I think I wasn't very interested in nuclear, back when.
And when I did get into it I wondered why, what was different about Molten Salt?
And for me, one of the things that I really liked about the Molten Salt Reactor, is the
fact it can handle a class of materials... waste and fission products.
And that really is a unique and compelling aspect of the Molten Salt Reactor
that I get very excited about.
So today I'm going to talk quite a bit about fission product handling.
I think this is relevant to everybody doing Molten Salt work,
and certainly relevant to our work.
Hi, I'm Kirk Sorensen with Flibe Energy.
I'm here with the Oak Ridge, Molten Salt Reactor Workshop.
We've had a great year at Flibe Energy.
On July 10 we were notified that we'd been awarded Department of Energy funding opportunity
to pursue an innovative technology approach for the fluorination of molten salt.
The fluorinator is really the heart of the chemical processing system of any molten salt
fluoride reactor.
Of course, all fission reactors turn fissile material like uranium or plutonium into an
array of fission and activation products (such as plutonium or neptunium).
These fission and activation products have a wide variety of physical and chemical properties.
Some are noble gases, some are metals, some are volatile at the operation temperature,
and others remain part of or dissolved in the fuel matrix.
At the moment of their formation, they are furiously radioactive at the moment of their
creation, throwing off beta particles as they rapidly transmute to a stable nuclear form
within a month of their birth from fission.
Regardless of their final form or properties, fission and activation products
will accumulate in the fuel of a nuclear reactor.
In conventional solid-fueled reactors, the consumption of fuel, and the degradation of
cladding material are generally the reasons the reactor must be shut down for refueling
rather than the buildup of fission products.
In a fluid-fueled molten-salt reactor, the potential exists to refuel the reactor during
operation by adding fissile material to the fuel salt.
The cladding degradation issue does not apply, on the contrary, molten-salt reactors that
use fluoride salts as the chemical medium are impervious to radiation damage in the
fuel itself, due to its ionically-bonded nature.
This leaves fission product buildup as the only real threat to
the long-term operation of the reactor.
A fluid-fueled reactor also has attractive options
for the longterm management of fission products.
They can be chemically isolated and separated from the fuel salt in a manner analogous to
the way that the kidney processes and removes waste products from the bloodstream.
A variety of different approaches to the removal of fission/activation products have been proposed
for liquid-fluoride nuclear reactors.
These include distillation of the fuel salt itself
leaving the fission/activation products in the heel.
Another proposed method is to selectively precipitate certain neutron-absorbing fission
products by overwhelming the salt with another material transparent to neutrons, such as
cerium.
Reductive extraction is yet another process, here the fuel salt is contacted with a metallic
chemical reductant that will preferentially reduce fission products from fluoride salts
to metals.
The MSRE considered distillation as a viable approach since it appears simple in concept.
The high temperatures required for the distillation of a carrier salt of LiF-BeF2 (FLiBe) from
a fuel salt are challenging.
There is also the inefficiency issue of repeatedly attempting to boil a large inventory of carrier
salt away in an attempt to concentrate a small inventory of fission products.
Inevitably some of the valuable carrier salt will follow the fission products into the
waste stream.
Precipitation with cerium is also a challenging method for fission product management because
it introduces another chemical species into the carrier salt at ever increasing concentrations
rather than actually removing the fission products and leaving no residual behind.
Reductive extraction of fission products increasingly appears to be the most attractive suggested
way to manage the long-term buildup of fission products in the fuel salt, especially if lithium
metal is used as the reductant.
Because lithium is one of the constituents of the FLiBe salt that makes up the solvent
into which nuclear fuel is dissolved in the reactor, its addition over time will not be
detrimental and more easily managed than a foreign species such as cerium.
The metallic lithium can be alloyed with metallic bismuth to carefully manage lithium�s introduction
into the fuel salt; bismuth is immiscible with the fluoride fuel salts that are generally
favored for molten-salt reactors.
Reductive metal extraction is a technique that can either be employed in a "chemical"
manner, contacting bismuth containing lithium with the fuel salt, or in an "electrolytic"
manner, where an electrical potential is applied to more carefully control the addition of
lithium reductant and the removal of metallic fission products.
Ideally, a technique for the removal of fission products from the fuel salt of a liquid-fluoride
reactor would be employed that could operate directly on the fuel salt without any pretreatment.
But the nature of reductive extraction is that it will tend to remove the most "noble"
constituents of the fuel salt first, and the actinides tend to be substantially more noble
than the fission products.
This figure provides the overview of how extractable various species are from the LiF-BeF2-ThF4
system.
Zr, U, Pu, Pa, and other actinides tend to reduce from a salt in preference to the lanthanides.
Thorium is a notable exception.
Zirconium, uranium, plutonium, and several other minor actinides not depicted in this
graph are all more susceptible to be removed from the fluoride salt mixture than the neodymium
and europium, which represent the larger class of lanthanide fission products.
Thorium which would be present in the breeder salt blanket has an even lower propensity
to be removed from the fuel salt than the lanthanide fission products.
But if one can imagine a fuel salt that does not contain thorium and where uranium is the
dominant actinide species, a solution to the challenge may present itself.
The approach which we propose to evaluate is the use of a fluorinating/oxidizing agent
to convert uranium, typically UF4 found in a liquid-fluoride reactor to its gaseous state
UF6.
Depending on the fluorination/oxidizing agent and temperature, other actinides will also
be fluorinated and/or oxidized from a trivalent or tetravalent state.
Neptunium and plutonium do form volatile hexafluorides but plutonium hexafluoride is thermodynamically
unstable.
If fluorination could be undertaken prior to an attempt at reductive extraction, the
uranium, neptunium, many of the transition metals, and non-metals present in the salt
could be largely removed and reductive extraction could be employed much more productively to
remove fission products.
The appeal of fluorination as a technique for the removal of uranium from fluoride fuel
salt has been noted for many years and fluorination formed an integral part of most of the chemical
processing flowsheets that were developed at Oak Ridge National Laboratory under the
Molten-Salt Reactor Program from 1957 to 1976.
Fluorinators were envisioned at a variety of locations in the chemical processing, universally
under the assumption that they would remove uranium from the fuel salt.
Despite the prevalence of fluorination as an envisioned chemical processing technique,
the actual amount of development that was undertaken on continuous fluorination was
surprisingly small.
Batch fluorination was utilized to remove uranium from the fuel salt of the Molten-Salt
Reactor Experiment (MSRE) in 1968, but this was done in the drain tank of the reactor
vessel and led to the introduction of a significant amount of corrosion products.
Repeated fluorination of the MSRE fuel salt in this manner would have undoubtedly led
to the structural failure of the drain tank due
to corrosion.
But the aggressiveness of F2 led to many practical engineering challenges in the development
of a continuous fluorination system.
To protect the fluorinator from F2 attack, ORNL engineers envisioned using an extensive
interior cooling system to freeze a layer of salt on the fluorination column�s inner
surface.
A fuel salt containing fresh fission products has considerable internal heat generation
that can be opposed by a cooling system to form a frozen wall on the interior surface
of a fluorination column.
But a chemically-similar simulant salt, such as LiF-BeF2-UF4, where fission products are
replaced with stable isotopes, has no such internal heat generation term.
It was necessary to simultaneously heat the salt internally, to simulate the heating effect
of fission product decay, while cooling the wall of the fluorinator to generate the frozen
wall.
Thus testing the frozen wall of the fluorinator under these conditions was very difficult.
This was never satisfactorily resolved during the Molten-Salt Reactor Project.
In the years since the MSRE concluded in 1976, alternative fluorination agents have been
advanced for consideration.
Most notable among these is NF3.
NF3 has been considered for rocket propulsion and is extensively used in the electronics
industry to clean and etch microelectronic silica chips.
It is minimally hazardous and not corrosive at temperatures below 70C and is likely less
corrosive than other fluorinating agents.
It is not known to react with moisture, is thermally stable at room temperature, and
has been demonstrated by PNNL to be an effective, thermallytunable fluorination/oxidation agent
for spent nuclear fuel constituents.
By controlling the treatment temperature, NF3 will selectively fluorinate/oxidize spent
nuclear fuel constituents.
The different temperature sensitivities and NF3 concentration effects for the fluorination/oxidation
of the different constituents potentially provides mechanisms to effect separations
of the volatile fluorides.
At higher temperatures, such as the temperatures at which a liquid-fluoride reactor would operate
(600C), NF3 is an effective fluorination/oxidation agent for UF4, NpF4, and many of the transition
metal fission products that form volatile fluorides.
The alkaline earths, lanthanides, and remaining actinides, including plutonium, will remain
dissolved in the molten salt.
This is a notable departure from the behavior of F2, which will indiscriminately convert
species to their volatile forms (if such a form exists).
The hazard level, and chemical reactivity attributes potentially make NF3 a very attractive
fluorinating/oxidizing agent for managing the composition of the fuel salt in a liquid-fluoride
reactor where uranium is the dominant or even exclusive fissile material.
Fluorination/oxidation of the fuel salt with NF3 would produce UF6 and remove uranium from
the salt.
Reductive extraction could then be employed to remove non-volatile fission and activation
products from the salt.
Finally, hydrogen could be used to reduce UF6 back to UF4 and reconstitute the salt
for return to the reactor.
We've very excited to be taking some of the first steps in many years, in conjunction
with Pacific Northwest Nuclear Laboratories [PNNL] and under the DOE FOA award.
We look forward to successfully demonstrating the effectiveness of nitrogen-trifluoride
fluorination in a lithium-fluoride beryllium-fluoride salt, where we would use that to remove the
uranium.
Why is it that now this has happened?
I could imagine something like this happening 4 years ago.
Well the reason this is happening now, is because the Department of Energy issued a
very unique funding opportunity announcement in December of 2017.
Previously most funding opportunity announcements around nuclear technology in the United States
have said: How will you do this thing which we have described?
Where-as this opportunity had to do with the companies proposing what could be done, and
then the Department of Energy made competitive selections where they would agree to fund
the proposed activity.
Now each company which does this has to provide a cost-match.
So, that's a very important attribute to ensure the companies have skin-in-the-game as far
as the value of the work they're proposing to do.
But, I think it has been a tremendous development that the Department of Energy has gone ahead
with this funding, and we are very grateful because it has given us an ability, in conjunction
with our partner PNNL, to advocate for the value of this work.
To show how it could apply to a program of Molten Salt Reactor technology.
And, ultimately, I was very happy they decided to make the award.
In Conclusions Fuel burnup in MSRs
is limited by fission products.
Reductive extraction can remove fission products, so long as actinides are removed first.
Fluorination can remove uranium and neptunium but is very aggressive when we use molecular
fluorine.
Fluorination using NF3 might be more practical and successful than previously suggested approaches.
I look forward to be able to come back next year and report on some initial results from
the campaign with PNNL on this new form of fluorination.
Thank you very much.