Originally posted by: davegray65
When I looked at Osama Motojima on youtube I didn't hear him mention the IETR MW/m3 figures that you give in your message.
No he didn't mention this, although he did welcome criticism.
This was simply an order of magnitude calculation of mine
Assuming ITER Tokamak is toroidal in shape for the purtpose of this estimate
Major radius of plasma (R) = 6.21 m
Minor radius of plasma (r) = 2.0 m
Volume of a torus = (pi * r^2) * (2 * pi * R) = 490 cubic metres
Maximum power output = 500 MWt
Power Density = 1.0 MW/m3 (Roughly the same as a Magnox Nuclear Reactor)
(this is an overestimate of the power density as the actual plasma volume is 837 cubic metres )
Similar calculation possible for DEMO assuming that the above dimensions are scaled by 20% and a power output of 1800MWt say.
The ITER site is enormous and includes lots of things like the Poloidal Field Coils Winding Facility, which presumably won't be used very often once ITER is built. This is one of 39 buildings that will be built of the ITER platform apparently.
"The building's metal cladding - five layers of metal sheeting and insulation - will isolate the poloidal field coil work space, where cleanliness is a priority, from the dust of the platform."
Do the 6 poloidal field coils really have to be built under dust free conditions?
Do the 6 poloidal field coils really need such a large building to wind them in? Couldn't they have just built some racks to store the field coils at one end of the building once wound?
Does the Poloidal Field Coils Winding Facility just have one use?
On another page "Specialised Tooling"
"The ITER bridge cranes can work together to lift loads of up to 1,500 tons [or tonnes?], or operate separately."
Once construction is complete they are going to be left with quite a lot of expensive kit on site that will rarely if ever get used again.
I am only pointing this sort of thing out because if engineers want to get involved with designing a molten salt reactor building and surrounding site infrastructure, they will have to be a little bit more cost conscious than the ITER engineers (actually a whole lot more cost conscious).
Another reason why I like to think about building a molten salt development reactor building with a strong yet light removable roof, is so that a used integral molten salt reactor can be replaced with a new one. Some sort of radiation shielding box would have to be lowered in with the roof removed. The roof could be replaced and the de-fuelled reactor lifted up into the shielding box using the internal crane. The building air is then filtered of any residual radioactivity before the building roof is again removed so that the shielded box can be craned out. A new replacement reactor can then be lowered in to replace it. The heavy lifting crane need only be hired for the few days that it is needed.
The idea will be to set form factor standards and other design standards for building inherently safe molten salt reactors (and other types of inherently safe small modular reactor in the range 100MWt to 900MWt), before the development reactor building design is finalised.
If this is done it may be possible to reuse the building at the end of the development process to house a new set of commercial nuclear reactors designed to generate electricity for the grid. The trick will be to look in detail at the labour intensive nuclear decommissioning work that is required for current nuclear plants that weren't designed to be quickly and easily dismantled (i.e. without creating lots of dust and procedures that might expose workers to large doses of radioactivity if they go wrong) and try to design this work away, so the building may be easily and quickly re-tasked cost effectively.