TVA to build 6 thorium reactors

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

Post Reply
EricF
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 2:52 pm
Location: Pell City, Alabama

TVA to build 6 thorium reactors

Post by EricF »

Cool! I used to trout fish in the Clinch river near the prison.

http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2 ... r-reactors
In the wake of the Fukushima nuclear disaster, countries like Germany and Switzerland have decided that nuclear energy isn’t worth the risk. The Tennessee Valley Authority apparently isn’t so skittish. The TVA has inked a letter of intent with nuke-maker Babcock & Wilcox to build six small, modular reactors near Clinch River, Tenn., the first time such small, distributed reactors have been tapped for commercial power generation.
......................
This idea relies more on next-gen thorium reactors that would be far safer to strew across urban landscapes than the current 1,000-megawatt models that bring with them the risk--however slight--of catastrophic meltdown. The TVA/B&W scheme is more of a plan to build a single power plant distributed between several reactors to improve safety and reduce costs. But it’s a step in the same direction, and could set a precedent for the way future nuclear energy projects are rolled out in this country.

Skipjack
Posts: 6898
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

I thought their reactors are just regular BW reactors?

KitemanSA
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Post by KitemanSA »

Skipjack wrote:I thought their reactors are just regular BW reactors?
Doesn't look to be a molten salt reactor so it could be a small BWR. Solid furel thorium can support a BWR as well as U235 provided there are enough AccelDriven neutrons to overcome the Pa poisoning.

EricF
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 2:52 pm
Location: Pell City, Alabama

Post by EricF »

Skipjack wrote:I thought their reactors are just regular BW reactors?
The article kinda of gave me the impression that this might be a pilot program to test a new reactor design.

Skipjack
Posts: 6898
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/06/tva-si ... r-six.html

No Thorium I am affraid. Just the normal boring BWR. Only thing interesting about it is the smaller size, but that is no real news anymore either, is it?

KitemanSA
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Post by KitemanSA »

YASD!
But it is a "small, modular" yet another stupid design. :wink:

EricF
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 2:52 pm
Location: Pell City, Alabama

Post by EricF »

Skipjack wrote:http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/06/tva-si ... r-six.html

No Thorium I am affraid. Just the normal boring BWR. Only thing interesting about it is the smaller size, but that is no real news anymore either, is it?
huh, mPower small reactor, a 125 MW LWR design that is still being completed on the drawing boards in Lynchburg, VA.

I wonder why the Popsci article threw in all that info at the end about thorium reactors, it makes it seem like that's the intent with the TVA plan. Doh!

Skipjack
Posts: 6898
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

But it is a "small, modular" yet another stupid design.
I would not call it a bad idea in general, but it is IMHO not all that exciting (not as much as a Thorium reactor would be). There are many others around that are simillar, if not better, e.g. Hyperions liquid metal designs and I think Mitsubishi had one too...
If it was Thorium or traveling wave it would get me excited, but the more or less standard design, just smaller is not really going to make much of a difference for nuclear power anymore (not here anyway).

KitemanSA
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Post by KitemanSA »

Skipjack wrote:
But it is a "small, modular" yet another stupid design.
I would not call it a bad idea in general,
That's ok, I'll do it for ya!
You may be able to tell that I am of the opinion that ANY reactor that runs U235+ is rather stupid, and any solid fuel reactor is much more so. JMHO!

EricF
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 2:52 pm
Location: Pell City, Alabama

Post by EricF »

Skipjack wrote:
But it is a "small, modular" yet another stupid design.
I would not call it a bad idea in general, but it is IMHO not all that exciting (not as much as a Thorium reactor would be). There are many others around that are simillar, if not better, e.g. Hyperions liquid metal designs and I think Mitsubishi had one too...
If it was Thorium or traveling wave it would get me excited, but the more or less standard design, just smaller is not really going to make much of a difference for nuclear power anymore (not here anyway).
I think you are thinking of this one
http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/nex ... 2.17b.html

Skipjack
Posts: 6898
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

Indeed I am. Mitsubishi, Toshiba, both are in making nuclear reactors, AFAIK, easy to mix up ;)
I actually wasnt sure, did a quick google search, saw Mitsubishi come up and went with that. Anyway, my point was that it is not a big new invention.

EricF
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 2:52 pm
Location: Pell City, Alabama

Post by EricF »

I didn't know Mitsubishi was too, that's great. With so many companies making the small molten-salt type reactors with alternative fuels, why hasn't their use become more prominent?

Skipjack
Posts: 6898
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

I am not sure whether Mitsubishi really does them too, the name just showed up when I searched for them and nuclear reactors ;)
IIRC, none of these reactors are molten salt.

Post Reply