How far off is thorium energy?

viciam

Evening all,

In your opinions and based on your knowledge, how far in the future in terms of years do you think it is before thorium reactors will overtake uranium reactors of today, if at all?

Is thorium going to kill the uranium energy or will it not even come close?

Any views on this will be greatly appreciated.

Many thanks

etudiant

Thorium reactors is too broad a concept, as it covers the gamut from new fuel for existing reactors to existing design reactors optimized for thorium to new reactor designs such as the various molten salt thorium reactors.
Thorium fuel bundles formulated to perform in existing uranium reactors have been developed in Russia and proposed for use as well in the US.
The Canadian CANDU heavy water moderated reactors will run very happily on thorium fuel with minimal adjustments.
However,afaik no one has built a large scale molten salt thorium demonstrator, so that route is at least a decade from opening up and meanwhile uranium is fairly abundantly available at low prices.
Given these reasons, I think it will be many decades before thorium overtakes uranium as a reactor fuel.

libertad

Hi there,
What's your opinion about using Thorium as fuel in current nuclear reactors.
is it possible? is it economic?
What's the different in terms of physical behaviors in reactor core?

QuantumPion

Thorium is not fuel, it is only used as feed material to make U-233 in a breeder reactor.

If you wanted to you could fuel a conventional light water reactor with mixed oxide Th-232 plus U-233/U-235/Pu-239. In fact the Shippingport reactor operated as a thorium breeder for a period. However, LWR's are not particularly well suited for breeding as it is difficult and expensive to reprocess the fuel, and the breeding ratio is not much over 1 making it uneconomical to do so with current uranium prices.

Rive

Quote by libertad

Hi there,
What's your opinion about using Thorium as fuel in current nuclear reactors.
is it possible? is it economic?

As I know both South-Korea and Russia have some projects about mixed-thorium fuel for existing reactor types. But judged from the frequency of relevant publications it'll be some years (a decade, maybe) before they can start the licensing of the reactors for their new fuel.

Astronuc

In India, "so far about one tonne of thorium oxide fuel has been irradiated experimentally in PHWR reactors and has reprocessed and some of this has been reprocessed, according to BARC. A reprocessing centre for thorium fuels is being set up at Kalpakkam."

Ref: http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf53.html

See also - http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf62.html

With uranium prices so inexpensive, utilities use UO2 fuel.

The VVER and AHWR are well suited for a thorium cycle.

mheslep

Quote by QuantumPion

Thorium is not fuel, it is only used as feed material to make U-233 in a breeder reactor.

If you wanted to you could fuel a conventional light water reactor with mixed oxide Th-232 plus U-233/U-235/Pu-239. In fact the Shippingport reactor operated as a thorium breeder for a period. However, LWR's are not particularly well suited for breeding as it is difficult and expensive to reprocess the fuel, and the breeding ratio is not much over 1 making it uneconomical to do so with current uranium prices.

I believe the Th reactor advocates are counting on reprocessing to be inexpensive. In any case it won't be free, so there has to make-up somewhere: enrichment largely goes away, high pressure vessel goes away for a liquid fuel/salt design. What else? Maybe containment goes away without the chance that high pressure primary side water can flash to steam?

mheslep

Quote by Astronuc

...

With uranium prices so inexpensive, utilities use UO2 fuel.

A relevant question here is what is the price of enriched uranium since enrichment is not required for Th.

Astronuc

Quote by mheslep

A relevant question here is what is the price of enriched uranium since enrichment is not required for Th.

Some amount of fissile material (U-235 or Pu-239) is required to obtain a critical configuration, even if it is natural uranium. The lower the enrichment, the lower the burnup and the lower the conversion of Th-232 to U-233.

Thorium based fuels are invariably MOX, but (U,Th)O₂ or (Pu,Th)O₂, rather than (U,Pu)O₂.

There have been various studies related to Th-based fuel for Pu disposition, e.g.,
Performance of Thorium-Based Mixed Oxide Fuels for the Consumption of
Plutonium in Current and Advanced Reactors
http://www.inl.gov/technicalpublicat...ts/2808461.pdf

In August 2012 a follow-on agreement among the parties (Candu Energy having taken over from AECL) focused on undertaking a detailed conceptual design of the Advanced Fuel Candu Reactor (AFCR), which is described as "a further evolution of the successful Candu 6 and Generation III Enhanced Candu 6, optimized for use of recycled uranium and thorium fuel." At the completion of the agreement in two years, the parties “expect to have the basis of a pre-project agreement for two AFCR units in China, including site allocation and the definition of the licensing basis."

Phase one of the AECL agreement was a joint feasibility study to examine the economic feasibility of utilizing thorium in the Qinshan Phase III PHWRs. (Geologically, China is better endowed with thorium than uranium.) This involved demonstration use of eight thorium oxide fuel pins in the middle of a Canflex fuel bundle with low-enriched uranium.

In July 2009, a second phase agreement was signed among these four parties to jointly develop and demonstrate the use of thorium fuel and to study the commercial and technical feasibility of its full-scale use in Candu units. . . . .

. . . .

from http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/in...fuelcycle.html

The thorium fuel cycles in India and China have adopted conventional methods as opposed to MSR type systems.

snorkack

Quote by Astronuc

Some amount of fissile material (U-235 or Pu-239) is required to obtain a critical configuration, even if it is natural uranium. The lower the enrichment, the lower the burnup and the lower the conversion of Th-232 to U-233.

Thorium based fuels are invariably MOX, but (U,Th)O₂ or (Pu,Th)O₂, rather than (U,Pu)O₂.

Why mixed?

You´d want to expose the thorium only ever to well moderated neutron flux, because otherwise the fast neutrons fresh out of a fission event could cause (n,2n) reactions leading to uranium 232 (after two betas and neutron capture). It would also help to pick thorium which geologically is clean of ionium.

mheslep

Quote by Astronuc

....

from http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/in...fuelcycle.html

The thorium fuel cycles in India and China have adopted conventional methods as opposed to MSR type systems.

I had read India was exploring conventional solid fuel thorium reactors, but that China was investigating liquid fuels. From your link:

The China Academy of Sciences (CAS) in January 2011 launched a program of R&D on thorium-breeding molten-salt reactors (Th-MSR or TMSR), otherwise known as Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor (LFTR), claiming to have the world's largest national effort on these and hoping to obtain full intellectual property rights on the technology. The TMSR Research Centre apparently has a 5 MWe MSR prototype under construction at Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics (SINAP, under the Academy) with 2015 target for operation. The US Department of Energy is collaborating with the Academy on the program.

QuantumPion

Quote by mheslep

I believe the Th reactor advocates are counting on reprocessing to be inexpensive.

Quote by mheslep

A relevant question here is what is the price of enriched uranium since enrichment is not required for Th.

These statements are pertinent to liquid thorium fast reactors. LTFR's continuously reprocess their fuel and due to the fast neutron spectrum have a higher breeding ratio. They still need high enriched U or Pu feed to get started though. The previous poster was asking about using Th in a convention LWR however.

mheslep

Quote by QuantumPion

..They still need high enriched U or Pu feed to get started though..

Sure, as Astronuc also pointed out.

The salient point is that a liquid Th reactor would need a small, small fraction of the enriched U required by a conventional light water U reactor, and perhaps only at the first start up with no more ever required theoretically for the life of the reactor. In a world where liquid salt (or solid?) Th replaces U reactors the enrichment industry does not disappear, but it does slowly collapse to a shadow of its current self. Agents performing any additional enrichment would be clearly announcing they do so for one purpose - a weapon.

Astronuc

Quote by mheslep

I had read India was exploring conventional solid fuel thorium reactors, but that China was investigating liquid fuels. From your link:

The China Academy of Sciences (CAS) in January 2011 launched a program of R&D on thorium-breeding molten-salt reactors (Th-MSR or TMSR), otherwise known as Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor (LFTR), claiming to have the world's largest national effort on these and hoping to obtain full intellectual property rights on the technology. The TMSR Research Centre apparently has a 5 MWe MSR prototype under construction at Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics (SINAP, under the Academy) with 2015 target for operation. The US Department of Energy is collaborating with the Academy on the program.

As far as I know, the MSR is on paper, and it is certainly non-conventional.

Ideally, one would start with a minimal enrichment (from U-235) and then gradually introduce U-233 as it is produced.

There are certain design and performance issues to be resolved. One is homogeneity or variations of enrichment/reactivity (reactivity and power distribution), especially if there are multiple streams feeding the core, and in particular, if one stream goes offline.

I see another critical issue being the loss of longer-lived delayed neutrons with the introduction of feed without delayed neutrons. It could make reactivity control a bit of a challenge under certain conditions.

Astronuc

Quote by snorkack

Why mixed?

You´d want to expose the thorium only ever to well moderated neutron flux, because otherwise the fast neutrons fresh out of a fission event could cause (n,2n) reactions leading to uranium 232 (after two betas and neutron capture). It would also help to pick thorium which geologically is clean of ionium.

One needs a fissile source to begin (and control) the process. Reactivity control and stable power distribution are two basic requirements.

One should look at the threshold for n,2n in Th-232. It's about 6.8 MeV, and only reaches 1 b at 7.7 MeV - toward the tail end of the fission neutron energy distribution.

U and Th ores are cleaned of decay products.

snorkack

Quote by Astronuc

U and Th ores are cleaned of decay products.

Only elements.

Uranium inevitably contains decay product uranium II. Thorium inevitably contains decay product radiothorium.

If an ore contains a mixture of uranium and thorium then purified thorium also contains uranium decay products uranium X1, ionium, uranium Y and radioactinium. While uranium X1, uranium Y and radioactinium rapidly decay once uranium has been removed, ionium is long lived.

Astronuc

Quote by snorkack

Only elements.

Uranium inevitably contains decay product uranium II. Thorium inevitably contains decay product radiothorium.

If an ore contains a mixture of uranium and thorium then purified thorium also contains uranium decay products uranium X1, ionium, uranium Y and radioactinium. While uranium X1, uranium Y and radioactinium rapidly decay once uranium has been removed, ionium is long lived.

Please use modern terms for nuclides.

http://www.alphacounting.com/Th_Decay_Series.html
http://www.evs.anl.gov/pub/doc/Thorium.pdf

http://www.alphacounting.com/U_decay_series.html

Note the long half-lives of U-238 and Th-232. I know from experience that the U-234 content of natural uranium is quite low. In enriched uranium, it is also quite low, as is the activity. I have handled natural and enriched UO₂, and one task in a previous job was to verify the isotopic content of enriched U.

The content of Th-229 and 230 is less than 1% each, and the Th-232 content is generally greater than 99%. Other elements are separated from Thorium and Uranium.

Additional background: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...ar/radser.html

Similar discussions for: How far off is thorium energy?
Thread	Forum	Replies
Thorium Propulsion	Nuclear Engineering	19
Uranium,Thorium,what next?	Nuclear Engineering	3
Thorium Industry.	Nuclear Engineering	0
ADSR-Thorium in the UK	Nuclear Engineering	7
Free energy from Thorium to Radon	Introductory Physics Homework	1

viciam	How far off is thorium energy? Evening all, In your opinions and based on your knowledge, how far in the future in terms of years do you think it is before thorium reactors will overtake uranium reactors of today, if at all? Is thorium going to kill the uranium energy or will it not even come close? Any views on this will be greatly appreciated. Many thanks

libertad	Hi there, What's your opinion about using Thorium as fuel in current nuclear reactors. is it possible? is it economic? What's the different in terms of physical behaviors in reactor core?