MIT Develops Meltdown-Proof, Nuclear Waste-Eating Reactor _ OilPrice

7/25/2019 MIT Develops Meltdown-Proof, Nuclear Waste-Eating Reactor _ OilPrice

1/7

Mar 16, 2013, 3:16 PM Home / Alternative Energy / Nuclear Power

MIT Develops Meltdown-Proof,Nuclear Waste-Eating Reactor

Transatomic, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology spinoff is developing a nuclear reactor

designed to overcome the major barriers to nuclear power. For the anti-nuclear folks the designoffers to burn up the existing spent fuel from the worlds fleet of nuclear reactors in a design that

doesnt offer a chance for a meltdown. That should be nirvana for those alarmed about atomic

energy and weapons proliferation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=AAFWeIp8JT0

For everyone else, the first offering is we would see a reduction in spent fuel containment costs and

get electrical energy, lots of it, instead. The second is the design would be factory produced cuttingbuild costs in a huge way and the reactors would be larger than the currently trendy Small Modular

Nuclear Reactors (SMNRs) offering the chance to install at existing locations saving on the

generation and grid connection costs.

Transatomic, founded by a pair of very smart and innovative young nuclear engineers, has updated

the molten-salt reactor, a reactor type thats highly resistant to meltdowns. Molten-salt reactors were

demonstrated in the 1960s at Oak Ridge National Lab, where one test reactor ran for six years.

What remains is raising $5 million to run five experiments to help validate the new basic design.

Russ Wilcox, Transatomics new CEO estimates that it will take eight years to build a prototype

reactor at a cost of $200 million. The company has already raised $1 million in seed funding,

including some from Ray Rothrock, a partner at the venture capital firm Venrock.

The cofounders, Mark Massie and Leslie Dewan, who we met here in April last year, are still PhD

candidates at MIT. Yet the design has attracted some top advisors, including Regis Matzie, the
http://transatomicpower.com/index.phphttp://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=AAFWeIp8JT0http://oilprice.com/http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/http://oilprice.com/http://oilprice.com/http://oilprice.com/http://newenergyandfuel.com/http:/newenergyandfuel/com/2012/04/03/nuclear-waste-has-new-best-friends/http://transatomicpower.com/index.phphttp://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=AAFWeIp8JT0http://www.technologyreview.com/news/512321/safer-nuclear-power-at-half-the-price/?utm_campaign=newsletters&utm_source=newsletter-daily-all&utm_medium=email&utm_content=20130312http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/http://oilprice.com/http://oilprice.com/


2/7

former CTO of the major nuclear power plant supplier Westinghouse Electric, and Richard Lester, the

head of the nuclear engineering department at MIT.

Ms Dewan Mr. Massie and Mr. Lester of Transatomic Power.

The new reactor design called the Waste-Annihilating Molten Salt Reactor (WAMSR) so far exists

only on paper. Ray Rothrock says the company will face many challenges. The technology doesnt

bother me in the least, he said. I have confidence in the people. I wish someone would build this

thing, because I think it would work. Its all the other factors that make it daunting. Well get to those

daunting factors in a moment.

Background todays conventional nuclear power plant is cooled by water, which boils at 100 C a

temperature far below the 2,000 C at the core of a fuel pellet. Even after the reactor is shut down, it

must be continuously cooled by pumping in water until the whole internal core apparatus is below

100 C. The inability to do that properly is what has caused the problems at troubled plants. Oddly,

the nuclear industry and regulatory agencies havent come to realize the notion of mixing water and

nuclear fuel is the dangerous matter.

The big problems can be solved by using molten salt, instead of water as the coolant, which is mixed

in with the fuel. Molten salt has a boiling point higher than the operating temperature of the fuel. That

way the reactor has a built-in thermostat if it starts to heat up, the salt expands, spreading out the

fuel and slowing the reactions cooling the thing off.

In the event of a power outage where cooling circulation would stop carrying away the heat, a plug at

the bottom of the reactor melts and the fuel and salt mixture flows by gravity into a holding tank,

where the fuel spreads out enough for the reactions to stop. The salt then cools and solidifies,

encapsulating the radioactive materials.

Ms Dewan now the companys chief science officer says, Its walk-away safe, if you lose electricity,

even if there are no operators on site to pull levers, it will coast to a stop.

She needs only $5 million to prove it.


3/7

Technology Transatomics design improves on the original molten-salt reactor by changing the

internal geometry and using different materials. Transatomic is keeping many of the proprietary

design details to itself, but one change involves eliminating the graphite that made up 90% of the

volume of the Oak Ridge reactor. The company has also modified conditions in the reactor to

produce faster neutrons, which makes it possible to burn most of the material that is ordinarily

discarded as waste.

WAMSR Reactor Schematic Graphic Diagram.

The design offers a couple other real strong incentives. Because it runs at atmospheric pressure

rather than the high pressures required in conventional reactors the amount of steel and concrete

needed to guard against accidents is greatly reduced. The technical approach will work for uraniumor for the future thorium fuels as well.

Related article: Will Japan Embrace Geothermal Power to Move Away from Nuclear?

Here is the comparison that should light up the hearts of the antinuclear crowd. A conventional

1,000-megawatt reactor produces about 20 metric tons (44,000 lbs.) of high-level waste a year, and

that material needs to be safely stored for 100,000 years. The 500-megawatt Transatomic reactor

will produce only four kilograms (8.8 lbs.) of such waste a year, along with 250 kilograms (550 lbs.) ofwaste that has to be stored for a few hundred years.

In the presentation the duo projects some warming numbers for both the low cost power and the anti

nuclear folks. Conventional nuclear reactors can utilize only about 3% of the potential fission energy

in a given amount of uranium before it has to be removed from the reactor. The Transatomic design

captures 98% of this remaining energy. A fully deployed Transatomic reactor fleet could use existing

stockpiles of nuclear waste to satisfy the worlds electricity needs for 70 years, now through 2083
http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Geothermal-Energy/Will-Japan-Embrace-Geothermal-Power-to-Move-Away-from-Nuclear.htmlhttp://thoriummsr.com/q-and-a-with-russell-wilcox-of-transatomic-power/


4/7

when about 99.2% of todays dangerous spent fuel would be burned away.

Even though the basic idea of a molten-salt reactor has been demonstrated the Nuclear Regulatory

Commissions (NRC) certification process is set up around light-water reactors. NRC spokesman

Scott Burnell said for the next few years, the NRC will be focused on certifying the more conventional

designs for SMNRs. But he also said that the commission is aware of Transatomics concept but that

designs havent been submitted for review yet. The certification process for Transatomic will take atleast five years once the company submits a detailed design, with additional review needed

specifically for issues related to fuel and waste management.

The detailed design is years and $4 million more dollars away. Wilcox estimated that it will take eight

years to build a prototype reactor at a cost of $200 million. Low cost power customers and the

antinuclear folks might want to coordinate getting the Congress to rewrite the NRCs procedures to

speed things up.

After all, China is reported to be investing $350 million over five years to develop molten-salt reactors

of its own. It plans to build a two-megawatt test reactor by 2020.

Itd be a pity to miss out on a trillion dollar industrial market and trillions more in electricity savings.

Plus get rid of all that weapons ready, costly to store used fuel.

A hat tip goes to Brian Wand for spotting the latest update to Tranatomics progress.

By. Brian Westenhaus

Original source: The Nuke The Anti Nuke Crowd Should Love

Join the discussion | Back to homepage
http://-/?-http://oilprice.com/http://newenergyandfuel.com/http:/newenergyandfuel/com/2013/03/13/the-nuke-the-anti-nuke-crowd-should-love/http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/03/transatomic-plans-for-factory-produced.html#more


5/7

SPONSORED FINANCIAL CONTENT

The nancial behaviors that leave

us underinsured

Zurich

Video: The income protection gap

is widening

Zurich

Report: Income protection gaps: a

rising global challenge

Zurich

(

BRIAN WESTENHAUS

Brian is the editor of the popular energy technology site New Energy and Fuel. Thesites mission is to inform, stimulate, amuse and abuse the

More Info

Susanne E. Vandenboschon March 18 2013said:

This is a question - not a criticism. Will the fast neutrons activate isotopes in the container material,making it very radioactive and difcult to dispose of.

SA Kitemanon March 23 2013said:

One can get the same basic effect with Flibe Energy's Spent Fuel Digester and the Liquid FluorideThorium Recycler (LFTR). The MIT work is nothing new.

Mel Tisdaleon March 29 2013said:

Anything that wakes up the powers that be to press ahead with nuclear power generation gets my vote
http://www.newenergyandfuel.com/http://oilprice.com/contributors/Brian-Westenhaushttp://www.dianomi.com/cms/register-interest/?utm_source=network&utm_medium=smartad_sponsor_linkhttp://www.dianomi.com/click.epl?pn=9076&offer=2791108&ad=8312&savid=19815&said=2623&adv=4418&unique_id=V2oW6sCoyKoAAAr09B4AAAAH&psa=941058296&smartreferer=http%3A%2F%2Foilprice%2Ecom%2FAlternative%2DEnergy%2FNuclear%2DPower%2FMIT%2DDevelops%2DMeltdown%2DProof%2DNuclear%2DWaste%2DEating%2DReactor%2Ehtmlhttp://www.dianomi.com/click.epl?pn=9077&offer=2791452&ad=8313&savid=19816&said=2623&adv=4418&unique_id=V2oW6sCoyKoAAAr09B4AAAAH&psa=941068725&smartreferer=http%3A%2F%2Foilprice%2Ecom%2FAlternative%2DEnergy%2FNuclear%2DPower%2FMIT%2DDevelops%2DMeltdown%2DProof%2DNuclear%2DWaste%2DEating%2DReactor%2Ehtmlhttp://www.dianomi.com/click.epl?pn=9078&offer=2791796&ad=8314&savid=19817&said=2623&adv=4418&unique_id=V2oW6sCoyKoAAAr09B4AAAAH&psa=941068726&smartreferer=http%3A%2F%2Foilprice%2Ecom%2FAlternative%2DEnergy%2FNuclear%2DPower%2FMIT%2DDevelops%2DMeltdown%2DProof%2DNuclear%2DWaste%2DEating%2DReactor%2Ehtml


6/7

We have listened to the Greens for far too long. They look forward to a life that uses draft animals toenable farmers to provide food for us. A green dream, which is better described as a black nightmare(but with roses aplenty!)

Give us loads of electrical power and it is a pound to a penny that humankind will soon nd a way ofsensibly using it to power all vehicles, including multi-wheelers, not just trendy cars and bikes. Accordinto some we have not got too long to make the conversion before fossil fuels, particularly oil, will be tooexpensive and not available at the rate we need them. It is difcult to see how society can avoid some

form of collapse when that time comes.

So let's have a massive Manhattan type project to get LFTR and/or other molten salt reactorsoperational, be they the ones discussed here or small modular ones. If they can guarantee that they wilnot provide terrorists with nukes, are as safe as claimed and have minimal waste, what's not to like?(And they offer a lot better existence than our having to spend all our time looking up where the sundon't shine as our horse pulls our plough.)

Curry B Tayloron March 31 2013said:

As much as I love MIT, and academics in general, I cannot condone use of taxpayer funds to support yeanother possible failure in a startup energy company. We need Manhattan-scale projects desperately,but they have to come from industry, private institutions, and individual donations, not from governmenmandate. Crowdfunding and high-risk investing on big ideas, rather than coercive taxation, is the wave the future. Voluntary individual and private enterprise funded many large projects before governmentsgot so involved in every aspect of our lives, but this is the way it will be again. We just need to reduce thtax burden signicantly enough so that there is enough money left over in the hands of the people forbig ideas to be chased. The world used to be an oyster, now it is run by theft and committee decree.

People wonder why big scientic projects cannot ever happen -- it's not because Congress doesn'tbudget enough money to science and startup companies, it's because that it does.

Samsonon January 15 2014said:

Thank you Ms Dewan and Mr Massie, you two really look like you know what your doing. So i'm going tomove to put the future of nuclear power in your hands. Keep on moving forward, you seem to know

exactly where nuclear power needs to go in the future.

T. Grifnon April 11 2014said:

Vandenbosch: this depends entirely upon the materials that are chosen to build the primary sidepressure vessel... Well, vessel in this case, as it operates at atmospheric pressure. A common problem,and controllable risk in light water reactors is the formation of Co-60. The half life is only about 5.2years, but it beta decays at a rather high energy (2.4ish MeV iirc). If these designers are as progressive


7/7

OilPrice.com | Google+

The materials provided on this Web site are for informational and educational purposes only and are not intended toprovide tax, legal, or investment advice.

Nothing contained on the Web site shall be considered a recommendation, solicitation, or offer to buy or sell a securito any person in any jurisdiction.

Merchant of Record: A Media Solutions trading as Oilprice.com

as touted, perhaps they can nd materials without known isotope propagators. This seems plausible asthere will not be terribly stringent pressure retaining requirements, on the primary side at least.

I nd it somewhat misleading to suggest that water in a light water reactor boils at 100C. A traditionalPWR utility reactor's primary side operates at ~300 C and 2000 psig, maintaining the liquid state of thewater.

David Ton June 18 2014said:

Sounds somewhat like the em2 reactor that General Atomics is proposing -- at least in terms of usingnuclear waste as its fuel.
https://plus.google.com/100818571694606454377/postshttp://oilprice.com/

Documents

MIT Develops Meltdown-Proof, Nuclear Waste-Eating Reactor _ OilPrice