Environment & Energy

johnd83

(593 posts)

25. There is plenty of water to moderate neutrons in a damaged reactor

Thu Nov 7, 2013, 05:05 PM

Nov 2013

I understand decay heat, and I understand that we don't think there was any additional chain reaction in the most recent accidents. I wish I could share my own (very impressive) credentials but it would instantly give away my identity. I don't see how you can claim that a damaged reactor could never go critical. Is it likely? Not really, but it is certainly very dangerous to assume that. Why else would they have added boron to the water?

Liquid fluoride reactors work on a completely different principle than current generation reactors. The nuclear material is in a liquid state, not rods. This design is much less likely to overheat from decay products.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

49 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Thorium vehicle will run 100 years on 8 grams of fuel [View all] OnlinePoker Nov 2013 OP

Won't take long for CFLDem Nov 2013 #1

Sorry, but bunk johnd83 Nov 2013 #2

100% WRONG!! PamW Nov 2013 #5

I think you misunderstand my point johnd83 Nov 2013 #7

100% WRONG PamW Nov 2013 #16

The thorium reactors use a particle accelerator johnd83 Nov 2013 #17

WRONG AGAIN!! PamW Nov 2013 #20

There is plenty of water to moderate neutrons in a damaged reactor johnd83 Nov 2013 #25

Reactor Physics 101 PamW Nov 2013 #29

The other advantage of thorium is the decay products become inert much faster johnd83 Nov 2013 #30

Actually it is NOT a huge assumption... PamW Nov 2013 #35

I still don't understand your point johnd83 Nov 2013 #36

Criticality in non-operating - but NOT in melted. PamW Nov 2013 #39

You are 100% WRONG johnd83 Nov 2013 #38

100% WRONG!!! PamW Nov 2013 #40

Yes, I was going to remark about the five ton engine it would take Warpy Nov 2013 #27

I want a nuclear vacuum cleaner! longship Nov 2013 #3

Those are different technologies johnd83 Nov 2013 #4

Yup! They are talking about a Sterling engine now. longship Nov 2013 #6

The Voyager spacecraft only hase a few hundred watts of power johnd83 Nov 2013 #8

Voyager has shut down its cameras. Long ago. longship Nov 2013 #9

I think for the next 100 years or so it is going to be mostly manned/unmanned craft johnd83 Nov 2013 #10

Fusion, unfortunately, is probably a long way off. longship Nov 2013 #11

Fusion power is not really that far off johnd83 Nov 2013 #12

But the technology is not yet practical. longship Nov 2013 #13

The technology I linked to is a magnetic containment plasma system johnd83 Nov 2013 #14

Yes! And I've heard of another in Europe. longship Nov 2013 #15

Correct. PamW Nov 2013 #22

Fusion propulsion is a lot easier than electricity generation bananas Nov 2013 #18

If you're going to use it for propulsion, yes. longship Nov 2013 #19

Not quite... PamW Nov 2013 #21

I never said that one would get to light speeds. longship Nov 2013 #23

Look at momentum per unit energy PamW Nov 2013 #41

Thanks. longship Nov 2013 #42

That's if your concern is momentum per unit energy; but often it's not, in rockets muriel_volestrangler Nov 2013 #43

Let's examine TOTAL mass.. PamW Nov 2013 #44

Well, yes, that's the point - you use nuclear power, or solar (ie external) muriel_volestrangler Nov 2013 #45

IF Polywell Fusion works VASIMIR is DOA FogerRox Nov 2013 #46

Does anyone have the faintest idea what process is being claimed here? muriel_volestrangler Nov 2013 #24

I didn't get that either johnd83 Nov 2013 #26

"And he hasn’t released any papers, only press releases." arcane1 Nov 2013 #28

I'll try to post on it later - basically, you can increase decay rate by jiggling it with a laser bananas Nov 2013 #33

Finally found a somewhat relevant hit bananas Nov 2013 #34

Thanks - that gives us a theory that the laser is relevant muriel_volestrangler Nov 2013 #37

Oh, I agree, it's as credible as his "USEING HELYXZION TECHNOLOGY WE CAN CURE “ALL” DISEASE" bananas Nov 2013 #48

I forgot that one. kristopher Nov 2013 #49

Not the faintest. FogerRox Nov 2013 #47

It won't work, period. NNadir Nov 2013 #31

Why, Are we still thinking in individual cars, individual propulsion systems, ... CRH Nov 2013 #32