Author: Norlin, A.
Paper Title Page
MOOBA01 Thorium Energy Futures 29
  • S. Peggs, W. Horak, T. Roser
    BNL, Upton, Long Island, New York, USA
  • V.B. Ashley, R.F. Ashworth
    Jacobs Engineering, Pasadena, USA
  • R.J. Barlow, R. Cywinski, R. Seviour
    University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, United Kingdom
  • J.-L. Biarrotte
    IPN, Orsay, France
  • S. Henderson
    Fermilab, Batavia, USA
  • A. Hutton
    JLAB, Newport News, Virginia, USA
  • J. Kelly
    Thor Energy, Oslo, Norway
  • M. Lindroos
    ESS, Lund, Sweden
  • P.M. McIntyre
    Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA
  • A. Norlin
    IThEO, Sweden
  • H.L. Owen
    STFC/DL/ASTeC, Daresbury, Warrington, Cheshire, United Kingdom
  • G.T. Parks
    University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
  The potential for thorium as an alternative or supplement to uranium in fission power generation has long been recognised, and several reactors, of various types, have already operated using thorium-based fuels. Accelerator Driven Subcritical (ADS) systems have benefits and drawbacks when compared to conventional critical thorium reactors, for both solid and molten salt fuels. None of the four options – liquid or solid, with or without an accelerator – can yet be rated as better or worse than the other three, given today's knowledge. We outline the research that will be necessary to lead to an informed choice.  
slides icon Slides MOOBA01 [3.887 MB]