new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants

[EricF]

I'm curious, do the governments or utility companies take the small Thorium/Molten Salt reactors seriously as an alternative to Uranium?

[MSimon]

They will once you have 20,000 hours delivering utility power.

[Josh Cryer]

Back to reality. Incremental improvements are a better way to go than total redesign. Total redesign can introduce totally unforeseen problems. That can be very expensive. And cause big delays.

Building III+s while working on and deploying IVs is a very good plan. If you want to be sure to have some nukes on line by date certain.

The Gen III+s that they're building only replace those plants that are due to be decommissioned in 10-20 years anyway. Gen IV may never get the funding it needs to get off the ground.

A study recently showed that nuclear power is cheaper when you build many of them at once.

[KitemanSA]

I suggest you guys study the AP1000. As an insider, it is quite intresting, pwr with passive safety, whether it is Gen III+ or Gen IV will depend on your viewpoint on what it takes to qualify for Gen IV.

I have always understood the AP series to be GenIII+. As far as I know it fulfills none of these "advantages" of GenIV reactors:

• * Nuclear waste that lasts decades instead of millennia.
  * 100-300 times more energy yield from the same amount of nuclear fuel.
  * The ability to consume existing nuclear waste in the production of electricity.

[Josh Cryer]

Don't forget that MSRs are inherently safe. they can't "overheat."

[KitemanSA]

Don't forget that MSRs are inherently safe. they can't "overheat."

That is why MSRs are listed in the GenIV group. MSRs (in theory) would fulfill all three of the "advantages".

* Nuclear waste that lasts decades instead of millennia.
The actinides would be left in the melt to burn up with the fuel. Only short lived fission products would be waste.
* 100-300 times more energy yield from the same amount of nuclear fuel.
ALL the Thorium would be burned for energy, not just the ~0.7% of fissile Uranium.
* The ability to consume existing nuclear waste in the production of electricity.
The actinides including Plutonium from PWRs could be burned in the melt.

[Dewald]

I agree, strictly speaking the AP series are Gen III+, the passive safety feels like better, but perhaps I'm just confused with our work on the PBMR.

The nice thing with the MSRs are the power desnsity is up in the same league as PWRs unlike the PBMRs.

[KitemanSA]

Yup, but the efficiency is WAY higher.