ThorEA - Towards an Alternative Nuclear Future.pdf

Q4. Early investment in accelerator technology at this tipping point in ADSR development has a good probability of a high
long-term return. Few technological advances would be as globally transformative as robust ADSR power generation,
and transmutation. ADSR accelerator R&D would also pay other dividends – foreseeable and unforeseeable – even if
robust ADSR power generation can not be achieved. Now is the right time for the UK to make a well-considered entry
into ADSR accelerator R&D. The ThorEA proposal is a good starting point from which to discuss a reasonable portfolio
of risk for the UK Accelerator R&D programme, but should the UK could choose to compete or collaborate with other
countries, inside or outside the EU?
A4. The competition vs collaboration argument is an interesting one: In principle there are perhaps two strategic choices:
1. A European project with EU political constraints and pace
2. A UK National project helping to rebuild national capacity with public money (as part of a UK return to industrial policy)
The prize for successfully competing with other countries in ADSR technology is substantial. At present estimates ~£30
billion plus will be spent on nuclear power in UK over next ten years. This will have macro-level effects on UK economy.
Developing an ADSR capability for UK industry will have comparable effects.
Conversely there are aspects of ADSR R&D for which collaboration could be desirable, possible and fruitful. However, until
the ThorEA initiative, the UK had little to take to the international ADSR table. The ThorEA project could place the UK at the
very centre of global ADSR collaborations.
Q5. ThorEA suggests that a 10 MW accelerator will require approximately 20 MWe to sustain its operation.” Is this realistic?
A5. The estimate of 20 MW wall-plug power comes from the typical accelerating structure efficiency, which is where most of the
power will go. A more robust estimate is needed, and will indeed be determined as part of the R&D programme. However,
this is not a critical issue for the development of ADSR technology. Even a doubling of the estimated power demand to
40MW will not change the overall feasibility of the proposed ADSR scheme.
Q6. The ThorEA report states that “… an extensive and coherent research and development (R&D) programme could secure
all underpinning technology necessary to facilitate construction of the world’s first thorium-fuelled ADSR power
station in the UK by the target date of 2025.” Is this date realistic?
A6. The time scale for this, as for any highly technical project, is clearly dependent upon both technological development
and political will. The suggested five year development programme for the basic ADSR technology is fully consistent with
the development and delivery of, for example, scaling FFAG technology in Japan; the development of SNS and J-PARC; the
construction 25 years ago of the world leading ISIS facility; our own ns-FFAG CONFORM project; and the projected schedule
for delivering the 5MW accelerator stage of ESS. It is also commensurate with the suggested time scale of the MYRRHA
project, which does not have the critical advantage of the global lead in innovative (ns-FFAG) technology provided by our
CONFORM project. Additionally, it should be noted that the time scale 2025/2030 is not overly critical to the proposed R&D
programme. The intention is to demonstrate thorium fuelled ADSR technology as a timely alternative to plutonium fuelled
GEN IV systems, which are scheduled to come on line in 2030.
Q7. ThorEA suggest “The principal objective of the five year AESIR (Accelerator Energy Systems with Inbuilt Reliability)
R&D programme is to design, build and demonstrate a robust and reliable prototype accelerator system which will
be suitable for mass production and commercialisation as an ADSR proton driver.” Can this be done in 5 years: the
current state-of-the-art is the 5 MW ESS, which will take 10 years to design, build, and commission?
A7. Unfortunately this is a mistaken comparison with ESS: the ESS driver itself will not take 10 years to design build and
commission. The ESS, as fully working 5MW spallation source delivering neutrons, will take as little as nine years to
complete. This suggests that coupling the development of the accelerator/target assembly design with the parallel design
and development of an ADSR core will indeed be possible on a 15 year timescale. Again, we emphasise that the tome scale
of the ThorEA project is entirely comparable with estimates for the MYRRHA project.
A report prepared by: the thorium energy amplifier association 67