Thorium vehicle will run 100 years on 8 grams of fuel

[PamW]

16. 100% WRONG

I just had to explain this to someone else.

It DOES NOT MATTER if the control rods melt or are damaged; the fact that they are in the core is enough.

The action of the control rods does NOT depend on the rods being solid or undamaged.

In fact, because of an effect known as "self-shielding" the rods will have MORE of a negative effect if they are melted and dispersed rather than being solid.

Consider the control poison that is in the center of the rod. What opportunity does that material have to absorb neutrons when it is surrounded by a bunch of other absorber material. Suppose we were to "unroll" the cylindrical control rod like one would a cinnamon roll. Then that center section wouldn't be surrounded and "shielded" from neutrons by the rest of the rod. It could then do a better job of absorbing neutrons.

If the control rod is melted or damaged. the controlling effect does NOT go away; and, if anything; will INCREASE and there will NOT be an uncontrolled chain reaction.

You are also in ERROR about an outside excitation being necessary for a U233 thorium-cycle. You aren't going to get much energy if you have a system that requires a source. For example, a 1 Megawatt reactor like at a University will require about 3.3e+16 fissions / sec. You would need a neutron source that put out 3.3e+16 neutrons / sec or be 3.3e+16 Becquerels. There are NO radioactive sources of that magnitude. Are you considering using an accelerator for your source?

The reactor at Fukushima wasn't poorly done; the support equipment including back-up generators was poorly done.

You don't have to tell me about walk-away safe reactors. I worked with Dr. Till of Argonne National Lab on one of the first "inherently safe" or "walk-away" safe reactors; the IFR. I helped design it.

PamW