Energy From Thorium Discussion Forum

It is currently Dec 14, 2017 10:15 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
PostPosted: Nov 18, 2016 3:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Nov 14, 2016 5:01 pm
Posts: 18
Tim Meyer wrote:
Amur_Tiger wrote:
I believe SMR means solid fueled. The fluid-fueled reactor where the fluid is a particular molten salt has not been given the chance to perform.


SMR is Small Modular Reactor, Flibe Energy's LFTR is one of many designs that fit into this category which tries to reduce the capital costs of building a reactor outside of the costs reductions specific to any chosen design. My view is that many of these designs should be given the chance to perform and that overtime LFTR's advantages are likely to push it to the forefront, concerns about nuclear waste are valid but of far less concern then challenges with coal emissions. We can afford to put all of it into casks and monitor it on site for decades before there's any particularly pressing need to deal with the stuff, indeed I think that rushing to try and implement long-term solutions has caused the nuclear industry more problems then good.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Dec 24, 2016 10:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Jun 05, 2011 6:59 pm
Posts: 1335
Location: NoOPWA
Amur_Tiger wrote:
My view is that many of these designs should be given the chance to perform and that overtime LFTR's advantages are likely to push it to the forefront, ...
My view is that SMRs will never work as long as the NRC fee structure remains locked into gigareactors. All the baseline fees and liabilities should be revised to take the output of the reactor into account as well as its degree of walk-away safety. That includes the Price Andersen Act.

_________________
DRJ : Engineer - NAVSEA : (Retired)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 01, 2017 1:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 14, 2013 2:34 pm
Posts: 180
Location: Here and There
"My view is that SMRs will never work as long as the NRC fee structure remains locked into gigareactors."

Maybe - Our new president and his cabinet which do not believe in over-regulation will make some changes. Since I left nuke work, I have read of how the security has been "beefed up." Times may be different, but I do not think human nature has changed all that much over the past twenty years. I'm thinking the worst thing they used to have to worry about was a stray cow running into the fence. I highly doubt that the added security can be justified when measured with the ruler of common sense.

I know some of the folks who post herein do not believe in global warming, but some think the Earth is flat too. You are entitled to those thoughts. Given, the thousands of intelligent scientists who do accept this as reality, it could be time to at least try a few of these new nuclear plants out as pilot plants. It is certainly an investment in the future.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group