nuclear weapons and the waste that uranium reactors produce can be used to produce nuclear weapons. The primary reason that I select this news is because I am making a research using this reactor method and the most important reason is that we only have six more years…

    • 362 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nuclear Energy - High Costs

    • 14024 Words
    • 57 Pages

    fter the spectacular crash of the 1950s propaganda of nuclear power that would be “too cheap to meter,” evidenced in dozens of cancelled nuclear power plants because they were too costly to build or complete, there is a new push for nuclear power in the United States. Some advocates of a nuclear power “renaissance” are basing their appeals on the notion that nuclear power will be an inexpensive way to get new baseload capacity and to combat global warming. Others believe that it may become economical if there is a high enough price on carbon dioxide emissions.…

    • 14024 Words
    • 57 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Thorium

    • 1027 Words
    • 5 Pages

    In recent years there has been renewed interest by experts in using thorium as a nuclear fuel in place of uranium to create nuclear power. Thorium, as well as uranium and plutonium, can be used as fuel in a nuclear reactor. Here’s how it works. When Th232 absorbs a neutron it becomes Th233, which is unstable and decays into protactinium-233 and then into U233. That’s the same uranium isotope we use in reactors now as a nuclear fuel, the one that is fissile all on its own. Thankfully, it is also relatively long lived, which means at this point in the cycle the irradiated fuel can be unloaded from the reactor and the U233 separated from the remaining thorium. The uranium is then fed into another reactor all on its own, to generate energy. The U233 does its thing, splitting apart and releasing high-energy neutrons. But there isn’t a pile of U238 sitting by. Remember, with uranium reactors it’s the U238, turned into U239 by absorbing some of those high-flying neutrons, that produces all the highly radioactive waste products. With thorium, the U233 is isolated and the result is far fewer highly radioactive, long-lived byproducts. Thorium nuclear waste only stays radioactive for 500 years, instead of 10,000, and there is 1,000 to 10,000 times less of it to start…

    • 1027 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    osha

    • 67643 Words
    • 271 Pages

    us ed in accordance with the licence terms and conditions . It mus t not be forwarded to, or s tored, or acces s ed by, any…

    • 67643 Words
    • 271 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nuclear Fusion

    • 826 Words
    • 4 Pages

    In spring of 1989, two scientists by the name of Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann announced that they had found a way to create nuclear fusion in a relatively simple and cheap way. Superhot fusion is the process in which deuterium, a heavier form of hydrogen, is held within a magnetic field and heated to tens of millions of degrees. The nuclei of the atoms fuse, and heat energy is released. This kind of fusion happens in our solar system’s sun. This type of fusion is known to occur, but recreating it is extremely difficult. One method of creating fusion failed because even a 100 trillion watt laser was not powerful enough to stimulate fusion. Fusion at room temperature, or cold fusion, is the type that Pons and Fleischmann claimed to have made. Cold fusion is theoretically possible if, instead of electrons, the deuterium has a cloud of heavier particles around it called muons, but attempts had never created noteworthy amounts of heat. If such fusion could be discovered, the scientists responsible would be guaranteed Nobel Prizes. This is because when fusion occurs, more heat is released than consumed, and it is an extremely efficient and 100% environmentally green source of energy. Fusion is a virtually limitless source of power. In addition, the power plants would have absolutely no pollutants; not even carbon dioxide, which is believed to cause global climate change, as well as giving off significantly less radiation than nuclear power plants. The generator basically runs on seawater. Needless to say, the find caused much excitement in the scientific and political communities.…

    • 826 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nuclear Reactors in the past few years have created a problem and moreover, they are confronted with issues relating to disposal of nuclear waste, catastrophic accidents despite the development of newer reactor designs and economics of nuclear power. After two or more decades there is a need for a revival of nuclear power. This is mainly due to climate change, desire for energy security and volatility in the fossil fuel market.…

    • 688 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays