coal 2nuclear 1.5:  Tampa's Big Bend Power Plant

Tampa's 'Big Bend' Coal Power Plant  
This web site is free speech Climate Change and energy opinion talk, not professional engineering advice, made without the knowledge or approval of any cited entities.
Fewer than 2% of all coal power plants are making almost 30% of all Climate Change.

Introductory video presented by ThorCon:
  ThorCon - Indonesia Thorium Consortium Completes ThorCon Technology Pre-Feasibility Study - 14142672.pdf   

Big Bend is about number 250 on the list of the world's largest 1,200 coal burning power plants with Taichung, in Taiwan, being #1.  This group of 1,200 makes 30% of all Climate change.

Over the next several years as many as 50 different North American companies will be unveiling their versions of as many as 10 different types of new Small Modular Reactors (known as SMRs).  These fourth generation reactors are designed to be mass produced by the thousands like airplanes and ships.

In the world of energy, cost is usually the most powerful market force and nuclear heat can be as much as 2,000 times cheaper than coal, something coal has always known and feared since the 1950s. 

From what I've seen, the far more costly and dangerous first and second generation nuclear power plants we've come to know and love are hopelessly obsolete and mindlessly expensive.

Old fashioned nuclear reactors typically are high pressure water cooled and over 1,000 megaWatts in power creating the potential for very powerful above ground steam explosions (think Chernobyl). Many of the new modern Generation IV reactors are unpressurized molten salt (think lava), which is incapable of exploding, smaller than 300 megaWatts in power, will be used in large numbers like today's big stationary diesel and aeroderivative engines and usually designed to be located at the bottoms of underground silos for extreme safety.  Molten salt reactors can be built much smaller, cheaper, and lighter if necessary. The first molten salt reactors were intended to power airplanes.

Once I understood the concept of the "CMO", or Cubic Mile of Oil equivalent , as a way to get my brain around the size of the energy we are obtaining from fossil fuels, I understood why windmills, solar cells, and old-fashioned nuclear reactors simply could not provide sufficient energy to replace fossil fuels as a way to stop Climate Change. 

Nuclear energy is, however, big enough to replace the worst source of Climate Change, coal, along with powering massive biofuel chemical processes to replace oil and natural gas. This combination does provide an economical way to stop the growth of Climate Change while continuing to provide enough energy for everyone on earth to live a comfortable and plentiful life.

This page introduces the reader to a nuclear technology that appears to have the "Right Stuff" for quickly ending about 1/3 of all the world's climate changing CO2 - the amount of CO2 being emitted by the world's 1,200 largest coal burning power plants . By comparison, the world's other 70,000+ smaller coal power plants are almost innocent bystanders. I should point out that a typical coal power plant has 4 to 6 boilers so we are probably talking 6,000 or so small nuclear reactors. 

Few people have ever been exposed to the entire global electrical system.  More money is invested in the world's electrical systems than any other industry. You can get an idea of how large electricity power really is from these folks:

Knowing that only 2% of the world's coal burning power plants are making almost 30% of ALL Climate Change makes obvious nuclear repowering of the world's 1,200 largest existing coal power plants is the world's best opportunity to reach the Paris Climate Change goals of 2050.

This web page is an introduction to the idea of replacing a large coal burning power plant's boilers with advanced molten salt nuclear reactor heated steam generators installed in ocean-going barges rigidly parked next to the electricity plant's turbine gallery building.  When the barges go away for refueling, repair, or plant decommissioning, their radioactivity goes with them. Replacing coal boilers with nuclear boilers isn't a new idea:  Hook-ons2.pdf.

This introduction to molten salt reactors is divided into four parts:
1. Nuclear Repowering Tampa's 'Big Bend' Coal Power Plant.
2. Nuclear Waste: The Sub-Seabed Solution.
3. Introduction to Molten Salt Reactors.                 
A 12-page ticket to the world of molten salt reactors:  Molten Salt Reactor Adventure.pdf 
4. Molten Salt Reactor Aviation Power Plants.      

Big Bend's Upgraded Sister Power Plant
Big Bend has a somewhat smaller nearby "sister" site, Bayside, that was successfully converted to natural gas combined cycle quite a few years ago.  More and cleaner electricity.

Combined-cycle Gas 'Hook-Ons' are upgrades of coal power stations repowered by using jet engines and steam generators.
Burning natural gas instead of coal, efficiency goes from 30% to 60%, CO2 emissions from 2,024 pounds per megaWatt-hour to 660 lb/mWh.
Much more electricity, much cheaper electricity, 1/3 the Climate-Changing emissions.  What's not to like?  Still not wind or solar cell clean.

Above is an aerial (layout) view of Tampa Electric Company's (TECO) Bayside plant after it's 7 turbine plus 7 heat recovery boiler upgrade. What is being suggested in this web site for the Taichung, Taiwan, coal power plant - the world's largest single source of CO2 - is similar to what TECO did in 2009: repower two fairly large old coal steam electricity generators (brown, left, light roof) with steam made by the exhaust blasts of seven new small natural gas powered jet engines (gray, mid right). Notice the long steam lines between the 7 jet engine heat recovery steam generators (HRSGs) and the 2 old steam turbines they are powering. 

This would be a wonderful idea for Big Bend.  It's generating units are larger than Bayside's so more jet engines would be needed to repower the four 450 megaWatt steam turbines but this could take the plant from about 1,600 mW to perhaps 5,000 mW, a big addition to Florida's Gulf Coast booming growth.

Beyond that, integral amine carbon capture could be added later to take the plant's CO2 emissions down to 10% of what would be combined cycle gas's already clean 500 lb per megawatt.  That's almost wind, solar, or nuclear clean. And running it on biofuel oil makes it CARBON NEGATIVE. Take that - wind, solar, and nuclear.
 Check out the integral amine carbon capture conceptual sketch below.

Unfortunately, Florida is suffering gas pains.  For the foreseeable future, the gas has to be piped in from Louisiana and a power plant as large as this one would be might draw more gas than the pipe could deliver.

This brings us to the nuclear options.


Ideas on this web site always need to be properly vetted by competent engineering companies such as Bechtel or Fluor before anyone should even consider taking these ideas to the bank. 
The Devil hides in the details. Engineering a detailed preliminary design of a pilot plant for something untried is a good way to vet an idea. - Site Author


Part 1

Nuclear Repowering Tampa's 'Big Bend' Coal Power Plant

Most of the world's 1,200 largest coal burning power plants, like Tampa's Big Bend, are located on navigable water to facilitate their purchasing of low cost coal by the barge load. 
This makes the possibility of quickly and inexpensively converting them to nuclear boiler barges to both end their Climate Changing emissions and substantially reducing fuel costs.  
Using inexpensive mass produced standardized nuclear boiler barges to preserve the very high value of the electricity being produced by world's largest power plants makes a lot of economic sense.  The world simply isn't rich enough to build a new fleet of nuclear electricity plants.
There are no coal burning power plants in the world too large to be converted to nuclear by using multiple ThorCon molten salt reactor heated steam generators.
August 2015
U.K. assessment of molten salt reactor technology:  Molten-Salt Reactor Feasibility Study by EPD  (pdf)

Big Bend's repowering idea using nuclear reactor steam barges is very simple: Cut 4 barge slips into the lagoon edge next to Tampa's Big Bend power plant turbine gallery that holds four 450 megaWatt coal powered steam turbine electricity generators.  Run new steam piping from the reactors to the existing steam piping in the turbine gallery.  With suitable connections and valves, the turbines could then be powered with a wide ratio of coal steam and/or nuclear steam.

ThorCon's extremely simple reactors are to be used somewhat like flashlight batteries.  They would come in two modules of two.  When one dual reactor module is turned on, it will produce enough steam to make 500 megaWatts of electricity for 4 years before it's fuel is too depleted to make full power.  Then the other dual reactor module of the pair of modules is turned on and the radioactivity in the "tired" reactor module has as long as 4 years to die down before it is replaced with a pair of fresh reactors.

The NuScale reactor company published an image of their reactor showing how radiation decays.  The small amount of decay heat is easily absorbed into the surrounding water.

Reactor barges would be exchanged as needed for maintenance with the one needing work towed away to a remote dry dock specializing in nuclear maintenance any time refueling or repair was needed.  The radiation goes away with the barge.   (See equipment layout sketch below)

(Site North is left)  Four concrete nuclear boiler barges, latched to their pilings to effectively make them buildings,
each with two pairs of 250 mW(e) ThorCon molten salt reactors to power Big Bend's four 450 mW(e) electricity generators.     Barges - Ocean Going Workhorse.pdf     Molten Salt Reactor Adventure.pdf 

ThorCon's Proposed "ThorConIsle" Nuclear Island Complete Power Plant Barge
Fewer than 2% of all power plants are making almost 30% of all Climate Change.


Shore Installation                                                                    At Sea Installation
Preempting the World's 2,000+ New Large Coal Burning Electricity Plants

An excellent idea for preempting the next 2,000+ new large coal power plants being planned for powering the world's emerging coastal mega-population centers.

ThorCon is suggesting anchoring complete 1,000 megaWatt electrical power plant barges offshore and feeding their electricity to land via cables like offshore wind farms do.  Your author thinks this is a good idea if a completely new power plant is needed, but also far more expensive and complicated than just replacing a coal plant's steam boiler with a barge-mounted reactor + steam generator module and re-using perfectly good existing power plants. 

The simple battery-like reactor + steam generator module ThorCon has come up with is too good to ignore for use in a smaller concrete barge to be located adjacent to the world's thousands of existing coastal electricity generating plants - such as Tampa's "Big Bend".

Concrete barges are fairly common, durable, and if made thick enough and strong enough, provide ample radiation containment shielding for plant workers and their next-door neighbors.

ThorCon 500 mWe (dual 250 mW(e)) Molten Salt Reactor Modules  ThorCon Power, division of Martingale   ThorCon 2017 Specification Sheet pdf

Notice the molten salt reactors (non-explosive, inert, like red-hot lava) do not need any more radiation isolation than a ship's reactor.
Their motto: "If it isn't cheaper than coal, forget it".

ThorCon Estimated Heat Balance - From ThorCon web site library. - Blue English conversion notes by site author.

Notice the molten salt reactors (non-explosive, inert, like red-hot lava) do not need any more radiation isolation than a ship's reactor.
Underground ThorCon 250 megaWatt (e) Nuclear Steam Generator Module
ThorCon Silo Dimensions - From ThorCon web site library. - Blue English conversion notes by site author.

Nuclear Steam Generator Barge Silo Profile

How a steam barge's molten salt reactor plus steam generators for a nearby very large steam turbine on-shore power plant might be arranged.
The barge could be made of 3-foot thick concrete (specific gravity 2.3) to confine any radioactivity.  Steel vs. Concrete Hulls - Pontoon Report.pdf
Liquid molten salt resembles molten hot lava.  In the unlikely event some leaked out of the reactor, it would cool and turn solid like a rock, unlike a conventional reactor's radioactive water that could eventually join the nearby ground water under the reactor.



Part 2

Nuclear Waste: The Sub-Seabed Solution
The radioactivity goes away with the nuclear barge.

The entire world of nuclear energy has bungled the issue of nuclear waste.  Here is a better idea:

CNNC to construct Chinese prototype floating nuclear plant, other nuclear barge items

Decommissioning Costs:

When no longer needed, the barge would be removed and taken to a sub-seabed disposal site 600 miles North of Hawaii, leaving no radioactivity behind at the customer's power plant site.  The nuclear power plant barge's radioactive equipment like worn-out reactor cores and coolant pumps would end up buried in the deep disposal site's peanut butter-like soft mud.  The disposal site is hundreds of meters thick so eventually the barge would would sink to the solid seabed strata at the bottom of the mud.

The really neat thing about this is that worn-out nuclear barges can be used to entomb everyone else's nuclear waste at the same time (for a modest fee).  Just add nuclear waste containers and pour in nuclear grade concrete.

Beyond technical and political considerations, the London Convention places prohibitions on disposing of radioactive materials at sea and does not make a distinction between waste dumped directly into the water and waste that is buried underneath the ocean's floor.

It remains in force until 2018, after which the sub-seabed disposal option can be revisited at 25-year intervals.

Russian Floating Nuclear Power Station (FNPS) Acadmic Lomonosov nuclear power plant barge - Due to come on-line fall, 2016.


Lights = Cities = Coal Power Plants.  The United States is only about 1/4 of the Climate Change problem.


Part 3

Introduction to Molten Salt Reactors


(Above) Major components of a generic molten salt reactor.




There are many really old nuclear scientists and engineers. They got that way because they KNEW what they were doing.      If you don't know what you are doing - DON'T DO IT!

People who work around radioactivity always wear pocket radiation detectors called   along with photographic film dosimeters to monitor their accumulated exposure to ionizing radiation.

Stay as far away as possible and behind the best shielding possible from anything that is even slightly radioactive.


Radiation Hormesis  





(Below) Looking down into a small molten salt reactor that Oak Ridge Laboratories built and ran for 5 years.

(Above) After the experiments trying out different thorium + uranium fuel blends were over, the MSR building was turned into a museum.

Running at the heat of coal, molten salt reactors run much hotter than conventional 550F water reactors. 
Here, the reactor uses a radiator  to carry the heat away from the reactor.  It ran red hot.  The liquid molten salt was like red hot lava. 
If it leaked, the molten salt would cool into a solid radioactive lump - unlike the radioactive water leaking from a water cooled conventional reactor which would sink into the ground, possibly making our drinking water supply radioactive.

(Above) The molten salt reactor was very docile and since it was already molten, it couldn't melt down. 
It didn't require much in the way of a control system, was "walk-away" safe, and easy to live with.
(Right) Assembling the small simple graphite moderator core.

(Above) The molten salt reactor building at Oak Ridge Laboratories.
The little molten salt reactor produced an impressive 8 megaWatts (thermal).  Incapable of exploding, it did not need a containment dome.


Part 4

Molten Salt Reactor Aviation Power Plants

The first molten salt reactors

In the beginning, the molten salt reactor was the Air Force's equivalent to the boiling water reactor used by the U.S. Navy for nuclear submarines.

"Fireball" molten salt nuclear jet engine reactor.  Note exhaust on left.
Relatively inexpensive, light, and quick responding like a jet engine, the molten salt reactor's first application was to make a jet airplane that,
like the nuclear submarine, a nuclear airplane could stay on station for weeks at a time.   The B-36's two bomb bays are almost boxcar-big.
Your author saw this actual early prototype on display at the edge of a parking lot at Idaho National Laboratory visitor's center.

The "Fireball" molten salt reactor and the 4 jet engines it powered were to be installed in the forward bomb bays of standard Convair B-36 nuclear bombers.
The Nuclear Bomber (NB-36) was designed to take off on all engines and then cruse on the nuclear jets.  Someone quipped: "Six turning, four burning".
Fireball reactor was never actually used to power a flight but was often running at full thrust temperature when in the air.  About 50 flights over the Southwest were made.
Concerns about a radioactive airplane crash in a city and the rapid development of Intercontinental Ballistic Missile technology led to abandonment of the NB-36 program.

The Soviets developed their version as a nuclear turboprop, along the Soviet standard counter-rotating propeller lines, and actually had several years of nuclear powered flight.
They used the rear bomb bay to locate their reactor further from the cockpit. 
Despite this effort, three of the ten crewmen are said to have had their life spans shortened due to inadvertent radiation exposure.


Tampa's Big Bend Power Plant 


Footnotes & Links


End >