Future of Thorium Reactors and Nuclear Energy

Подписаться 9 тыс.

Просмотров 118 тыс.

50% 1

Future of Thorium Reactors and Nuclear Energy
Thorium was introduced as a potential energy source at the dawn of the nuclear age. With the first test reactor development starting soon after. The technology was one that was going to revolutionize the world - from efficient green power to thorium-powered planes. Except it never happened. Why did this occur? If it really has these large benefits, why hasn’t the technology been realized and built? My name is Joaquin Revello and today we will be exploring the engineering, economics, and sustainability of thorium nuclear reactors as a source of energy production for the future of energy. As in all my videos, I add business opportunities relating to the technology explored, that if brought to market could very well make you billions. Because of that, you definitely want to watch this entire video.
The design of nuclear reactors today is that of the standard U253 water reactor, which you likely already know the engineering behind. If not, I do not want to waste your time explaining this, so you can watch any video on RU-vid, or my favorite video which I’ve linked in the description below: • Nuclear Energy Explain... . However, what's most interesting and unknown about this reactor technology is how 96% of the total uranium from fuel rods goes unused - with these unused rods actually requiring a nuclear reprocessing plant to convert this back into usable fuel. Because with solid uranium253, there is a large buildup of noble gases that just absorb neutrons, preventing the reaction from really flourishing. On Top of this, the solid pieces of uranium become damaged due to radiation damage that leads to cracks in the solid lattice of the rods - making it more challenging for a chain reaction to propagate and more trips to the reprocessing plant. Another challenge with these reactors is that the water cooling is difficult to maintain, so a disruption in the water cooling supply could very likely lead to a catastrophic failure, as the rods are unable to be cooled.
The solution to this reactor? The thorium reactor, which consists of, well you guessed it, thorium atoms. Why Thorium atoms? First Thorium232 is not fissile-able material, which means that if the Thorium does split, it’s not the splitting that releases the bulk of the energy. Rather, when it does absorb a neutron, it turns into Protactinium233 and then into Uranium233. So it’s the U233 that releases the energy, with the 233 isotopes being actually more easily fissile than U235, with the probability of fission being larger at 91.2% compared to its absorption. Hence it's not the thorium atom splitting that releases energy, but rather its product U233.
--
Follow Joaquin:
Linkedin - / joaquin-revello
Instagram - / joaquin_revello
TikTok - / joaquin_revello
--
About Joaquin: I am a Freshmen at the Jerome Fisher Program in Management & Technology - A duel degree between Wharton and Penn Engineering at UPenn
--
Sources:
docs.google.com/document/d/1k...
--
#FutureofThoriumReactorsandNuclearEnergy
#JoaquinRevello #ThoriumReactors #NuclearEnergy

Наука

Опубликовано:

28 июн 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 693

@tomshackell 2 года назад

This video has some fantastic information, and the production values are excellent. It is worth noting, though, that there are several things that are getting confused here: First the Chinese "thorium reactor" is the TMSR-LF1. Much as with ThorCon's design, the fuel mix for this is a HALEU (19.75% U-235) and thorium mix. It is a "uranium burner" with thorium as an optional "fuel additive". In this fuel the U-235 is the primary fissile element producing the majority of the power, and the thorium is very much secondary, just acting as a replacement for some of the U-238. It is in no way shape or form a "thorium breeder" or LFTR. There's a good reason that's the case: no one has the slighest idea how to do the online fuel processing required for making a true thorium breeder reactor work. Secondly, many of the benefits that you quote for thorium reactors, such as being a high temperature reactor, are actually just benefits of MSRs in general. Molten Salt Reactors are awesome, I am a huge advocate but they work just as well running on U-235 as thorium and this is the route almost every vendor in this space is taking. A pure thorium cycle is just a lot lot harder to make work because it requires a breeder reactor.

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

Hey Tom, thank you for the feedback - I appreciate these valuable insights. The second point you made on the ThorCon's fuel design is a good point and one that I glossed over. I'll make sure to delve deeper into technicalities like that in all future videos.

@jeebus6263 2 года назад

I'll just say I'm concerned whenever i see the term MSR used. The term MSR is appropriate in reference to a design where molten-salts are used for cooling, but that's NOT what the thorium community is generally referring to. This is one of the reasons kirk specifically suggested the term "Liquid Fueled" as in LFTR.

@CraftyF0X 2 года назад

@@jeebus6263 I hate to be the one to inform you but the LF in the LFTR means Liquid Fluoride not liquid fuel. Since that is pretty much the fuel too it's not like a big mistake from your part anyway.

@gregdarby6225 2 года назад

As you mentioned Tom, U-235 is the fuel of choice at the moment, but as you would be aware, it is simply not abundant, with U-238 content of uranium being 99.3% , and U-235 the remaining 0.7% At some point the cost of extracting U-235 will become prohibitive. My feeling is the Chinese are utilising U-235 in their pilot reactor as Thorium LFTRs are hard to start, but R & D on Thorium LFTRs continue, and the work done by Alvin Wienburg and his team at Oakridge is instructive, and still being scrutinised and tested with today's technology. The future of global energy, and the improvement of human civilisation itself, is indeed wonderful if technologies such as modular LFTRs and fusion reactors can be developed in the medium term.

@jeebus6263 2 года назад

@@CraftyF0X i agree, in any particular publication it would be important to check their definitions (often in parenthesis). In this case i also agree both are equivalent in this context. @GregDarby, as long as you're discussing specific isotopes it would have been nice to see you mention one of the most important points is that we can potentially use this technology to process what is currently considered waste.

@claudioteles4331 Год назад

Outstanding to see a young nuclear power enthusiast doing such a great work. Congrats, Joaquin! Carry on!!

@keatonwright5764 2 года назад

Very cool video, every time that you said “Nuke-U-Lur” instead of Nuclear was like a dagger in my soul though

@anonymous.youtuber Год назад

Replacing Americium by “Americanium” was funny too.

@dlewis8405 2 года назад

Refreshing to see younger people taking an interest in nuclear energy. We need nuclear energy in abundance to combat climate change. I had a keen interest in thorium powered reactors about six or seven years ago. I am sure you have seen Kirk Sorensen’s videos. Recently nuclear is undergoing a bit of a renaissance but it looks to me like most of the major investment is going towards SMRs that are modified light water reactors powered by Uranium. Maybe India or China will figure out the Thorium reactor. It doesn’t seem like we can wait for a technology breakthrough considering the urgency of the climate crisis. Good luck to you, I am sure your future is bright.

@Chris-ie9os 2 года назад

It's too late for nuclear to help fight climate change. This is 2022 not 1982. We have ~10 years. We need a solution that can reduce CO2 emissions by ~80% in 10 years. Literally impossible for nuclear to achieve that. Solar and Wind are the only viable options. Maybe nuclear power can help reduce the 'blight' of solar panels and wind turbines on the landscape in 100 years but that would be FAR too late to address climate change.

@TV-xm4ps 2 года назад

Nuclear is a non-solution. - Too slow, as the video above also shows (2030 until the first reactor design earliest? Too late). - Too expensive (especially since it is still in early stages of development). - Too risky to be used as weapons, which in the current political climate is an insane move. - Too reliant on large corps, with huge lobby power, and too much influence to lobby down required environmental standards. - And boringly enough, the waste problem is still mot solved, and recycling just a theoretical idea, that will not be done due to costs (see above for large corps with lobby power). So, no to that idea that will just undermine our fight for a more equal, less centralised, and renewable future.

@Chris-ie9os 2 года назад

@@TV-xm4ps Yep. NuScale was founded in 2000. Their first 'test' reactor won't be online until 2030. That's 30 years just to adapt existing light water reactor technology. Any kind of LFTR would take even longer. We don't have that kind of time. We don't even have half that much time. MASS deploy solar NOW! MASS deploy wind NOW! We could EASILY add 20GW of wind over the next 18 months. 60GW over the next 3 years. DO IT!

@williambaikie5739 2 года назад

@@Chris-ie9os Don't listen to the 'Doom is nye' climate alarmists. Even the overly pessimistic IPCC doesn't claim catastrophe soon. They predict warming by 2100 which will reduce global GDP by ~5%, but also predict global GDP will have increased by over 300% so will have a net GDP of +295%. Wind and Solar currently contribute very little to grid electricity. Because of it's unreliability gas and coal generators are kept spinning and spin up when wind doesn't blow and the Sun doesn't shine. Storage is impractical and further away than nuclear.

@dlewis8405 2 года назад

@@Chris-ie9os The NuScale SMR has regulatory approval from the NRC and is raising money through a SPAC. They have deals in Poland and Romania to build plants for electricity and industrial heat.

@alexhong8204 2 года назад

Hi Joaquin ... as an educator ... I am really glad to come across your video ... your production value is very high and informative without political judgement. Our future looks bright with young minds your and your peers ... have a great year ahead. Greetings from Singapore/Malaysia

@spacetimemalleable7718 Год назад

One of the BEST explanation of Thorium MSRs. Kudos to you, Joaquin!

@leolee5435 Год назад

Great job summarizing, and you did it in a way everyone can understand. Keep up the good work!

@JoaquinRevello Год назад

Thank you!

@tomchupick9450 Год назад

Great video on Thorium. Can’t wait to hear more on some of the recent projects (in China and the Indonesian Thorcon plant). I started my chemical engineering career in Elliot Lake Canada in 1978 a uranium extraction facility, which also had a shutdown thorium extraction plant. Both have since been dismantled, so I’m particularly pleased to see this revival. Also, I still do decarbonization reviews in refinery and chemical plants around the world, and it would be great to see molten salt reactors in industrial clusters to provide more sustainable and affordable heat and power. CCS and hydrogen firing are used far too often in (unaffordable) 2030 and 2050 decarb roadmaps.

@PrivateSi Год назад

Excellent vid. Great info and arguments well presented. It's good to hear people singing Thorium and Molten Salt Reactor praise. You should check out the FLEX Reactor project on the molten salt front. It's idea was to concentrate on making a non-corrosive salt and the ability to idle the reactor so it just stores heat for a while instead of producing electricity (flexible, doesn't have to be continuously on). -- They use a mixture and tests so far look great. No corrosion after over a year with their salt so far. This already far exceeds the competition. Combined with Thorium it would be very scalable solution. You also missed the fact RUSSIA has been running an experimental (non-molten salt), fast neutron Thorium Breeder Test Reactor that already uses 100th the amount of enriched uranium of conventional enriched uranium reactors.

@georgeyoung1810 Год назад

Awesome video, thanks for taking the time to make it!!

@sprocket9200 2 года назад

Good job young man! Glad to hear you're looking into this and you are well on your way to success! I hope and pray this can get some traction.

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

Yes, thank you for the support. Over the next few years I plan to continue researching about these alternative green technologies before picking a specific niche and developing it at scale. Again, I appreciate your support.

@evebaker4740 Год назад

Ty for this thorough video!

@DJJonPattrsn22 Год назад

This is the most concise explanation on thorium reactors that I have seen. Great job! Thank you! You clearly invested/spent many hours in the research for & making of this presentation which is quite remarkable since you're a full-time university student. Hopefully, you were/will be able to use (at least part of) this for a school project! Besides the discrepancies mentioned in other comments it would've been nice if you had touched on potential benefits to the US economy; such as through rare earth mining. It is very encouraging to see that although we are not currently developing or researching this technology, there is at least interest in it!

@Merlin3189 7 месяцев назад

As with Greta, one can admire his enthusiasm and idealism, but he, as she, is let down by their lack of knowledge and understanding. The video is full of misinformation and is no basis for any sensible discussion of Thorium reactors. There are much better treatments already around on YT by adults who understand what they are talking about.

@frede2102 Год назад

Water can indeed be used as a moderator in a LFTR. Copenhagen Atomics for instance plan to use heavy water at 50 degree Celsius, thus not under pressure. The moderator is in separate tubes and not mixed with the salts. So the important thing is that the molten salt is used as a coolant, not a moderator, and the molten salt coolant do not require high pressure unlike using water as a coolant (the confusing part is that the water in normal reactors are both coolant and moderator)

@stanleymcomber4844 Год назад

Well done, this is likely the first video that I have seen that didn’t mess the information up. Again we’ll done. 👍🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

@MrWilde 2 года назад

Mate this video is Awesome!! I have been a massive advocate of LFTR ever since watching Kirk Sorensen talk many years ago. This is one of the best and detailed brake downs I have seen to date. You need patreon or at least a link to buy you a coffee. Again awesome work

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

Thank you for the support, I really appreciate it. Yes, I also watched Kirk Sorensen talk which inspired me to produce this video.

@plumahoplita 2 года назад

Sorensen is great. Thorium is the future

@paulbedichek2679 2 года назад

LFTR was built in China the US has many advanced liquid fueled designs ,including fast reactors, ThorCon doing great work in Indonesia,US is very advanced nation but has very poor nuclear regulations so that it is better for them to start with a different country Indonesia,and they are making progress together, Thorcon uses HALEU,highly enriched U, and Th.

@TecnamTwin Год назад

Glad I found your channel. Hope you much success in your endeavors.

@tomquinn5437 Год назад

You are on to something really big and very important. The potential for small neighborhood power plants is huge. Stay focused and keep up the good work. Thanks for who you are and what you do.

@tigertiger1699 Год назад

Really great vid mate👍🙏

@DumA2034 2 года назад

Not a bad video kid. Good layout, good amount of information in, I look forward to the next.

@NavySturmGewehr 2 года назад

I wish you success on youtube, you have a wonderful voice to listen to.

@richglaser4566 Год назад

Thank you for making this, excellent video

@shaunh5316 2 года назад

Thanks. Great video. Well presented.

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

Thank you for the support, I appreciate it

@randallhernandez1644 2 года назад

Gran documental, Sigue así bro 👍🏾👏🏾

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

Gracias amigo

@garyoliver8183 Год назад

Impressive presentation. Nice work!

@carlosnovaes6993 Год назад

Great Video!! Great Explanation!! Long live to the channell.

@jeremypearson7205 10 месяцев назад

Man, you were a boss in this video. So comprehensive and well done. I’ll keep an eye out for you 10 years from now when you are leading an MSR company!

@JoaquinRevello 10 месяцев назад

Thanks man!

@wolfsdfgu 2 года назад

This is incredible

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

Thank you for watching

@irwainnornossa4605 2 года назад

Amazing video. Nicely informative. And with units the whole world can actually understand. Damn. We should start heavily investing into this tech, it seems like a good way to generate power.

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

Thank you for the support - I really appreciate it.

@terminusest5902 2 года назад

Thanks. But by global standards and the need for low carbon energy developing MSR reactors is relatively low cost and low risk. Fortunately, investment is increasing significantly. Also, governments are helping to reduce bureaucratic restrictions on atypical reactor designs. Especially in the US where licensing and safety is based on PWR reactors which have no relevance with MSR reactors. They have very different safety technology.

@ripLunarBirdCLH Год назад

There's actually one more reason to invest into this tech. Hydrogen for fuel cells and for hydrogen combustion engines (Japan is already developping both). Normally producing hydrogen on industrial scale is VERY EXPENSIVE. That's because it requires high temperatures and pressures that must be generated. And this typically is not cheap. But TMSR reactors can do that just by running normally. As a result the main problem with fuel cells and hydrogen combustion engines disappears. Hydrogen can be cheap and mass produced. And Japan is already working on modifying regular combustion engines to run on hydrogen. They managed to do this with both modern and old engine already. So we may not actually need to get rid of combustion engines to stay green after all if we use thorium.

@ericepperly9517 2 года назад

Attractive guy with deep voice, informative, people might listen. Good job with the video.

@BarrieHughes 2 года назад

Great to see a young student making such an informed technical video.

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

Thank you very much for the support - I know that more people need to continue looking into alternative technologies to counter global climate emissions, so why not me?

@6NBERLS Год назад

Most excellent.

@achbanilacran2061 2 года назад

I like thw content of this guy. Subscribed.

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

Thank you very much for the support - I appreciate the subcription.

@paulohenriquearaujofaria7306 Год назад

Proper video, sir.

@greezyhammer764 2 года назад

Thank you for bringing this into spotlight! While I like to build fictional machines, the fact of the matter is, we need these very real machines to stay economically competitive and relevant.

@brucemiller2172 2 года назад

In a word, Weinstein.

@JoaquinRevello Год назад

Happy to help!

@standavison328 2 года назад

We’ll done. It’s so encouraging to see that there are younger engineers interested in nuclear engineering.

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

Thank you very much for the support - I know that more people need to continue looking into alternative technologies to counter global climate emissions, so why not me?

@standavison328 2 года назад

@@JoaquinRevello - Retired nuclear engineer here. I totally agree with you. Thorium reactors should be vigorously pursued. There were good reasons to develop light water thermal reactors. Those reasons are gone. Keep stepping into the future. Again, we’ll done.

@robertsigsby7788 5 месяцев назад

You have done a wonderful job at bringing this knowledge to people, great presentation keep up the good work

@backfirebaldich5906 2 года назад

Stellar video man. I am interested in nuclear power, and becoming a nuclear engineer, and videos like this make me more interested! Keep it up!

@singularityphoenixx 2 года назад

To nitpick the inaccuracies: Thorium's abundance isn't whats really great about it. We're not running out of Uranium. The thermal efficiency doesn't matter when the fuel price for nuclear is so low. Classic reactors do not explode shooting radioactive waste everywhere if the [cooling] pumps fail. Without cooling the reactor melts. Fukushima blew up because of hydrogen build up, it wasn't the reactor that blew up. Chernobyl was a runaway chain reaction (they turned off the cooling pumps - they didn't fail; it blew up because of the positive feedback loop both inherent in the design and how they ran it off the edge). It would be very brave to build any nuclear reactor without a containment building. Using a thorium reactor to make weapons grade material is very easy. The protactinium has to be separated out anyways to feed it back into the reactor (after it has decayed into U-233). Separating this U-233 from the protactinium is done with a chemical process and so is very easy compared to using gas centrifuges. Compared to breeding plutonium, everything is done except the last step. Water scarcity is not an issue for using water in the primary cooling loop since it is condensed and returned the losses are minimal. Thorium reactors also use water as the working fluid which also has minimal losses. Uranium (and conventional hydrocarbon fuel power plants) use water in cooling towers since it is often cheaper than air cooling. But some modern nuclear plants use air cooling. Nuclear powered planes are a very bad idea. The exhaust is radioactive. Government regulation and public perception are not what has prevented nuclear war. Mutually assured destruction has. You leave out the fuel reprocessing requirement of thorium reactors when discussing economics. Nuclear is 20% of the USA's electricity production, but it is only 10% of the USA's energy production. It is an important distinction. Your other similar statistics are similarly wrong. Fuel reprocessing of a uranium reactor would produce a similar reduction in transuranics. It isn't done with uranium reactors because its cheaper to purchase new fuel.

@piotrd.4850 Год назад

Price of fuel is everything: currently nuclear fuel is cheap, because of miniscule demand.

@singularityphoenixx Год назад

@@piotrd.4850 Huh? Economy of scale actually works the other way. Miniscule demand? You know uranium isn't just used for civilian power production right? Nuclear fuel is cheap because so little fuel produces so much energy, very little fuel is needed (compared to combustion power plants). Its the capex and financial risk that make nuclear expensive. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-cbeJIwF1pVY.html

@PurnamadaPurnamidam Год назад

Best of Luck for your studies buddy. This video is very educative & helpful.

@TimRobertsen 2 года назад

Good stuff! :)

@ericderbez2446 2 года назад

Kudos Joaquin, you nicely combined many of historical, technical and economic points other videos dwell on. Hopefully you'll someday take on the economic mantle from Kirk Sorensen's generation and make LFTRs and Thorium reactors a reality. Perhaps you could make a video on FLIBR's use to make tritium for Fusion reactors and the economics of that industry?

@alexlawcb 2 года назад

Seeing youngsters with such interest really make me feel hopeful!

@jamesmorton7881 2 года назад

Engineers make things. That is productivity. Banks make nothing. Like CEOs and managers.

@parrotraiser6541 2 года назад

SMR (small modular reactors) make a lot of sense, and the thorium cycle seems to work with them.

@paulbedichek2679 2 года назад

What smr's use Th? ThorCon is a 500MW unit, the China LFTR is 2MW,Terrestrial Energy can use Th but U works just as well.The SMR coming in the US is NuScale and uses traditional fuel rods,Ultra Safe Nuclear uses TRISO fuel as does XEnergy ,you can put Th in Triso fuel but there aren't current plans to do so. X Energy uses TRISO fuel, no Th.

@migBdk Год назад

@@paulbedichek2679 the Copenhagen Atomics reactor is a 100 MW thermal reactor, so SMR size. It is a molten salt reactor in a burn-then-breed configuration. Running on thorium, with small amounts of plutonium (or other trans-uranics) to get the process started.

@lw1945three 2 года назад

thanks for making this video, it saves me from feeling guilty about not making one myself LOL. THANKS FOR TELLING IT LIKE IT IS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

@seancody329 Год назад

Absolutely a wonderfully comprehensive coverage of the Thorium nuclear subject. Bravo 👏.(but it's "nuclear" not "nucular". Sorry.)

@JeffHoldenWS-NC 2 года назад

Very good job! There's a couple of suggestions. If I'm not mistaken thorium reactors can also used ground up radioactive waste from other reactors since only 3% is currently used of fuel rods. This reduces the half-life of nuclear waste tremendously down to around 300 years. As you mentioned thermal is a big part of thorium or molten salt reactors including the ability to melt aluminum, steel, quartz into glass or solar panels and processing cement, all highly energy intensive processes. Finally nuclear powered planes sounds cool but weighr and shielding and cost still going to be an issue. Nuclear powered container ships is less sexy but far more manageable with small modular nuclear reactors. Again these are just picky items I thought I would mention, but overall you did an excellent job.

@tjampman 2 года назад

I doubt commercial ships will have nuclear powered propulsion until a long time after it has been established on land.

@JeffHoldenWS-NC 2 года назад

@@tjampman four countries have built commercial nuclear power ships including cargo carriers and ice breakers. Obviously aircraft carriers and many US submarines use nuclear. I believe they're just small versions of current technology light water pressure vessel reactors. Molten salt reactors would be a great improvement and safety and reliability and if you care about the carbon footprint they would be especially helpful since 6% of all fuel used in the world goes to container ships. It might make more sense to start with ships that are out in the ocean rather than fixed land plants

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

I appreciate the feedback. Thank you for the support

@JeffHoldenWS-NC 2 года назад

@@JoaquinRevello Thanks again for great video. For some reason Thorium has a fuel has a lot of detractors. I think it's a tribal thing they're not really based on science. Please correct me if I'm wrong but I think that regular old uranium can work in a molten salt reactor. I don't know if it's interchangeable with thorium but that would be an interesting question to answer.

@stanleytolle416 2 года назад

@@tjampman there already lots of nuclear powered ships now. Sealed no maintenance systems would make sense. Something like solidstate heat pipe units that load follow and auto shutdown.

@YourCapyBro_windows95_3DPipes Год назад

Wow you're a young dude. Thanks for this based video. Thorium is where it's at!!

@JorgenRomeMojo 2 года назад

Subscribed!

@jasondinning4506 2 года назад

Great video man, well done! Didn’t know thorium fuel was a liquid, very cool 👍👍

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

Thank you, I appreciate the support.

@paulbedichek2679 2 года назад

U is just as liquid ,when you heat something practically anything becomes liquid.

@neuralwarp 2 года назад

thorium metal is a solid at temperatures up to hundreds or thousands of degrees. But if you react it with hydrochloric or hydrofluoric acid, the resulting ThCl or ThF salt, when dried, melts at relatively low temperatures. Some thorium reactors use solid thorium, some use molten thorium salts.

@andrewlukashchuk5036 2 года назад

The production quality is insane, do you edit these by yourself

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

I edit these videos with one of friends - Edward. He makes excellent videos such as one on UPenn CIS

@derrekvanee4567 2 года назад

Yes ah this dude is gojng places. But youtube even quality isn't a easy shoe in anymore. Need production quality and lots of time researching and editing and quality English writers

@Rvatial 2 года назад

A few notes on the production/structure of this video. This is meant to be constructive criticism, take it as you will. I'm no expert at RU-vid or Nuclear Engineering. The script for this video leans very academic. At times it felt like a Uni paper being read. The 2nd half of the video goes off on tangents that while expected to be covered in an engineering class, may not be relevant to a youtube audience. Transuranic elements are important, but the video super quickly introduces them, and then starts rambling. A better quick explanation with some diagram would have been helpful if you wanted to dive into the topic. The first 8 or minutes was really good, you can tell you know the stuff and are interested in it. The rest of the video felt like that last page of the your 5 page paper where you're padding and needlessly recapping. I was getting some sound desync starting around the 5-6 minute mark, even after a video reload. I watch informational videos at 1.25x speed, but something was definitely off about video/sound sync. There were some volume drops/bad splices, the most egregious was at 19:38. I look forward to future videos!

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

Wow, I cannot say how grateful I am for your feedback. I will make sure to address these issues in all future videos.

@shangtsung2450 2 года назад

Are you forgetting fast neutron reactors? They're an important part of the closed cycle.

@ahmedhashish6168 2 года назад

Thx

@agecon2246 2 года назад

Great video. Look at thorcons' work. While their box is a waste burner to eat the transuranics, they are inexpensive to build. Lastly be aggressive and get these built. They Are the solution we need and need this moment. Good luck and get going. Best regards, from an old boilermaker.

@henrikl1394 2 года назад

It was not shut down because of corrotion, it was an political decision. Think You have to listen to the talk between Kirk Sorsen and they that worked at Oak Ridge 1969.

@drmosfet 2 года назад

I've been watching a alternative fusion project in Aneutronic, called focus fusion for sometime now, and quite surprised to hear that a similar aneutronic project receiving billions in funding? The main difference between the two seems to be the fuel it runs on, the one receiving the most investment is the one with the most controllable fuel source helium-3 as opposed to hydrogen and boron that focus fusion uses, it got me thinking about uranium vs thorium it seems that the reactor with the highest possible of a cartel forming around it's fuel supply will be the reactor getting the most investment which help to explain why we don't have Thoruim Molten Salt Reactor.

@paulbedichek2679 2 года назад

No,U suppliers have nothing to do with the lack of progress on Th reactors, followed focus fusion for years Helion energy is leading in this area with a huge investment recently.

@billbaldwin8074 Год назад

My understanding is that the reason most of the U235 in the fuel rods is unused is because the bulk of the fuel rod Uranium in the form of the U238 isotope, which is not fissionable, absorbs to many neutrons to allow the chain reaction of U235 fission to continue so the fuel rods no longer can sustain their energy production and are thus spent. I don’t see how a build up of noble gasses in the fuel rods could impede fission in them.

@kevmars1000 Год назад

Great video, you clearly spent a lot of time researching this topic. One aspect of your video that deserves it own video based on thorough research is verifying the assumption that CO2 emissions are harmful and that their presence in the atmosphere are driving a rise in global temperatures, and clearly ignores other factors such as sun spot activity that may be more dominant factors impacting the earth’s temperature. If one goes back in time, the Earth has experienced warming and cooling prior to industrialization. Please consider a video that addresses this, thanks.

@MalcolmAkner 2 года назад

Fantastic video! Can I get access to the video footage from ORNL? We're working with molten salts, and I've seen the images of them in the graphite core many times, but I didn't know they had video footage! Would be very appreciated ^^

@p.turgor4797 2 года назад

11:08 Market cost of raw pre-fuel is ~90 USD/kg for uranium and 7 USD/kg for thorium. So in compare to plant cost it is negligible.

@christalbert722 2 года назад

Dude- nice video! (and I'm envious of where you are in your education/career- for me that was a truly fun time in life- enjoy it!!) I'd say that while it may become possible develop an airborne reactor that it's a really hard use case. Weight, safety, and reliability requirements in aviation cause extreme design constraints limiting the options. And it's a bit hard to conceive of literally 1000s of such complex and potentially dangerous reactors being in the air at any time. Hard to design something to be contained and safe after smacking the ground at speed :) Now, cargo ships and trains, maybe there's a use case there, but still a tough sell. The "win" could be using abundant/cheap/clean energy to create substitute fuels that are carbon neutral. Automotive would seem best suited to just going battery/electric, but aviation could be well suited to transition to a synthesized fuel of some type. Maybe trains too, although it's probably just smarter to electrify. And... it won't happen because it's critical to the environment, that's an uphill battle- but the second it becomes cheaper suddenly everybody will be onboard. The bummer is that what we can do, what makes the most sense to do, and what we actually do end up being 3 different things. Since big$ is involved it becomes political, and that pretty much throws any "what makes the most sense" choice aside. Gut wrenchingly sad but true. ( Again, hoping for the "hey, this is cheaper! I'll take 1000 of them!" surprise win scenario.)

@paulbedichek2679 2 года назад

It was funding for a bomber that could fly for months which we could build today,they knew they weren't going to fly with a reactor as fuel source in the 50's but they took the money and did incredible engineering, the advancement isn't using Th, it is the type of reactor. In 15 to 20 years we will build commercial ships with nuclear propulsion.

@qui-si-sana 2 года назад

Well done ... excellent presentation..you have a very bright future.. It's great that you want to bring a brighter future to humanity .. Thorium is one key tools ....Go for it !

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

I appreciate the support, thank you again for the feedback

@qui-si-sana 2 года назад

@@JoaquinRevello hey good to hear from you ..keep at it..you are an impressive young man ... your heart and mind are in good harmony....and so many children depend on people like you for thier future...🙏🌞👍🌈🌈💪💪🕣🕣🕣

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

@@qui-si-sana Wow, thank you for kind words. I'll be doing my best for the rest of my life to try to make my dream of zero emissions possible.

@qui-si-sana 2 года назад

@@JoaquinRevello not at all......I admire your dreams/ambitions...there is so much other old technology around ( ex Co2 scrubbers devolped in the 60 s ... and more )..that were far ahead of their time )....now is the time...Carpe Diem ..keep me updated... Best wishes . Sean and family.. Cambridge UK xx

@achalhp 2 года назад

Excellent video. Most of these benefits are because of liquid form of the fuel. You could change title to "fluid-fuel reactor" or "molten-salt reactor". You may also change the script and use "molten-salt reactor" instead of "thorium reactor" and re-upload. At least you could write a note in description and give a link to wikipedia page on Molten-Salt Reactor.

@john3pq Год назад

I would use the term "Molten Fuel Reactor"or "Liquid Fuel Reactor", but I'm funny that way... That differentiate it from solid fuel MSRs, which aren't very much different from the solid fuel reactors we use today (BWRs, PWRs).

@tayro7265 2 года назад

It never happened? Oak Ridge National Laboratory 1965-1969. It was closed and stripped under pressure from the military and lobbyist from the uranium industry. We have had the ability to scale this tech for homes since the 70's. Most of the "problems" had been solved at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Remember that "closed and stripped" comment? It was stripped and sold for scrap. A working reactor closed, paper work trashed, key components made on site along with any schematics sold as scrap or thrown in the trash. You know why.

@yoshisaidit7250 Год назад

I use to be against nuclear power, until I research it. Thorium sounds to be a very good option.

@Nill757 2 года назад

Under current nuclear regulation, the removal (escape?) of radioactive fission product gasses is considered a failure, not a feature as suggested here for a molten fuel reactor. Yes removal of gasses allows greater burn-up, but gasses leaving the reactor is a failure in LWRs. Gas escape from cracked LWR solid fuel elements led to frequent shutdowns in the early days of US nuclear power, which in turn drove the industry to great expense to fuel designs that would retain fission products, eventually enabling the 92% up-times seen today. The regulatory bodies are wedded to a secure fuel notion, and will have to turn themselves upside down to approve a system that says, 'our fission gasses are removed and stored in this tank over there, lets move along'.

@actionjackson9554 10 месяцев назад

I agree the young should explore the Thorium fuel and go smaller reactors for neighborhoods..less transmission lines and waste...smaller safe to run community nuke power..

@StephenLee529 11 месяцев назад

Well done…

@RealistNW Год назад

Here is something that is being built in Idaho by NuScale energy NuScale's new reactor housings offer further protection. A conventional reactor sits within a reinforced concrete containment vessel up to 40 meters in diameter. Each 3-meter-wide NuScale reactor nestles into its own 4.6-meter-wide steel containment vessel, which by virtue of its much smaller diameter can withstand pressures 15 times greater. The vessels sit submerged in a vast pool of water: NuScale's ultimate line of defense. For example, in an emergency, operators can cool the core by diverting steam from the turbines to heat exchangers in the pool. During normal operations, the space between the reactor and the containment vessel is kept under vacuum, like a thermos, to insulate the core and allow it to heat up. But if the reactor overheats, relief valves would pop open to release steam and water into the vacuum space, where they would transfer heat to the pool. Such passive features ensure that in just about any conceivable accident, the core would remain intact, Reyes says.

@grootje1234 Год назад

Great video . There is in Japan a new reactor for uranium that works with helium the temperature is 1600 Celsius and they use it right now

@hartunstart Год назад

One more question. Is it possible to change the power output of a thorium reactor as the demand changes. A problem with uranium reactors is that when you run the reactor down, you have to wait a few days before starting it up again because of xenon poisoning. In general, excellent video.

@peterolsen9131 Год назад

thats the beauty of them! the more you hit the gas pedal on demand side, the reactor gets slightly cooler and produces to meet the load[ load following] then when you back off the demand , its heats up slightly and the reaction slows down automatically, due to the laws of physics, not someone pushing a button or pulling a lever to change the reactor, its all a balance of load to reaction rate

@Yezpahr 4 месяца назад

I had this video on my Watch Later list since the day it was uploaded.... Now I feel bad for not having shared it when it mattered. I hope the algorithm still pushes it. Here's a comment for the algorithm.

@quinto190 2 года назад

Very thoughtful, although a bit complex. I think it's very important to make this technology more well known, since it's such a good complement for the current reactors.

@flixri726 9 месяцев назад

why would it be? You would need to construct a whole new infrastructure for what? Uranium is far from being short at the moment and in fact, states that dont posses uranium could construct bombs with the u233 produced in the thorium cycle. To spread this technology would increase the risk of proliferation.

@Arturo-lapaz Год назад

Very well narration with enough information . What is out of the scope, the thermodynamic actual energy generation using a working gas, either Helium, Argon or an adequate two atomic gas, like Nitrogen, but not Hydrogen. Higher than 45% efficient thermodynamic cycles are possible, with the conventional combined cycle, near 60% and even higher with advanced single cycle if adequate cooling heat exchangers are used, like providing recuperation.

@carrdoug99 2 года назад

Nice video. Production cost is why nobody wanted to be first, outside of China. It's really important to remember, that ten year development average has as much to do with the regulatory process/politics, driven by LWR history as anything.

@ardeshirmehta9327 2 года назад

I applaud you for this video, I learned a lot! Kudos. (Please, however, pronounce "nuclear" correctly.) You might also try to see if Thorium electricity production will be competitive in cost with the prices of solar and wind energy production in, say, 15 years' time.

@BartLocanthi 2 года назад

+1 it's unfortunate to have the impact/authoritativeness of this otherwise excellent video take a hit every time it's mispronounced.

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

Thank you for the support and the feedback. Yes, many have noted the mispronounciation and I apologies about that (English is not my first language). I'll definetely look into that electicity cost production comparison.

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

Apologies about that again, I'll make sure to double check the pronounciation (as English is not my first language)

@ardeshirmehta9327 2 года назад

@@JoaquinRevello I had no idea that English is not your first language: you speak it so well! Wow.

@easymac79 2 года назад

Could a sacrificial electrode[anode?] be used to stop corrosion of pipes from salts? Similar to the way boats use this to prevent corrosion of their hull.

@larrydugan1441 11 месяцев назад

Very good video thanks. Imagine if the trillions being wasted on windmills and solar panels had been spent on molten salt reactors.

@JoaquinRevello 11 месяцев назад

Yes, have a great day!

@deadeyeglen Год назад

You have excellent presentation skills. You could make a career in TV, radio, or even youtube 🙂

@peejuu 2 года назад

Great video although would just to add from 6 minutes onward there were audio sync problems lol your lips were behind to least 20ms

@apuuvah 2 года назад

Well, people like you are the future. If we have one.

@vijayanchomatil8413 Год назад

I wonder if the increased temperature of MSRs will be suitable for applications like Industrial heat processes?

@Idontgivechainsaw 4 месяца назад

great video man. Good fucking job

@daniellarson3068 2 года назад

Good video - lots of facts. At the end he mentioned economic opportunities. I don't think he mentioned that Thorium often occurs in nature with the rare earth minerals. Mining thorium would give you a double whammy in that other valuable materials would be obtained. These are used in computers, missiles, electric cars, electric windmills and many other places. Today, China mines them for the world and holds a near monopoly. Given the recent supply chain disruptions, this may certainly present a viable opportunity in the future.

@karhukivi 2 года назад

The problem is that thorium deposits are not widespread, given its difficult chemistry. Uranium is far more plentiful in terms of deposits in different countries and geological settings. For example, Europe would have to import thorium whereas uranium is found in many EU countries.

@paulbedichek2679 2 года назад

China process rare earths because they have weak environmental laws ,their methods render the land unusable.

@daniellarson3068 2 года назад

@@paulbedichek2679 I think you deserve the prize for correctness.

@bmobert Год назад

Not bad. I favorite msr is Elysium. I've heard flibe is a comparatively difficult msr.

@xboxerdudekiingpurp5530 2 года назад

you should do a video with the Turbine Guy also on youtube about nuclear

@ledenhimeganidleshitz144 Год назад

No! The Oak Ridge project shutdown for political reasons, Nixon wanted the budget for jobs in California. The reason was not corrosion or other technical reasons.

@chapter4travels Год назад

Correct, so many myths out there about the reasons.

@andreaugusto3851 2 года назад

nice voice dude!

@noahrubin3327 2 года назад

Sick video

@JoaquinRevello 2 года назад

I appreciate it, thank you

@tomeks666 Год назад

There is so much money spent on thermonuclear projects with little prospect of becoming practical, while this thorium salt looks so promissing and would solve all all energy needs for the planet for ever.

@bertovv3369 2 года назад

it to the desert. Cooling water, however, is another matter, because it is needed in great quantity and regular flow.

@patrickfavier4310 2 года назад

Nice info. Sidenote: Your audio and video sync is slightly off.

@putteslaintxtbks5166 2 года назад

One time many years ago (like 40-50 yrs. ago?), just west of Sioux Falls, SD, my dad pointed out a building and said that was one of the first nucear plants ever run, that it was filled with concrete after a few years running. I tryed to find out more about this, but never found out anything. Could this have been the molten salt reacter?

@jamesgornall5731 2 года назад

I think it was

@putteslaintxtbks5166 2 года назад

@@jamesgornall5731 It was just east, not west of, between SF and Brandon, SD.

@paulbedichek2679 2 года назад

Idaho national laboratory is the site of 50 reactors ,we are now building the experimental molten chloride fast reactor, you don't use Th in many advanced reactors.

@thomasjalabert658 2 года назад

Very nice video. There is 4x more thorium than uranium in earth crust but you need a precise ratio of uranium isotopes to power the reactor, which is not the case for thorium. So thorium combustible is actually 200more abundant than uranium if we take this into account.

@paulbedichek2679 2 года назад

Irrelevant we have U to last trillions of years way past the life of our sun.

@neuralwarp 2 года назад

True, but thorium has a lot of advantages over uranium if you're building a MSR, and a MSR has a lot of advantages over an SSR. One advantage of Th is that we're digging it up anyway with other minerals, and it costs us money to re-bury it. We have to go looking for U.

@throwaway692 Год назад

I wasn't aware the Grizzly Bear had been adopted as an SI unit. Long overdue. ;)

@thepeff 2 года назад

Nuclear powered planes? That is a fever dream

@eldergeektromeo9868 Год назад

How about nuclear powered submarines, aircraft carriers? Are those fever dreams as well??

@1crazypj Год назад

150 Atm is around 2,200 psi which is something more people (at least i USA) can probably relate to . Water is generally said to expand about 1,000 times but at that pressure it will actually be expanding around 1,600 times if released to atmospheric pressure You may not be aware but sodium has been used to transfer heat in exhaust valves of internal combustion engines for over a hundred years. Modern materials shouldn't have any real problem with molten salt

@Arturo-lapaz Год назад

Experience in the desert shows otherwise, at above 600 degrees , unnecessary . The solar plants use its storage properties, on a continuous power station , not applicable.

@1crazypj Год назад

@@Arturo-lapaz You mean molten sodium in the 'Solar Reflector' power plants? No idea what you mean about experience in the desert?

@infini_ryu9461 2 года назад

I think this fixation on Thorium being the cure is very bad strategy. Uranium 238 is absolutely viable in advanced reactors, specifically Fast Reactors. I would argue it's even better, because Fast Reactors are better. Thorium 232 and Uranium 238 both do better in Fast Reactors than in Thermal Reactors, while Uranium 238 is unviable in Thermal Reactors, but U238 is superior to Th232 is Fast Reactors. The problem with Thorium is it's Neutron economy. Plutonium 239(From U238) releases 3.0 Neutrons in a Fast Spectrum, while Uranium 233(From Th232) releases only 2.5 neutrons in a Fast Spectrum. Thorium requires a larger core, it requires more fissile to remain critical. Even Thorium on the Thermal Spectrum requires a large amount of handling and reprocessing, that costs money. While a Fast Reactor running on Uranium-Plutonium can run for decades untouched. The problem is not the fuel, it's the people, there are too many people having to be paid to walk around with clipboards. Nuclear fuel is the reason Nuclear Reactors can and have produced energy cheaper than coal, so a shift in fuel is not necessary, it's not what should be the focus, unless it's to reduce the hours of people at the plant, and Uranium-Plutonium has the greatest potential for doing so.