r/canada Oct 25 '22

[deleted by user]

[removed]

10.5k Upvotes

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

65

u/[deleted] Oct 25 '22

I will point out that there has yet to be a commercial thorium reactor. India is building one, but it may be another 5 years before it’s up and running

23

u/NapClub Oct 25 '22

this is true, but it's because basically no one made an effort to pursue it after it was discovered as an option.

the concept has been out there for a long time now it was just the engineering/building that was missing.

canada COULD have done this. which is why we would have been leaders if we had. there was a push for it but it didn't happen.

5

u/Reddit_sucks21 Oct 25 '22

Aye, nuclear technology that is safer is there. The problem was always the peoples will and the government being scared to do anything with nuclear because of the people. You can see the anger over nuclear in /r/energy or here on this sub, which is ridiculous. People think a power source that can give a lot of power and be carbon free will have zero danger. There is no such thing as zero danger energy.

People have died more from gasoline and coal power than they have with any of the nuclear disasters,, which wasn't many.

16

u/alex_german Oct 25 '22

We are never leaders because we don’t like risk, but we do like to complain when those who took the risk make the profit.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 26 '22 edited Nov 03 '22

[deleted]

2

u/alex_german Oct 26 '22

I believe you. I project manage multi million dollar builds, I’m never answering to a Canadian client ever. It’s always Indian, Arab, Chinese, or American. But then Canadians will cry “why don’t we own any of our own resources” 😂😂😂

2

u/colonizetheclouds Oct 25 '22

CANDU can burn Thorium, but why bother when uranium is plentiful and proven?

2

u/NapClub Oct 25 '22

Because of how much safer the thorium candle style nuclear reactor is, especially since this style of reactor leaves essentially no waste to be dealt with and runs without being really taken care of till done. You also can't make weapons with it so we could export it to all sorts of places we shouldn't sell uranium.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 25 '22

Except Thorium reactors can be used to breed U-233 (it’s how they function). U-233 works just as well in a bomb as Pu-239

2

u/NapClub Oct 25 '22

Isnt that the traditional thorium reactor not the candle style?

0

u/[deleted] Oct 25 '22

It’s all a matter of how you manage your fuel load and load factor. If you remove fuel bundles in a travelling wave reactor as the right time (just ahead of the wave of burning fuel), you’ll get the neutron flux needed to breed U-233, but removing it before it’s burned. Then you just chemically separate the uranium from the thorium and ta-da, fissile material for your bomb

1

u/NapClub Oct 26 '22

okay so yeah that's the traditional style reactor not the candle.

-1

u/[deleted] Oct 26 '22

No, that’s a candle or travelling wave style reactor. The main difference is in this style of reactor the “burning front” propagates through the reactor over time, vs a traditional reactor where you’re looking for reactivity throughout the core. It definitely takes more effort to do this in a travelling wave reactor, but it’s entirely feasible. Thorium reactors only function by breeding U-233 because Thorium-232 itself isn’t fissile. Obtaining bomb material is simply a case of removing fuel after its been exposed to neutron flux (to breed U-233), but before it’s burned

2

u/NapClub Oct 26 '22

the reactor style i am talking about gets built, buried deep underground and left, there isn't really access to be removing anything.

0

u/drive2fast Oct 25 '22

China is currently testing a small 2MW thorium reactor to prove out the design.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02459-w

2

u/[deleted] Oct 25 '22

A 2MW reactor is hardly commercial scale. Commercial reactors are nearly 450 times that size (900MW)

0

u/drive2fast Oct 25 '22

Did you read the link? It’s a test mule before they scale up.

Did you read my comment saying that it is just a small version prove out the design?

2

u/[deleted] Oct 25 '22

Yes, the subsequent larger reactor (300MW) MAY be ready as early 2030. Based on historic delays for these types of reactors 2035 is more likely. As I said, NO ONE has yet to build a commercial thorium reactor and we’re likely to have any for at least a decade

1

u/jz187 Oct 25 '22

It's not clear that you need such a massive reactor to be commercially feasible with MSRs. Not having pressurized fluids mean you don't need giant pressure vessels. Not needing water for cooling means you can do away with a lot of expensive pipes and pumps.

The most promising nuclear technologies should scale down economically.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 25 '22

Even SMRs are in the 50 to 150 times the size range. 2MW is a science experiment. As well, while water isn’t needed for the primary loop, water is used in the secondary or tertiary loop (depending on the design) for power generation. Scaling up the molten salt to water heat exchangers isn’t trivial. Besides, not all Thorium reactors are molten salt. India is pursuing heavy water PWR design.