U.S. DoE Helping China Build a Molten-salt Nuclear Reactor

Posted: February 3, 2015 in Technology and Energy

SEE ALSO:  China and Canada Sign Agreement on Nuclear Fuel Development

SEE ALSO:  Russia To Build Jordan’s First Nuclear Power Plant


.

The U.S. is helping China build a novel, superior nuclear reactor

By

In 1973, the Nixon administration made a momentous decision that altered the course of civilian nuclear power: It fired the director of the renowned Oak Ridge National Laboratory, scuppering development of a reactor widely regarded as safer and superior to the complicated, inferior behemoths that define the global industry to this day.

Nixon banished a reactor that was virtually meltdown-proof, left comparatively little long-lived waste, made it more difficult to fashion a bomb from the waste, ran at friendlier atmospheric pressure instead of the potentially explosive pressurized environments of conventional reactors, and ran at much higher temperatures, making it more cost-effective as an electricity generator.

Under director Alvin Weinberg, Oak Ridge had built and run a small, experimental version of the so-called molten-salt reactor for five years. It wasn’t perfect but it was a good start, and inventor Weinberg was preparing to improve it. Then Nixon’s axe fell, leaving Oak Ridge all dressed up and nowhere to go as the keeper of a valuable, clean, safe nuclear energy technology—a technology that today could go a long way toward moving the world onto a much needed source of power that doesn’t emit carbon dioxide.

Decades later, the U.S. Department of Energy (which owns Oak Ridge) is slowly reawakening to Weinberg’s vision. But this time, rather than build a molten-salt reactor itself—the country currently lacks the political will and funding to do so—the U.S. is helping others.

Fortune has learned that DOE plans to sign a 10-year collaboration agreement with China to help that country build at least one molten-salt machine within the next decade. And in a smaller development, Oak Ridge publicly announced in January that it will advise Terrestrial Energy, a privately held Canadian start-up, on development of a molten-salt reactor that draws on Weinberg designs and on the reactor scheme that briefly hatched at Oak Ridge after Weinberg left.

The idea from the U.S. perspective—especially with the larger DOE collaboration with the Chinese Academy of Sciences—is to foster a reactor that could eventually gain hold in the U.S.

“The Chinese will be doing work and sharing information with us, and we’ll be applying our expertise and supporting them,” Oak Ridge nuclear engineer Jess Gehin tells Fortune. “They’re going to build a reactor there [in China]. Hopefully one will get built in the U.S., but there isn’t any concrete plan for that.”

In recent years, China has committed some $400 million to development of two molten-salt reactors at the Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics, which is part of the Academy. China first announced its plans in early 2011, and at one point was targeting this year for completion of a tiny pilot version of its first, on the way to a full blown demonstrator by 2024, rated at 100 megawatts—a size that fits the emerging trend for small reactors. Its target dates have shifted a few times; it could benefit from DOE’s help. A second molten-salt reactor based on a variation of the first is due within 10 to 20 years.

“The Chinese, being relatively new to it, need technical support,” says Gehin, who leads Oak Ridge’s efforts to integrate reactor technology research and development projects. “If they follow through and build a test reactor, there’s a lot of useful information that we could get from that.”

The 10-year cooperative research and development agreement, or CRADA, ratchets up a smaller “memorandum of understanding” that the Department of Energy and China signed in late 2011 to collaborate on the same technology. With the new installment, China is contributing “a significant amount of money,” Gehin says.

The collaboration will not initially focus on a replica of Weinberg’s experimental reactor. Weinberg used a liquid fuel, mixing uranium with molten salts that would flow through the reactor serving as both the fuel and the coolant. The U.S. Department of Energy is specifically helping China develop a machine that uses solid, pebble-shaped fuel, but that will use flowing molten salts as the reactor’s “coolant.” (In a nuclear power system, coolants absorb heat from fission reactions and transfer it to water, creating steam to drive a turbine. Conventional reactors typically use ordinary water to cool reactions, and are called Light Water Reactors, or LWRs.)

China plans to eventually build a liquid fuel molten-salt reactor as well. The DOE collaboration will help. To help increase their effectiveness, China plans to run the reactors not on uranium but on thorium, which enhances the reactor benefits.

Nuclear energy is a strong part of China’s plans to cut back its reliance on the coal-fired power plants that are choking its cities with deadly pollution and spewing environmentally hazardous carbon dioxide. The two molten-salt reactors are just one of several reactors under development in China based on unconventional designs; China is also building more conventional reactors than any country.

The new reactors have high level support in China, where Jiang Mianheng, the son of former Chinese president Jiang Zemin, oversees them. Last March, Beijing ordered the Shanghai Institute to accelerate development of them.

The younger Jiang has outlined plans to use alternative reactors not only for electricity, but also as sources of clean heat for high temperature industrial processes which today run on CO2-emitting fossil fuels, to help gasify coal, to help produce environmentally friendly methanol fuel, and for other purposes.

Meanwhile, Canada’s Terrestrial Energy is also eyeing the industrial heat market, as well as electricity generation—especially for off-grid locations—for its molten-salt reactor. Terrestrial’s development deal with Oak Ridge is a short term consulting arrangement which could help meet its goal of building such a reactor by the early 2020s.

Oak Ridge will advise Terrestrial on things like salts and heat exchangers, and how to combat corrosion. The Terrestrial reactor will initially run on liquid uranium fuel. It’s based on a designed called the “Denatured Molten Salt Reactor,” which Oak Ridge conceptualized but never built in the 1970s as a follow up to the earlier reactor. The DMSR uses low-enriched uranium, rather than the more highly enriched uranium that Oak Ridge used in the experimental MSR which was to have bred additional fuel. Weinberg wanted to ultimately use thorium.

“If the DMSR is the basis of your design, you’d obviously want to go back to the original lab that has all the data, that has all the know-how; Oak Ridge National Laboratory is that lab for the DMSR,” Terrestrial CEO Simon Irish says.

China probably wouldn’t dispute that.

SOURCE: http://fortune.com/2015/02/02/doe-china-molten-salt-nuclear-reactor/

Advertisements
Comments
  1. teslark. says:

    molten salt reactors have been studied and even tried aboard submarines for their so-called superior safety.

    the problem is that with blogs, and even non-blog conferences where these technologies are ‘discussed’ you wind up getting a very skewed view of people’s opinions on these things.

    the bottom line is that every researcher and worker on a project wants to WORK and be successful to they are biassed to only see the benefits of their technology. for competitors they are biassed to the see the bad.

    most people get false infomration that is biassed and unknowingly run with the ‘truth’ as if they even understand it. they don’t. they are parrots.

    if you’ve done your homework, you know you , as a non-specialist, are not an expert and are just a parrot. if you don’t know you’re a parrot you’re an even stupider parrot.

    the fact is very important people in directorships and congress and executive positions, looked over the people who worked on molten salt, and the people who didn’t and made the call.

    of course, there is the line of reasoning that much of the executive leaderhsip makes backwards decisions because they are driven by the profitteers who lobby and back them. in the nuclear industry, that would be the MINING concerns. they have TOO much fuel and don’t want better reactors. they need waste.

    however, that said, it is also very possible that the molten salt reactors simply had not proven their worth and that they have , as do most reactors, some very serious and intractable safety concerns.

    finally, the real problems facing us in nuclear power are WASTE handling, not how to build bettter reactors. it is of course a shame that our nuclear technology and r&d has stagnated.

    but the reality is the world is awash in cheap energy, cheap coal, cheap oil, cheap BIOMASS, and cheap nuclear. it’s all pretty godamn in plentiful supply.

    developing ‘safter’ reactors that do the same thing as the old reactors is not all that interesting.

    in nuclear , the only truly interesting stuff is nuclear waste recycling, or disposal technologies (burning the chain of products in a fast fission reactor that has a much higher rate of neutrons fissioning its own byproducts, ) . bill gates is working on micro reactors which, for all intents and purposes are probably only useful for building better smaller aircraft carriers, rather than doomsday bunkers , small cities, or small power stations.

    the thing about convnentional power is that it scales well. decentralizing power can be very progressive, but effectively decentralizing nuclear power is both stupid and not effective because of the nature of the fuel.

    the fuel must be concentrated in an ore to begin with, and then reconcentrated many many times.
    even if you could burn depeleted uranium in an advanced fast reactor (some people say that would be best done with molten salt)———-it’s still requireing so much heat and neutron shielding that making it ‘small’ for the purposes of creating decentralized reactors is silly.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s