Remedies to Primary Problems With Conventional Nuclear Energy Using Liquid Fluoride Thorium

Abstract

The extensive use of uranium fuels has been linked with inefficiency such as waste management challenges, being insecure, and easy to be weaponized, which calls for the adoption of an alternative source of nuclear reactors. The use of Liquid Fluoride Thorium as an alternative fuel in nuclear fission reactor has been reported across the world. Liquid Fluoride Thorium is associated with enhanced the safety of the components and is hard to be weaponized compared to uranium. Nevertheless, the cost-effectiveness has raised questions since thorium-fueled reactors entail massive investment for setup before it can be availed for commercial use. This paper is aimed at examining the viability of using Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors in conventional nuclear energy technology as an alternative to Uranium-based options.

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Background of the StudyNuclear fuel cycle involves a series of industrial processes to produce electricity from radioactive power reactors. Uranium has been widely exploited in the generation of electric power due to its availability worldwide making it a convenient source of fuel in nuclear technology. In the contemporary society, the extensive use of uranium fuels has been perceived with inefficiency that calls for the adoption of an alternative source of nuclear reactors. However, the approach has encountered cost-effectiveness in nuclear technology since the breeder or reprocessing reactors can spend some of the energy used in the fuel making it cheaper to establish and maintain. The activities involved in the uranium-fueled reactors end with the disposal of the nuclear waste while reprocessing of used fuel in the nuclear process is enhanced by the fuel cycle. The preparation of uranium for use in the industrial process has to undergo various steps: the mining of the uranium ore, milling, conversion, enrichment, and fabrication of fuel. The processes constitute the front end of the nuclear fuel cycle. The involvement of uranium in the nuclear reactors takes about three years before being subjected to a temporary storage facility, reprocessing and recycling before the removal of wastes, which constitute the back end of the nuclear cycle. The technicalities encountered in the final disposal of the uranium wastes have provided the opportunity for the development of new approaches and alternatives to nuclear energy use (Letcher, 2014). In such a scenario, thorium-fueled reactors have been projected for the improved utilization of nuclear power.

The use of Liquid Fluoride Thorium as an alternative fuel in nuclear fission reactor has been reported across the world. The increasing adoption of Thorium to replace uranium has been faced with various advantages and disadvantages facilitating the increased debates on the subject. Proponents of the use of Liquid Fluoride Thorium have enhanced the safety of the component since it is hard to be weaponized compared to uranium. The opponents have built on the ideas of the cost-effectiveness of the approach since thorium-fuelled reactors entail massive investment for setup before it can be availed for commercial use. The incorporation of thorium fuel has been perceived as the future and most recent form of nuclear energy that needs to be exploited. Such a consideration is enhanced by the presence of high-temperature reactors (HTR) and molten salt reactors (MSRs) from thorium. The high melting point of thorium makes it appropriate for the high-temperature reactors, while inherent safety and efficiency of the fuel are derived from the molten-salt reactors. Liquid Thorium Fluoride is a particular type of molten-salt reactors that produce the fissile isotope, U233 causing an automated consumption of the wastes. The automatically consumed wastes enhance the production of long-lived radioactive compounds.

The Liquid Fluoride Thorium fuels conventional nuclear plant requires the development a new supply chain, fabrication facility, and reprocessing and storage facility for effective implementation. Such a consideration will enhance convenience during the launch in the fuel-energy markets as part of the golden age nuclear innovation like China projects the commercial sale of molten-sate reactors by the year 2030 (IAEA, 2007). The use of thorium-fueled nuclear plants does not offer much of a realistic profitable objective despite being achievable in the future nuclear fuel markets. Such a move is enhanced by the assessment of the physical tests and characterization of the prominent and postulated effects of the thorium fuels. The fuel cycles of thorium can destroy the transuranic materials from the supply of the neutrons. From the prospects of thorium nuclear technology, it can be classed as the first conventional nuclear energy that will combine thorium and plutonium elements in light-water and high-water reactors. In such a move, thorium is ideal for the disposition of plutonium.

1.2 Aim of the researchThe paper focuses on examining the viability of using Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors in conventional nuclear energy technology as an alternative to Uranium-based options. Such a consideration will enable the exploitation of the uranium limitations in comparison to the advantages of Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors such a waste management, safety, and proliferation of weapons.

1.3 Research QuestionsWhat are the advantages of using thorium as an alternative to uranium in nuclear technology?

What are the challenges associated with the use of Liquid Fluoride Thorium in nuclear energy?

How can be challenges associated with the use of LFTRs in nuclear energy production be resolved?

1.4 Significance of StudyThe Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors (LFTRs) have the potential of generating more fuel than uranium, which adds to its advantage in the production of fuels. The development of the LFTRs allows for the elimination of the fabricated solid-fuel elements in the production of the nuclear energy. Such a move offers a passive to decomposition, removal of heat, and efficiency in the high thermal conversion at reduced pressures. The unique properties of thorium make it essential in the radioactive class of reactors (Blix, 2016). However, LFTR faces regulatory challenges in the adaptation of the solid-fuel reactor policies in the requirements for liquid-fuel technology. Nuclear engineers and scientists have reported the formation of tritium in the molten salt and the container. More so, it is quite challenging to acquire the necessary documentation with the support of the thorium-fuelled reactors. The strategic use of thorium as a secure energy reserve for the future makes it the best alternative to uranium or plutonium. The fuel cycles of thorium are characteristic of low volumes of highly transuranic radioactive elements that are produced as wastes. The economic significance of the thorium fuel cycle is yet to be proven through research and practice. The deliberation of LFTR requires the conversion of Th-232 to uranium-233 since the former is fertile but non-fissile. The conversion process involves a neutron capture, which is time-consuming and expensive to implement. Thorium-fuelled reactors utilize the establishment and disposition of new technologies of fuel-cycle that are accomplished through the uranium fuel cycles. Evidence indicates that the use of thorium-fuelled reactors is likely to generate traceable amounts of plutonium and high-quality fissile materials that are vital proliferating tissues similar to the conventional uranium fuel cycles.

1.5 Problem Statement and JustificationUranium-fueled reactors have been evident of three significant problems in nuclear energy production; waste production, safety issues, and proliferation of weapons. Various technical challenges are associated with the use of LFTRs in modern nuclear technology. For instance, thorium being non-fissile, it is underappreciated due to non-triviality and high costs of conversion. Such a consideration necessitates for the provision of current fissile drivers to enhance the functionality of the element. The surpluses of plutonium from the used nuclear fuel energy provide a viable option and sensation for recycling despite the difficulties in handling the product (Hargraves, 2012). However, few technological problems have been demonstrated in the production of thorium fuels for conventional reactors, where the principal problem lies in the state of the fuel after irradiation of the components.

LFTRs provide potential paradigm shifts in the nuclear fission that are susceptible to various technical hurdles, like corrosion of materials, control of reactors, and in-line fuel processing. The expansion of the material database is a prime technical challenge in LFTRs because it can take several years to test the portability of nuclear plant. The thorium-fuelled reactors utilize different technologies that should be utilized in the central systems, like the power conversion, chemical processing, and reactor vessel and primary heat transport system. However, it is quite difficult to predict which system will more challenging or will require more time to set up. From the consideration, the Liquid Fluoride Thorium reactor is likely to have a complicated design to achieve the enhanced safety of the nuclear reaction processes. The difficulty of nuclear power conversion will depend on the technologies implemented in the process that should save time and address the complexity of the reactor system.

2.0 Literature ReviewNuclear energy entails the release of energy through a chain of radioactive reaction aided by the process of nuclear fission in the reactor. The source of fuel used in the generation of nuclear energy is widely developed through mining and processing of uranium to produce electricity. Uranium is considered a slightly radioactive metal that occurs in four parts-per-million in granite. It is also present in fertilizers, where the concentration of uranium is about 400 ppm, while more than 100 ppm in coal deposits (Hargravesm, 2012). The reactivity of the mineral is attributed to the radioactive decay process. After the mining and milling process, uranium oxide product is developed that helps in the extraction of the natural, fissile uranium because the oxide cannot be used directly as a nuclear reactor. The fissile isotope of uranium is uranium-235, which is separated from U-238 through an enrichment process to increase its concentration to about 3.5- 5%. The enrichment process converts the element in the gaseous form. The conversion facility for uranium refines the oxide to uranium dioxide that can be used as a source of fuel for the nuclear reactors that do not require enriched uranium. The conversion stage is hazardous due to the utilization of hydrogen fluoride that enhances the development of uranium hexafluoride.

Fuel fabrication process of uranium is often enhanced in the form of ceramic pellets that are abstracted from uranium oxide under high temperatures. The fuel fabrication plant is essential in the development of vital shapes and sizes of the pr...