Elysium Molten Chloride Salt Fast Reactor will use existing technology for rapid approval

The Elysium Molten Chloride Salt Fast Reactor (MCSFR) is state-of-the-art in its design. Elysium’s technology is unique as it can provide base-load and clean power while addressing the current issues in the nuclear power industry. Based on demonstrated technology in the 1960s, Elysium has adapted and improved the molten salt reactor design for commercial deployment. In addition, the Elysium reactor has the ability to consume spent nuclear fuel and weapons waste transforming it into useful energy.

The Elysium MCSFR will be built utilizing existing code-qualified materials and relies on natural processes. Elysium is simplifying engineering systems saving cost with natural techniques for passive operation and safety.

Everything that Elysium is choosing is to only use what is qualified and working at this time.

The design is barely critical at all times. The flow rate of material controls the power output.

One reactor vessel for all sizes of power plants and power levels.

More piping, more pumps and more heat exchangers increase the power level.

The Loop reactor will be the easiest to get approved in the USA.
The modular reactor will be most efficient and maintainable in the long run.
The Integral reactor will need more work for maintenance. The Terrestrial energy design is integral and will have the entire maintainable section designed to be removed or redundant.

A Simpler Reactor

Use of code qualified materials

Comprised of simple structures with thin walled vessels benefiting from lower operational pressure. Elysium’s reactor design is focused on incorporating materials, salt chemistry, and components that have high technical readiness today, reducing cost and time for development and testing.

Mostly automated

Enables inherent passive reactor operations and safety response, and simplified reactor control systems, thus increasing safety and reducing cost by eliminating human operator actions.

Low Maintenance Needs

No need to frequently replace components during reactor lifetime such as solid fuel rods, that are used in today’s nuclear power plants, and moderators used in thermal molten salt reactors.

Flexible Power Rating

With a capacity of 1 GW electric, the Elysium MCSFR can provide baseload electricity amounting to sales of ~$400 million every year. Producing and selling large amounts of power enables the utility to recoup these fixed costs quickly and maximize economic viability of the design. However, if required and/or under the right economics, the Elysium MCSFR can provide low power levels.

High Fuel Utilization – so very little waste aka unburned fuel

Using a liquid fuel and a fast neutron spectrum allows for the efficient utilization of almost all the nuclear fuel material leading to lower total fuel costs over the lifetime of the reactor. Elysium’s reactor burns over 95% of fuel, as opposed to 1-4% for thermal water reactors. Even after a reactor is decommissioned, the fuel can be reused in follow-on reactors.

Reduced Construction costs

The Elysium MCSFR operates at relatively low pressures, which dramatically reduces the size and cost of the reactor vessel and containment buildings relative to conventional pressurized water reactors. Additional costs associated with solid fuel fabrication and validation are also eliminated. Passive safety systems, also reduce cost relative to emergency coolant injection systems and other similar systems in conventional reactors. These factors lead to significant savings in its construction costs relative to conventional reactors.

42 thoughts on “Elysium Molten Chloride Salt Fast Reactor will use existing technology for rapid approval”

  1. The Loop reactor will be the easiest to get approved in the USA.” Really? How could a multi-loop reactor have lower line break probability than a pool-type, which doesn’t have lines to break. Maybe it can be argued in marketing land. “Elysium’s reactor burns over 95% of fuel.” Really? Now that is truly transparent marketing double speak of the type that Transatomic had to take back after peer review from Kord Smith (Google “MIT Technology Review Transatomic Backtrack). “The design is barely critical at all times. ” Really? Is that the 6th grade reading level explanation of ‘critical’ using reduplication? Actually, they mean it doesn’t use poisons, therefore doesn’t have excess reactivity, and therefore requires the periodic addition or subtraction of fissile material if the conversion ratio is not exactly 1.0. They say it is a breeder, so subtraction. The flow rate of material controls the power output. Really? Actually the average temperature of the system controls the power output unless there is voiding or geometry changes even if it employs control elements. Whatever guys. I support ya. Trump’s DOE might keep you on a starvation diet just to look progressive.

    Reply
  2. The Loop reactor will be the easiest to get approved in the USA.””Really? How could a multi-loop reactor have lower line break probability than a pool-type”””” which doesn’t have lines to break. Maybe it can be argued in marketing land.””””Elysium’s reactor burns over 95{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of fuel.””””Really? Now that is truly transparent marketing double speak of the type that Transatomic had to take back after peer review from Kord Smith (Google “”””MIT Technology Review Transatomic Backtrack).””””The design is barely critical at all times. “”””Really? Is that the 6th grade reading level explanation of ‘critical’ using reduplication? Actually”” they mean it doesn’t use poisons therefore doesn’t have excess reactivity and therefore requires the periodic addition or subtraction of fissile material if the conversion ratio is not exactly 1.0. They say it is a breeder”” so subtraction.The flow rate of material controls the power output.Really? Actually the average temperature of the system controls the power output unless there is voiding or geometry changes even if it employs control elements.Whatever guys. I support ya. Trump’s DOE might keep you on a starvation diet just to look progressive.”””””””

    Reply
  3. Brian – thanks for including Gordon McDowell’s video from the Thorium Energy Alliance Cnference. He and a volunteer crew have been doing a great job at all of the conferences. IMO everyone interested in nuclear fission should use the video to get to Gordon’s channel, and watch more of the presentations. Even nuclear opponents need to study the new designs – ‘Know your enemy!’ As Dr. David LeBlanc of Terrestrial Energy says in one of the videos, ‘Come for the thorium – stay for the (molten) salt.’ I hope the first Elysium reactor will also be built here in Canada.

    Reply
  4. Brian – thanks for including Gordon McDowell’s video from the Thorium Energy Alliance Cnference. He and a volunteer crew have been doing a great job at all of the conferences. IMO everyone interested in nuclear fission should use the video to get to Gordon’s channel and watch more of the presentations. Even nuclear opponents need to study the new designs – ‘Know your enemy!’As Dr. David LeBlanc of Terrestrial Energy says in one of the videos ‘Come for the thorium – stay for the (molten) salt.’ I hope the first Elysium reactor will also be built here in Canada.

    Reply
  5. I still think Moltex’s and Thorcon’s designs, where the highly radioactive fuel salt is kept in tubes or the entire reactor vessel is kept in a can, are superior to these other MSR designs where the salt is pumped around loops. Plumbing always leaks eventually. Would you rather deal with a very mildly radioactive coolant salt, or a highly radioactive fuel slat that needs a remotely controlled robot to clean it up and fix the leak?

    Reply
  6. The lettering on the picture of the ‘integral’ reactor shows that it is actually of a Russian design. That, and a general lack of detail, suggests that these guys are at a very early stage of pencilling out their proposal.

    Reply
  7. I still think Moltex’s and Thorcon’s designs where the highly radioactive fuel salt is kept in tubes or the entire reactor vessel is kept in a can are superior to these other MSR designs where the salt is pumped around loops.Plumbing always leaks eventually. Would you rather deal with a very mildly radioactive coolant salt or a highly radioactive fuel slat that needs a remotely controlled robot to clean it up and fix the leak?

    Reply
  8. The lettering on the picture of the ‘integral’ reactor shows that it is actually of a Russian design. That and a general lack of detail suggests that these guys are at a very early stage of pencilling out their proposal.

    Reply
  9. What is the date and URL of the Japanese paper?I suggested this idea in 2011 on the Thurium blog site and here on my bloghttps://yellowdragonblog.com/2015/01/03/dupic-as-a-molten-salt-reactor-fueldi-dupicms/

    Reply
  10. Rapid approval could be possible … if it is going to be built in Russia. OKBM is their primary reactor builder. If they seriously try I am sure they would get approval. It could be they may not get the money together to build one though. And then there is also politics, they already to have a successful reactor business without this addition.

    Reply
  11. Rapid approval could be possible … if it is going to be built in Russia. OKBM is their primary reactor builder. If they seriously try I am sure they would get approval. It could be they may not get the money together to build one though. And then there is also politics they already to have a successful reactor business without this addition.

    Reply
  12. What’s this “relies on natural processes”? Have they copied the systems used in nuclear powered whales or something? What sort of natural reactor controls are they talking about?

    Reply
  13. One other advantage of the Moltex design is that all the fissile is always in the core. In the ones that want to pump the fuel around, half or so of the fuel is always outside the core, and so not fissioning. The thermal spectrum designs only need a quarter or so as much fissile to start a chain reaction, but this pumped fast spectrum proposal loses on both counts.

    Reply
  14. Solid opinion had some serious problems. Comments would randomly disappear, stuff like that. Not saying that this system is better, but I’m reserving judgement at this point.

    Reply
  15. What’s this relies on natural processes””? Have they copied the systems used in nuclear powered whales or something? What sort of natural reactor controls are they talking about?”””

    Reply
  16. One other advantage of the Moltex design is that all the fissile is always in the core. In the ones that want to pump the fuel around half or so of the fuel is always outside the core and so not fissioning. The thermal spectrum designs only need a quarter or so as much fissile to start a chain reaction but this pumped fast spectrum proposal loses on both counts.

    Reply
  17. Solid opinion had some serious problems. Comments would randomly disappear stuff like that.Not saying that this system is better but I’m reserving judgement at this point.

    Reply
  18. Natural Processes”” is marketing speak for “”””We’re pretty sure it won’t get away from us.”””””””

    Reply
  19. I thought the video was fairly technical for the target audience – leaves a huge amount out for an engineer, but honestly short of a week long lecture you have no choice … Importantly though they are aiming at investors with such talks not engineers. Certainly they will also have to build a prototype to work out many of the details. With limited capital and a continual need to keep food on the table there are always limits to the level of technical detail into which a startup can delve.

    Reply
  20. I thought the video was fairly technical for the target audience – leaves a huge amount out for an engineer but honestly short of a week long lecture you have no choice … Importantly though they are aiming at investors with such talks not engineers. Certainly they will also have to build a prototype to work out many of the details. With limited capital and a continual need to keep food on the table there are always limits to the level of technical detail into which a startup can delve.

    Reply
  21. I thought the video was fairly technical for the target audience – leaves a huge amount out for an engineer, but honestly short of a week long lecture you have no choice … Importantly though they are aiming at investors with such talks not engineers. Certainly they will also have to build a prototype to work out many of the details. With limited capital and a continual need to keep food on the table there are always limits to the level of technical detail into which a startup can delve.

    Reply
  22. What’s this “relies on natural processes”? Have they copied the systems used in nuclear powered whales or something? What sort of natural reactor controls are they talking about?

    Reply
  23. One other advantage of the Moltex design is that all the fissile is always in the core. In the ones that want to pump the fuel around, half or so of the fuel is always outside the core, and so not fissioning. The thermal spectrum designs only need a quarter or so as much fissile to start a chain reaction, but this pumped fast spectrum proposal loses on both counts.

    Reply
  24. Solid opinion had some serious problems. Comments would randomly disappear, stuff like that.

    Not saying that this system is better, but I’m reserving judgement at this point.

    Reply
  25. Rapid approval could be possible … if it is going to be built in Russia.
    OKBM is their primary reactor builder. If they seriously try I am sure they would get approval. It could be they may not get the money together to build one though. And then there is also politics, they already to have a successful reactor business without this addition.

    Reply
  26. I still think Moltex’s and Thorcon’s designs, where the highly radioactive fuel salt is kept in tubes or the entire reactor vessel is kept in a can, are superior to these other MSR designs where the salt is pumped around loops.

    Plumbing always leaks eventually. Would you rather deal with a very mildly radioactive coolant salt, or a highly radioactive fuel slat that needs a remotely controlled robot to clean it up and fix the leak?

    Reply
  27. The lettering on the picture of the ‘integral’ reactor shows that it is actually of a Russian design. That, and a general lack of detail, suggests that these guys are at a very early stage of pencilling out their proposal.

    Reply
  28. Brian – thanks for including Gordon McDowell’s video from the Thorium Energy Alliance Cnference. He and a volunteer crew have been doing a great job at all of the conferences. IMO everyone interested in nuclear fission should use the video to get to Gordon’s channel, and watch more of the presentations. Even nuclear opponents need to study the new designs – ‘Know your enemy!’

    As Dr. David LeBlanc of Terrestrial Energy says in one of the videos, ‘Come for the thorium – stay for the (molten) salt.’ I hope the first Elysium reactor will also be built here in Canada.

    Reply
  29. “The Loop reactor will be the easiest to get approved in the USA.”

    Really? How could a multi-loop reactor have lower line break probability than a pool-type, which doesn’t have lines to break. Maybe it can be argued in marketing land.

    “Elysium’s reactor burns over 95% of fuel.”

    Really? Now that is truly transparent marketing double speak of the type that Transatomic had to take back after peer review from Kord Smith (Google “MIT Technology Review Transatomic Backtrack).

    “The design is barely critical at all times. ”

    Really? Is that the 6th grade reading level explanation of ‘critical’ using reduplication? Actually, they mean it doesn’t use poisons, therefore doesn’t have excess reactivity, and therefore requires the periodic addition or subtraction of fissile material if the conversion ratio is not exactly 1.0. They say it is a breeder, so subtraction.

    The flow rate of material controls the power output.

    Really? Actually the average temperature of the system controls the power output unless there is voiding or geometry changes even if it employs control elements.

    Whatever guys. I support ya. Trump’s DOE might keep you on a starvation diet just to look progressive.

    Reply

Leave a Comment