Total Posts:3|Showing Posts:1-3
Jump to topic:

Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors [LFTRS]

JuliusMaxims
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2014 9:31:23 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I have recently become interested in the possibilities that the liquid fluoride thorium reactor provides but I'm still rather wet behind the ears when it comes to the subject. Is anyone else interested in them, and if so what do you think of them. Also links to more information regarding said reactors would be greatly appreciated.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2014 11:25:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/13/2014 9:31:23 PM, JuliusMaxims wrote:
I have recently become interested in the possibilities that the liquid fluoride thorium reactor provides but I'm still rather wet behind the ears when it comes to the subject. Is anyone else interested in them, and if so what do you think of them. Also links to more information regarding said reactors would be greatly appreciated.

Really interesting. Seems the Chinese are up for it. 300 years doesn't seem that long to hold waste. But it still would be a lot of waste.

Have you taken a look at this http://www.mdpi.com...

Application in military aircraft is cool and supply seems abundant. 3,000 is much better than 300. I prefer renewable and green energies. http://www.csuohio.edu...

After reading the article I do remember seeing a video on these things. It talked of the health hazards of the tetraflourides and core. I'm unsure if this video is public. I was unable to find it on youtube. But I remember clearly footage of the reactor and the narration. I think it was at some abandoned US military research facility.
JuliusMaxims
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/14/2014 4:28:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/13/2014 11:25:56 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/13/2014 9:31:23 PM, JuliusMaxims wrote:
I have recently become interested in the possibilities that the liquid fluoride thorium reactor provides but I'm still rather wet behind the ears when it comes to the subject. Is anyone else interested in them, and if so what do you think of them. Also links to more information regarding said reactors would be greatly appreciated.

Really interesting. Seems the Chinese are up for it. 300 years doesn't seem that long to hold waste. But it still would be a lot of waste.

Have you taken a look at this http://www.mdpi.com...

Application in military aircraft is cool and supply seems abundant. 3,000 is much better than 300. I prefer renewable and green energies. http://www.csuohio.edu...

After reading the article I do remember seeing a video on these things. It talked of the health hazards of the tetraflourides and core. I'm unsure if this video is public. I was unable to find it on youtube. But I remember clearly footage of the reactor and the narration. I think it was at some abandoned US military research facility.

Based on my limited knowledge there was an initial debate between thermal(slow) reactors, which the LFTR is and fast reactors. It seems that the fast reactors won out in the U.S. and the only interest in thermal reactors was for a stable energy source to be used in aircraft. The fast reactors didn't work out well and were extremely complicated to run and all of the ones that were built have been shut down.

I've also heard that a much larger portion of the fuel is used with this method some of the waste that is produced is in the form of Plutonium 238, which is no longer being produced and is vital for the operation of deep space probes like Cassini"Huygens and the Voyager spacecrafts.

I may be incorrect in this but I've also heard that Molten Salt Reactors can be "fed" weapons grade nuclear material to produce energy.