Why ThorCon is different

THORCON IS DIFFERENT. ThorCon is different from today’s nuclear power plants, called light water reactors (LWR). Here are reasons you might think differently about ThorCon fission power plants.

LIQUID FUEL. ThorCon thorium-uranium fuel is dissolved in liquid that is simply moved around with a pump. Heat flows much better in liquid than in LWR solid fuel encased in zirconium tubes cooled by high pressure water. There are no hot spots that can fracture solid fuel rods. ThorCon’s liquid is molten salt — a mixture of beryllium fluoride and sodium fluoride.

PASSIVE SAFETY. If ThorCon fuel overheats, fission stops because the fuel salt expands and neutrons are absorbed. If overheating continues, a frozen plug of fuel salt melts and the fuel salt drops to a drain tank cooled by thermal radiation to a cold wall with naturally circulating water. Today’s LWRs depend on redundant, engineered safety systems to take the reactor to a safe state after internal faults or external events. ThorCon passive safety depends on physical principles, not operators, mechanical valves, control systems, or active safety systems.

LOW PRESSURE. ThorCon liquid fuel is at low, garden hose pressure. The reactor vessel is commercial stainless steel. A large LWR pressure vessel is a 9-inch thick steel forging to contain 350C water at 175 atmospheres pressure for heat transfer. Should ThorCon liquid fuel rupture out, there is no phase change and little pressure energy to disperse radioactive materials. Spilled fuelsalt merely flows to the drain tank where it is passively cooled.

HIGH EFFICIENCY. ThorCon liquid fuel allows heat production at 700C, converting heat to electricity at 46% efficiency, rather than 35% for a LWR, reducing fuel consumption and costs.

THORIUM. Thorium reduces uranium fuel consumption because neutron absorption converts some thorium to fissile uranium fuel. ThorCon is a thorium converter. About 25% of ThorCon power comes from inexpensive thorium.

SHIPYARD CONSTRUCTION. ThorCon is built in a shipyard and integrated in a hull. Construction takes place in a high quality production line with specialized metal-working equipment and skilled workers. The completed plant is towed to a shallow water customer site and ballasted to the seabed. Unlike a LWR, there is little need for skilled onsite labor and heavy equipment.

LOW CAPITAL COSTS. ThorCon low costs derive from low pressure, liquid fuel, passive safety, high efficiency, and shipyard construction. Capital costs are $1.2/watt of generating capacity, a third that of internationally competitive LWRs, which are a third the cost of recent US LWRs.

CHEAPER THAN COAL ThorCon can generate electricity at 3 cents/kWh, cheaper than coal, competitive with natural gas, and cheaper than storage-buffered wind and solar power. New LWRs in the US will generate electricity at a cost over 10 cents/kWh. Only reliable electricity cheaper than coal will dissuade developing nations from building more coal-fired power plants.

MAINTENANCE. ThorCon power plant components are replaceable, accessed with cranes via deck hatches. The reactor vessel and primary heat exchanger is replaced every 8 years. For LWRs, replacing large components such as steam generators has required cutting open their concrete domes, on occasion destroying the plant.

GLOBAL SCALE. A single shipyard has capacity to produce 20 GW of ThorCon power plants per year, with a two-year lead time. The world is adding roughly 5 GW of LWR nuclear power plants annually. The shipbuilding industry has idle capacity sufficient to produce 100 GW of ThorCons per year. Global electric power consumption now averages 3000 GW. Full electrification to end world CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels would roughly triple that demand.