ThorCon: Cheap, reliable, CO2-free electric power
I understand the interest in baseload generation but don't see why there's so much interest in nuclear when low-tech concentrated solar in the desert can get the job done and scaling it up (and ensuring it's 100% safe) isn't a matter of R&D but just basic manufacturing. It strikes me a lot of the nuclear focus is (understandable, if not justifiable) interest in cool new technology.
Ironically, with concentrated solar, going lower tech, even at the expense of efficiency, might decrease costs because the materials would amount to cheap mirrors/collectors and steel pipes. Saul Griffith's classic talk highlighted that there's probably no meaningful manufacturing limit to building concentrated solar with existing industrial infrastructure:
https://longnow.org/seminars/02009/jan/16/climate-change-rec...
The article quotes a very old capacity-factor for wind-energy (30%). Today it is 60-64%. https://www.ge.com/renewableenergy/wind-energy/offshore-wind... Also read this report regarding new types of nuclear power (a summary is that these new versions is probably a waste of money): https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/2021-05/ucs-rpt-A...
I think making a molten salt reactor work would be amazing. Doing so in a 3rd world country would be even better but it happening is really hard to see.
I think more likely one of the companies working in Canada will get there first. Canada is the only international regulator of high standing who has a real strong program of trying to get such reactors actually certified.
The US has woken up out of their deep, deep slumber in the last 5 years but the DoE changing policy is basically like watching a glacier. They have done some good things and hopeful they continue to cooperate with Canada.
One of the biggest things holding back nuclear is that each country has a totally unique regulatory framework. And no market (except maybe the US) is large enough to justify the investment.
This is also a problem in other spaces but getting your electronics certified is a lot cheaper then spending potentially 100s of millions on a certification process.
To make nuclear commercial really happen international regulatory agency should exist or the nuclear regulator should cross license each other.
ThorCon gets around that by working with a company that almost doesn't (or didn't) have a regulatory agency or a regulatory framework and they are building them together. The government is building the regulator, the company the product.
I wish them the very, very best. If they are successful it could do more then almost any other project. Its far more important then getting a little bit more wind energy into Germany. Indonesia is one of the biggest countries in the world and coal is their only viable option right now.
Edit: This is great video to understand what ThorCon is actually doing:
Next generation nuclear or fusion would be amazing, but looking how things stand today, I would bet on cheap and reliable grid-storage batteries coming first. Pairing renewables with cheap batteries solves energy for 80% of the world. Things like sodium-ion batteries look like they are getting close production, and don't contain hard-to-acquire materials.
Is everybody supposed to know it’s a nuclear plant? It took 5 minutes to figure the fuel…
Previous discussion (with comments from a ThorCon employee): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8863535
> The fission island Cans requires 700 tons of very high quality graphite, and 800 tons of SUS 316 and 304.
SUS is the typical Japanese Industrial Standards (JIS) designation for stainless steel grades. It stands for “steel use stainless.”
The linked page says little about how they do what they do. Even the Design page doesn’t explain how.
This all appears to assume some knowledge of power generation or even their approach.
Edit >> sorry! I read the hn linked page, and then I navigated to the design page. I did not also go to “home”. Perhaps the hn link could be for the home page.
undefined
8 minute is selling solar + storage for 4cents/kWh. Nuclear can't compete with that.
Aren't the difficulties dealing with molten salt like corrosion leading to huge costs? If you are already dealing with molten salt, then why not use concentrated solar power?
this reads like a too good to be true pitch, so I have to ask, what's the catch?
edit: these are breeder reactors? aren't there still waste and other concerns here?
I learned more about coal plant than the ThorCon itself. Was this published on April 1st :)
My brother works at the Pentagon on the Navy budget, and found the "tale of two ships" to be spot on.
From their Design page, under the "Overview" subheader:
>> ThorCon is a molten salt fission reactor. Unlike all current nuclear reactors, the fuel is in liquid form. It can be moved around with a pump, and passively drained in the event of a casualty.
Casualty? Huh?
Why can't we store the gasses from burning fuel/coal, under high pressure, for generating power once more between two tanks for example?
it's not like academics and advisors have been saying this for years...
glad industry is catching on even if big govt(s) won't...
More nuke promotion.
It doesn't matter how you spin nukes, they will always end up costing way, way more than renewables + storage. Diverting capital to nukes slows our response to global climatic catastrophe, perhaps enriching a few at the expense of the whole world.
"Most people will automatically scoff at the claim that a nuclear power plant should cost less to build than a coal plant. It is received wisdom that nuclear plants are outrageously expensive. And most recent nuclear projects confirm that belief. But why"
Because of the potential of catastrophic failure. Duh!
That and these people are not counting the discounted cost, over 200,000 years, of storing their long term waste and maintaining the site.
Nuclear power looks cheap if you completely discount the future - and you are unethical enough to make future generations pay for current consumption. (Ditto coal)
The fundamental flaw with wind power.
The wind does not blow on demand and, currently in the Pacific Northwest, they store the wind energy in batteries! The neighboring hydroelectric dams can back up water when demand is low (e.g. at night) and increase flow when demand rises (e.g. during the day).Prosperous economies require reliable energy when needed, so power generation must be dispatchable on demand. Intermittent wind and solar source generators can temporarily supply low-cost electric power to the grid, but with a capacity factor of about 30%. This has created demand for redundant natural gas turbine generators to provide “back up” power when there is no wind or sun.