From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Thorium-based nuclear power is
nuclear reactor-based electrical power generation fueled primarily by the fission of the isotope uranium-233 produced from the fertile element
thorium. According to proponents, a
thorium fuel cycle offers several potential advantages over a
uranium fuel cycle—including much
greater abundance
on Earth, superior physical and nuclear fuel properties, and reduced
nuclear waste production. However, development of Thorium power has
significant start-up costs. Proponents also cite the lack of
weaponization potential as an advantage of thorium, while critics say
that development of breeder reactors in general (including thorium
reactors that are breeders by nature) increase proliferation concerns.
Since about 2008, nuclear energy experts have become more interested in
thorium to supply nuclear fuel in place of
uranium to generate
nuclear power. This renewed interest has been highlighted in a number of scientific conferences, the latest of which, ThEC13
[1] was held at
CERN by
iThEC and attracted over 200 scientists from 32 countries.
A nuclear reactor consumes certain specific
fissile isotopes to make energy. The three most practical types of nuclear reactor fuel are:
- Uranium-235, purified (i.e. "enriched") by reducing the amount of uranium-238
in natural mined uranium. Most nuclear power has been generated using
low-enriched uranium (LEU), whereas high-enriched uranium (HEU) is
necessary for weapons.
- Plutonium-239, transmuted from uranium-238 obtained from natural mined uranium. Plutonium is also used for weapons.
- Uranium-233, transmuted from thorium-232, derived from natural mined thorium. That is this article's subject.
Some believe thorium is key to developing a new generation of cleaner, safer nuclear power.
[2][3] According to an opinion piece (not peer-reviewed) by a group of scientists at the
Georgia Institute of Technology,
considering its overall potential, thorium-based power "can mean a
1000+ year solution or a quality low-carbon bridge to truly sustainable
energy sources solving a huge portion of mankind’s negative
environmental impact."
[4]
After studying the feasibility of using thorium, nuclear scientists Ralph W. Moir and
Edward Teller
suggested that thorium nuclear research should be restarted after a
three-decade shutdown and that a small prototype plant should be built.
[5][6][7] Research and development of thorium-based nuclear reactors, primarily the
Liquid fluoride thorium reactor, (LFTR),
MSR design, has been or is now being done in
India,
China,
Norway,
U.S.,
Israel and
Russia.
Background and brief history
After World War II, uranium-based nuclear reactors were built to
produce electricity. These were similar to the reactor designs that
produced material for nuclear weapons. During that period, the U.S.
government also built an experimental
molten salt reactor using U-233 fuel, the fissile material created by bombarding thorium with neutrons. The reactor, built at
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, operated
critical for roughly 15000 hours from 1965 to 1969. In 1968, Nobel laureate and discoverer of
Plutonium,
Glenn Seaborg, publicly announced to the
Atomic Energy Commission, of which he was chairman, that the thorium-based reactor had been successfully developed and tested:
So far the molten-salt reactor experiment
has operated successfully and has earned a reputation for reliability. I
think that some day the world will have commercial power reactors of
both the uranium-plutonium and the thorium-uranium fuel cycle type.[8]
In 1973, however, the U.S. government shut down all thorium-related
nuclear research—which had by then been ongoing for approximately twenty
years at
Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
The reasons were that uranium breeder reactors were more efficient, the
research was proven, and byproducts could be used to make nuclear
weapons. In Moir and Teller’s opinion, the decision to stop development
of thorium reactors, at least as a backup option, “was an excusable
mistake.”
[5]
Science writer Richard Martin states that nuclear physicist
Alvin Weinberg,
who was director at Oak Ridge and primarily responsible for the new
reactor, lost his job as director because he championed development of
the safer thorium reactors.
[9][10] Weinberg himself recalls this period:
[Congressman] Chet Holifield
was clearly exasperated with me, and he finally blurted out, "Alvin, if
you are concerned about the safety of reactors, then I think it may be
time for you to leave nuclear energy." I was speechless. But it was
apparent to me that my style, my attitude, and my perception of the
future were no longer in tune with the powers within the AEC.[11]
Martin explains that Weinberg's unwillingness to sacrifice
potentially safe nuclear power for the benefit of military uses forced
him to retire:
Weinberg realized that you could use thorium in an entirely new kind
of reactor, one that would have zero risk of meltdown. . . . his team
built a working reactor . . . . and he spent the rest of his 18-year
tenure trying to make thorium the heart of the nation’s atomic power
effort. He failed. Uranium reactors had already been established, and Hyman Rickover,
de facto head of the US nuclear program, wanted the plutonium from
uranium-powered nuclear plants to make bombs. Increasingly shunted
aside, Weinberg was finally forced out in 1973.[12]
Despite the documented history of thorium nuclear power, many of
today’s nuclear experts were nonetheless unaware of it. According to
Chemical & Engineering News,
"most people—including scientists—have hardly heard of the heavy-metal
element and know little about it...," noting a comment by a conference
attendee that "it's possible to have a Ph.D. in nuclear reactor
technology and not know about thorium energy."
[13] Nuclear physicist
Victor J. Stenger, for one, first learned of it in 2012:
It came as a surprise to me to learn recently that such an
alternative has been available to us since World War II, but not pursued
because it lacked weapons applications.[14]
Others, including former
NASA scientist and thorium expert
Kirk Sorensen, agree that "thorium was the alternative path that was not taken … "
[15][16]:2
According to Sorensen, during a documentary interview, he states that
if the U.S. had not discontinued its research in 1974 it could have
"probably achieved energy independence by around 2000."
[8]
Possible benefits
The
World Nuclear Association explains some of the possible benefits
[17]
The thorium fuel cycle offers enormous energy security benefits in
the long-term – due to its potential for being a self-sustaining fuel
without the need for fast neutron reactors. It is therefore an important
and potentially viable technology that seems able to contribute to
building credible, long-term nuclear energy scenarios.[18]
Moir and Teller agree, noting that the possible advantages of thorium
include "utilization of an abundant fuel, inaccessibility of that fuel
to terrorists or for diversion to weapons use, together with good
economics and safety features … "
[5]
Thorium is considered the "most abundant, most readily available,
cleanest, and safest energy source on Earth," adds science writer
Richard Martin.
[16]:7
- Thorium is four times as abundant as uranium, which is as common as
lead. It is ~ 570 times as common as uranium-235, the fissile isotope of
uranium used for nuclear energy. The Thorium Energy Alliance (TEA)
estimates "there is enough thorium in the United States alone to power
the country at its current energy level for over 1,000 years."[18][19][unreliable source]
"America has buried tons as a by-product of rare earth metals mining,"
notes Evans-Pritchard. "Norway has so much that Oslo is planning a
post-oil era where thorium might drive the country’s next great phase of
wealth. Even Britain has seams in Wales and in the granite cliffs of
Cornwall. Almost all thorium is fertile
Th-232, compared to uranium that is composed of 99.3% fertile U-238 and
0.7% more valuable fissile U-235. There is enough to power civilization
for thousands of years."[20]
- It is difficult to make a practical nuclear bomb from a thorium reactor's byproducts. According to Alvin Radkowsky,
designer of the world’s first full-scale atomic electric power plant,
"a thorium reactor's plutonium production rate would be less than 2
percent of that of a standard reactor, and the plutonium's isotopic
content would make it unsuitable for a nuclear detonation."[16]:11[21] Several uranium-233 bombs have been tested, but the presence of uranium-232 tended to "poison" the uranium-233 in two ways: intense radiation
from the uranium-232 made the material difficult to handle, and the
uranium-233 led to possible pre-detonation. Separating the uranium-232
from the uranium-233 proved very difficult, although newer laser techniques could facilitate that process.[22][23]
- There is much less nuclear waste—up to two orders of magnitude less, states Moir and Teller,[5] eliminating the need for large-scale or long-term storage;[16]:13 "Chinese scientists claim that hazardous waste will be a thousand times less than with uranium."[20]
The radioactivity of the resulting waste also drops down to safe levels
after just a few hundred years, compared to tens of thousands of years
needed for current nuclear waste to cool off.[24]
- According to Moir and Teller, "once started up [it] needs no other
fuel except thorium because it makes most or all of its own fuel."[5] Because it is non-fissile, it can also be used with fissile material, such as uranium and plutonium, as a nuclear fuel.[18]
- Since all natural thorium can be used as fuel no expensive fuel enrichment is needed.[24] However the same is true for U-238 as fertile fuel in the uranium-plutonium cycle.
- Comparing the amount of thorium needed with coal, Nobel laureate Carlo Rubbia of CERN,
(European Organization for Nuclear Research), estimates that one ton of
thorium can produce as much energy as 200 tons of uranium, or 3,500,000
tons of coal.[25]
Coal, as the world's largest source of carbon dioxide emissions, makes
up 42% of U.S. electrical power generation and 65% in China.[26]
Summarizing, Martin writes, "Thorium could provide a clean and
effectively limitless source of power while allaying all public
concern—weapons proliferation, radioactive pollution, toxic waste, and
fuel that is both costly and complicated to process.
[16]:13
From an economics viewpoint, U.K. business editor
Ambrose Evans-Pritchard writes that "Obama could kill fossil fuels overnight with a nuclear dash for thorium," suggesting a "new
Manhattan Project," and adding, "If it works, Manhattan II could restore American optimism and strategic leadership at a stroke …"
[25]
Moir and Teller estimated in 2004 that the cost for their recommended
prototype would be "well under $1 billion with operation costs likely on
the order of $100 million per year," and as a result a "large-scale
nuclear power plan" usable by many countries could be set up within a
decade.
[5]
Possible disadvantages
Some experts note possible specific disadvantages of thorium nuclear power:
[27]
- Breeding in a thermal neutron spectrum is slow and requires
extensive reprocessing. The feasibility of reprocessing is still open.[28]
- Significant and expensive testing, analysis and licensing work is first required, requiring business and government support.[18] According to a 2012 report by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists,
about using thorium fuel with existing water-cooled reactors, it would
"require too great an investment and provide no clear payoff," noting
that "from the utilities’ point of view, the only legitimate driver
capable of motivating pursuit of thorium is economics."[29]
- There is a higher cost of fuel fabrication and reprocessing than those that use traditional solid fuel rods.[18]
- Thorium, when being irradiated for use in reactors, will make
uranium-232, which is very dangerous due to the gamma rays it emits.
This irradiation process may be able to be altered slightly by removing
protactinium-233. The irradiation would then make uranium-233 in lieu of
uranium-232, which can be used in nuclear weapons to make thorium into a
dual purpose fuel.[30]
Current projects
Research and development of thorium-based nuclear reactors, primarily the
Liquid fluoride thorium reactor, (LFTR),
MSR design, has been or is now being done in the
U.S.,
U.K.,
Germany,
Brazil,
India,
China,
France, the
Czech Republic,
Japan,
Russia,
Canada,
Israel and the
Netherlands.
[14][16] Conferences with experts from as many as 32 countries are held, including one by the
European Organization for Nuclear Research (
CERN) in 2013, which focuses on thorium as an alternative nuclear technology without requiring production of nuclear waste.
[31] Recognized experts, such as
Hans Blix, former head of the
International Atomic Energy Agency,
calls for expanded support of new nuclear power technology, and states,
"the thorium option offers the world not only a new sustainable supply
of fuel for nuclear power but also one that makes better use of the
fuel's energy content."
[32]
Canada
CANDU reactors of Atomic Energy Canada Limited are capable of using thorium,
[33][dead link][34] and TPC (Thorium Power Canada) has, in 2013, planned and proposed developing thorium power projects for Chile and Indonesia.
[35]
China
At the 2011 annual conference of the
Chinese Academy of Sciences it was announced that "China has initiated a research and development project in thorium molten-salt reactor technology."
[36] In addition, Dr.
Jiang Mianheng, son of China's former leader
Jiang Zemin, led a thorium delegation in non-disclosure talks at
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Tennessee, and by late 2013 China had officially partnered with Oak Ridge to aid China in its own development.
[37][38] The
World Nuclear Association notes that the
China Academy of Sciences
in January 2011 announced its R&D program, "claiming to have the
world's largest national effort on it, hoping to obtain full
intellectual property rights on the technology."
[18]
According to Martin, "China has made clear its intention to go it
alone," adding that China already has a monopoly over most of the
world's
rare earth minerals.
[16]:157[20]
In March 2014, with their reliance on coal-fired power having become a
major cause of their current "smog crisis," they reduced their original
goal of creating a working reactor from 25 years down to 10. "In the
past, the government was interested in nuclear power because of the
energy shortage. Now they are more interested because of smog," said
Professor Li Zhong, a scientist working on the project. "This is
definitely a race," he added.
[39]
In early 2012, it was reported that China, using components produced
by the West and Russia, planned to build two prototype thorium
molten salt reactors by 2015, and had budgeted the project at $400 million and requiring 400 workers."
[16]:157 China also finalized an agreement with a Canadian nuclear technology company to develop improved
CANDU reactors using thorium and uranium as a fuel.
[40]
Germany
The German
THTR-300
was a prototype commercial power station using thorium as fertile and
highly enriched U-235 as fissile fuel. Though named thorium high
temperature reactor, mostly U-235 was fissioned. The THTR-300 was a
helium-cooled high-temperature reactor with a
pebble-bed reactor
core consisting of approximately 670,000 spherical fuel compacts each 6
centimetres (2.4 in) in diameter with particles of uranium-235 and
thorium-232 fuel embedded in a graphite matrix. It fed power to
Germany's grid for 432 days in the late 1980s, before it was shut down
for cost, mechanical and other reasons.
India
In February 2014,
Bhabha Atomic Research Centre
(BARC), in Mumbai, India, presented their latest design for a
"next-generation nuclear reactor" that will burn thorium as its fuel
ore. Once built, with a target date of 2016, they estimate that the
reactor could function without an operator for 120 days.
[41]
According to Dr R K Sinha, chairman of their Atomic Energy
Commission, "This will reduce our dependence on fossil fuels, mostly
imported, and will be a major contribution to global efforts to combat
climate change." Because of its inherent safety, they expect that
similar designs could be set up "within" populated cities, like - Mumbai
or Delhi.
[41]
India's government is also developing up to 62, mostly thorium
reactors, which it expects to be operational by 2025. It is the "only
country in the world with a detailed, funded, government-approved plan"
to focus on thorium-based nuclear power. The country currently gets
under 3% of its electricity from nuclear power, relying for the rest on
coal and oil imports. It expects to produce around 25% of its
electricity from nuclear power.
[16]:144
In 2009 the chairman of the Indian Atomic Energy Commission said that
India has a "long-term objective goal of becoming energy-independent
based on its vast thorium resources."
[42][43]
In late June 2012, India announced that their "first commercial fast
reactor" was near completion making India the most advanced country in
thorium research." We have huge reserves of thorium. The challenge is to
develop technology for converting this to fissile material," stated
their former Chairman of India's Atomic Energy Commission.
[44] That vision of using thorium in place of uranium was set out in the 1950s by physicist
Homi Bhabha.
[45][46] India’s first commercial fast breeder reactor — the 500 MWe
Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR) — is approaching completion at the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam, Tamil Nadu.
As of July 2013 the major equipment of the PFBR had been erected and
the loading of "dummy" fuels in peripheral locations was in progress.
The reactor was expected to go critical by September 2014.
[47]
The Centre had sanctioned Rs. 5,677 crore for building the PFBR and
“we will definitely build the reactor within that amount,” Mr. Kumar
asserted. The original cost of the project was Rs. 3,492 crore, revised
to Rs. 5,677 crore. Electricity generated from the PFBR would be sold to
the State Electricity Boards at Rs. 4.44 a unit. BHAVINI builds
breeder reactors in India. India's 300 MWe
AHWR
(pressurized heavy water reactor) reactor began construction in 2011.
The design envisages a start up with reactor grade plutonium that will
breed U-233 from Th-232. Thereafter thorium is to be the only fuel.
[48]
Israel
In May 2010, researchers from
Ben-Gurion University in Israel and
Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York began to collaborate on the development of thorium reactors,
[49]
aimed at being self-sustaining, "meaning one that will produce and
consume about the same amounts of fuel," which is not possible with
uranium in a light water reactor.
[49]
Japan
In June, 2012, Japan utility
Chubu Electric Power, wrote that they regard thorium as “one of future possible energy resources.”
[50]
Norway
In late 2012, Norway's privately owned Thor Energy, in collaboration with the government and
Westinghouse, announced a four-year trial using thorium in an existing nuclear reactor."
[51] In 2013, Aker Solutions purchased patents from Nobel Prize winning physicist
Carlo Rubbia for the design of a proton accelerator-based thorium nuclear power plant.
[52]
U.K.
In Britain, a few organizations are either promoting or examining
research on thorium-based nuclear plants. House of Lords member
Bryony Worthington is promoting thorium, calling it “the forgotten fuel” that could alter Britain’s energy plans.
[53] However, in 2010, the UK’s
National Nuclear Laboratory
(NNL) concluded that for the short to medium term, "...the thorium fuel
cycle does not currently have a role to play," in that it is
"technically immature, and would require a significant financial
investment and risk without clear benefits," and concluded that the
benefits have been "overstated."
[18] Friends of the Earth UK considers research into it as "useful" as a fallback option.
[54]
U.S.
In its January 2012 report to the
Secretary of Energy, the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Future notes that a "molten-salt reactor using thorium [has] also been proposed."
[55] That same month it was reported that the
U.S. Department of Energy is "quietly collaborating with China" on thorium-based nuclear power designs using a
molten salt reactor.
[56]
Some experts and politicians want thorium to be "the pillar of the U.S. nuclear future."
[57] Senators
Harry Reid and
Orrin Hatch have supported using $250 million in federal research funds to revive
ORNL research.
[4] In 2009, Congressman
Joe Sestak unsuccessfully attempted to secure funding for research and development of a
destroyer-sized reactor [reactor of a size to power a destroyer] using thorium-based liquid fuel.
[58][59]
Alvin Radkowsky, chief designer of the world’s second full-scale atomic electric power plant in
Shippingport, Pennsylvania, founded a joint U.S. and Russian project in 1997 to create a thorium-based reactor, considered a "creative breakthrough."
[60] In 1992, while a resident professor in
Tel Aviv, Israel, he founded the U.S. company, Thorium Power Ltd., near Washington, D.C., to build thorium reactors.
[60]
The primary fuel of the proposed
HT3R research project near
Odessa, Texas,
USA, will be ceramic-coated thorium beads. The earliest date the reactor will become operational is in 2015.
[61]
In early 2014, some geologists speculated that there was a higher
reserve of thorium, least 600,000 tons, in one county in northern Idaho,
which they claim is "a higher reserve of thorium . . . than anywhere in
the world."
[62]
World sources of thorium
World thorium sources (2007)[63]
| Country |
Tons |
% |
| Australia |
489,000 |
18.7% |
| USA |
400,000 |
15.3% |
| Turkey |
344,000 |
13.2% |
| India |
319,000 |
12.2% |
| Brazil |
302,000 |
11.6% |
| Venezuela |
300,000 |
11.5% |
| Norway |
132,000 |
5.1% |
| Egypt |
100,000 |
3.8% |
| Russia |
75,000 |
2.9% |
| Greenland (Denmark) |
54,000 |
2.1% |
| Canada |
44,000 |
1.7% |
| South Africa |
18,000 |
0.7% |
| Other countries |
33,000 |
1.2% |
| World Total |
2,610,000 |
100.0% |
Thorium is mostly found with the
rare earth phosphate mineral,
monazite,
which contains up to about 12% thorium phosphate, but 6-7% on average.
World monazite resources are estimated to be about 12 million tons,
two-thirds of which are in heavy mineral sands deposits on the south and
east coasts of India. There are substantial deposits in several other
countries
(see table "World thorium sources").
[18]
Another estimate of reasonably assured reserves (RAR) and estimated
additional reserves (EAR) of thorium comes from OECD/NEA, Nuclear
Energy, "Trends in Nuclear Fuel Cycle", Paris, France (2001).
[64] (see table "IAEA Estimates in tonnes")
IAEA Estimates in tons (2005)
| India |
519,000 |
21% |
| Australia |
489,000 |
19% |
| USA |
400,000 |
13% |
| Turkey |
344,000 |
11% |
| Venezuela |
302,000 |
10% |
| Brazil |
302,000 |
10% |
| Norway |
132,000 |
4% |
| Egypt |
100,000 |
3% |
| Russia |
75,000 |
2% |
| Greenland |
54,000 |
2% |
| Canada |
44,000 |
2% |
| South Africa |
18,000 |
1% |
| Other countries |
33,000 |
2% |
| World Total |
2,810,000 |
100% |
The preceding reserve figures refer to the amount of thorium in
high-concentration deposits inventoried so far and estimated to be
extractable at current market prices; millions of times more total exist
in Earth's 3
×10
19
tonne crust, around 120 trillion tons of thorium, and lesser but vast
quantities of thorium exist at intermediate concentrations.
[65][66][67] Proved reserves are "a poor indicator of the total future supply of a mineral resource."
[67]
Types of thorium-based reactors
According to the
World Nuclear Association
there are seven types of reactors that can be designed to use thorium
as a nuclear fuel. The first five of these have all entered into
operational service at some point. The last two are still conceptual,
although currently in development by many countries:
[18]
Additionally, in the 1958 Atoms for Peace publication entitled Fluid Fueled Reactors,
Aqueous Homogeneous Reactors
(AHRs) were proposed as a fluid fueled design that could accept
naturally occurring uranium and thorium suspended in a heavy water
solution.
[68] AHRs have been built and according to the IAEA reactor database, 7 are currently in operation as research reactors.
See also
