International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

[Amber G.]

Pakistan maintains a stockpile of uranium in Dera Ghazi Khan and is the location of the country's largest nuclear centre. There is a one old Uranium mine 40 km NW (Baghalchur) which is now used to store nuclear waste. (Site: BC1)

[Amber G.]

FWIW: (Some background):

The Dera Ghazi Khan site is home to the Pakistan Institute of Nuclear Science and Technology (PINSTECH), which is the country's leading nuclear research and development facility. PINSTECH operates a number of nuclear facilities at the site, including a research reactor, a nuclear fuel enrichment plant, and a nuclear waste management facility.

The Dera Ghazi Khan site is also home to a uranium mine, which was closed in 1990 but is now used to store nuclear waste. The waste is stored in a deep geological repository, which is designed to isolate it from the environment for thousands of years.

The Dera Ghazi Khan site is located in a remote area of Pakistan, and there is no significant population center within a 50-kilometer radius. This makes it an ideal location for nuclear facilities, reduced risk of accidents or attacks, or may be RAW )

The Dera Ghazi Khan site is a strategically important site for Pakistan's nuclear program. It plays a key role in the country's nuclear research and development, uranium enrichment, and nuclear waste management. The site is also home to a significant stockpile of nuclear materials.

Disclaimer - Pakistan does not publicly disclose information about its nuclear program or its nuclear facilities .. ... so take it for what ever it's worth..

[Tanaji]

Would not have the winds carried over fallout if any into India by now? And hence be detected?

Also should be easy to surreptitiously procure a ground sample from near vicinity?

[fanne]

I find it incredible that a missile test goes wrong and falls on a new clear facility. Not happening. Is it cover to steal some maal?

[drnayar]

FWIW: (Some background):

The Dera Ghazi Khan site is home to the Pakistan Institute of Nuclear Science and Technology (PINSTECH), which is the country's leading nuclear research and development facility. PINSTECH operates a number of nuclear facilities at the site, including a research reactor, a nuclear fuel enrichment plant, and a nuclear waste management facility.

The Dera Ghazi Khan site is also home to a uranium mine, which was closed in 1990 but is now used to store nuclear waste. The waste is stored in a deep geological repository, which is designed to isolate it from the environment for thousands of years.

The Dera Ghazi Khan site is located in a remote area of Pakistan, and there is no significant population center within a 50-kilometer radius. This makes it an ideal location for nuclear facilities, reduced risk of accidents or attacks, or may be RAW )

The Dera Ghazi Khan site is a strategically important site for Pakistan's nuclear program. It plays a key role in the country's nuclear research and development, uranium enrichment, and nuclear waste management. The site is also home to a significant stockpile of nuclear materials.

Disclaimer - Pakistan does not publicly disclose information about its nuclear program or its nuclear facilities .. ... so take it for what ever it's worth..

likely the Mossad or RAW did some " high speed recycling" of the centrifuges and whole enrichment plant went kaput. There would be tell tale signs that the pakis wont be able to hide..

"Explosions: In 2020, a mysterious explosion caused extensive damage at the Natanz centrifuge factory. In 2021, a second explosion destroyed the power supply and damaged underground centrifuges used to enrich uranium at Natanz."

https://iranprimer.usip.org/blog/2021/a ... ar-program

also "sound barrier broken"



also begs the khewstyn "If it was just a Sonic Boom, why would you snap internet, rush Ambulances and Security Forces to the said area??"

https://twitter.com/OsintUpdates/status ... 6328065284

The reporter can be heard saying that the explosion was so powerful that its sound was heard for several kilometers and windows/walls of houses were broken.

" Massive explosion at Pakistan Army's nuclear facility in DGKhan heard up to 50 km away. Urgent evacuation. Sources says #
CyberAttack resulted in explosion that's why Internet shutdown"

[Tanaji]

Let’s not being in Indian involvement unnecessarily. We have a treaty with Pak to not attack their nuclear facilities. We have stuck to it, and there is no reason to believe that’s not the case now.

[Leonard]

An interesting discussion on the implications of Nuclear Sound Barrier Pindi Fart at DGK ...

[hnair]

“CTBT is dead. Long live CTBT”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... uels-doubt

US Nuclear Test Raises Concerns of New Arms Race With Russia

Department of Energy detonated explosion at Nevada test site
Arms control experts say steps needed to prevent escalation

[drnayar]

"high explosive test" .. how convenient

as long as they dont say the n word everyone should be happy

[hnair]

And they were NOT preparing for it over last few months…. Just woke up brushed teeth and burst one <wink, wink>

[sanman]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/russia-nu ... -1.6998461

Russian lawmakers unanimously vote to de-ratify the nuclear test treaty. Here's what that means

[sanman]

[sanman]

[sanman]

[sanman]

[sanman]

[sanman]

Norks don't want to reunify with South anymore -- all the better to aim nukes at them

[sanman]

Russia and China to Put Nuclear Reactor on the Moon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KPnsZbBlA8

[Tanaji]

Nuclear fission plant reached a milestone

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-o ... e-68723533

This seems to be a different way of initiating fusion. How do they reach the energies required for fusion to occur? Or is it that this is simply a controlled thermonuclear device where a gun type fission device initiates the fusion? Why is everybody using lasers instead? Also you would need strong magnetic field for containment regardless?

Perhaps AmberG can comment?

[Amber G.]

Meanwhile: The head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization (AEOI) says a new nuclear reactor will be constructed in Shiraz, southern Iran, as part of efforts to "advance nuclear science, technology, and research, and contribute to scientific and educational initiatives...

[Amber G.]

Meloni seeks to bring nuclear power back to Italy

[Amber G.]

Nuclear fission plant reached a milestone

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-o ... e-68723533

This seems to be a different way of initiating fusion. How do they reach the energies required for fusion to occur? Or is it that this is simply a controlled thermonuclear device where a gun type fission device initiates the fusion? Why is everybody using lasers instead? Also you would need strong magnetic field for containment regardless?

Perhaps AmberG can comment?

FWIW: I'm skeptical about First Light Fusion's approach. It's unclear how they'll reach the extreme energies needed for fusion, and their projectile-based method seems more like a controlled 'thermonuclear' device. Most research uses lasers or magnetic confinement, so I question why they're pursuing a different approach. Until they reveal more details, I remain doubtful about their ability to achieve sustained fusion...

(The article mentions compressing a target containing fusion fuel using a high-speed projectile, but it's unclear how they plan to reach the extreme energies required for fusion to occur (typically in the range of tens to hundreds of keV).
Most fusion research focuses on using lasers or magnetic confinement to achieve the necessary conditions, rather than a projectile-based approach. Lasers are used to compress and heat the fuel to incredibly high temperatures and densities, while magnetic fields are used to contain and stabilize the plasma. It's unclear why First Light Fusion is pursuing a different approach...it's still unclear whether their design can achieve the necessary conditions for sustained fusion)

[Tanaji]

Here is one more company which aims to commercially produce energy from fusion “soon”. No idea on how they have solved the energy efficiency problem with tokamak style reactors for extended periods of operation required for commercial applications

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c80e86d1kl3o

I am convinced at least some of these companies are Theranos type companies.

[Amber G.]

Rolls-Royce's 470 MWe small modular reactor design has passed the second stage of generic design assessment, a significant milestone in the UK's nuclear power development. The Environment Agency, Office for Nuclear Regulation, and Natural Resources Wales confirmed the design's progression to stage three, citing no significant issues or concerns. This assessment ensures the design meets high standards of safety, security, environmental protection, and waste management. Rolls-Royce SMR's design is a low-cost, clean energy solution using commercially available technology, promising a fully integrated, factory-built nuclear power plant. The UK government has invested £300 million in domestic HALEU production for smaller nuclear reactors, aiming for 24 GW of nuclear power by 2050.

470 MW of power: Rolls-Royce’s small nuclear reactor wins 2nd approval

[sanman]

India has plans to build small modular reactors

But international experts are worried that small modular reactors may create a vulnerability for acquiring nuclear bombs:

[Amber G.]

Worries about "...reactors may create a vulnerability for acquiring nuclear bombs" - is not new and there are plenty of such 'experts' with such 'worries' -- (I just watched the first few minutes of that video)

For India :
- India has a well-established nuclear program with robust safeguards and security measures in place.
- Modern SMR designs incorporate enhanced safety features, such as passive cooling systems and containment structures, reducing the risk of accidents and unauthorized access.
- We may opt for SMR designs that use LEU or other proliferation-resistant fuel cycles, minimizing the risk of HEU diversion..

Ityadi...
(See my recent posts about SMR's in other dhaga .. and/or news items in main-stream news papers - about SMR's India is looking for significant growth, with the government announcing plans to partner with the private sector for the development of Bharat Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) and research newer technologies, as part of its recent budget allocation of ₹25,000 crore to the Department of Atomic Energy. It aligns with India's ambitious goal of adding 11GW of new nuclear capacity by 2040.)

[vera_k]

How small can small be - as in what are the limits to shrinking the size? Can I get a small nuclear reactor for my house? If not, how about my neighborhood?

Asking, because small seems a misnomer here since what is being called small here is larger than the original CANDU PHWRs.

[Amber G.]

How small can small be - as in what are the limits to shrinking the size? Can I get a small nuclear reactor for my house? If not, how about my neighborhood?

Asking, because small seems a misnomer here since what is being called small here is larger than the original CANDU PHWRs.

Per physics- As reactors get smaller, cooling and heat removal become more challenging. You can't shrink the reactor too much without compromising safety and efficiency.
Also Economics, ( the cost per unit of electricity generated increases as size decreases) so:

House (at least my house ) No.
Neighborhood: Unlikely, but potentially possible with future advancements. "Micro-reactors" or "small modular reactors" might serve a small community or neighborhood, but would still require significant infrastructure and safety measures.

At present SMRs are designed for industrial or commercial applications, not residential use. ..May be in future like iPWRs or molten salt reactors, which might lead to smaller ones.

(RTG's/RHU's -- not reactors but which use nuclear energy - are quite small -- they have gone up with Chandrayaan though)

__ In Military (there are submarines etc) etc..and I guess there are designs for as small as 5MW reactors but at present in operations (only China and Russia (and may be few others) are the one who uses them at present ) - smallest one are about 100 MW -- buildings to house them about 20mx40m or larger..

[sanman]

Is it true that China is now commissioning the world's first thorium molten salt reactor?
Should we consider joint collaboration with China on developing thorium technology?

[ernest]

Is it true that China is now commissioning the world's first thorium molten salt reactor?
Should we consider joint collaboration with China on developing thorium technology?

Gen PR Shankar disagrees with this assessment.

[sanman]

New US Nuclear Strategy Plans for 3-vs-1 Nuclear Conflict

(US vs Russia+China+NKorea)

[Sanatanan]

How small can small be - as in what are the limits to shrinking the size? Can I get a small nuclear reactor for my house? If not, how about my neighborhood?

Asking, because small seems a misnomer here since what is being called small here is larger than the original CANDU PHWRs.

Per physics- As reactors get smaller, cooling and heat removal become more challenging. You can't shrink the reactor too much without compromising safety and efficiency.
Also Economics, ( the cost per unit of electricity generated increases as size decreases) so:

My views: CANDU type reactors using NatU, designed for about 200 MWe capacity, could be classified nowadays as SMRs. They boast of high 'neutron economy'; more about this a little bit below. Based on Canadian CANDU design at now abandoned Douglas Point NPP, India has developed this type of NPPs to a large extent at 220 MWe capacity. As per new designations, these would qualify for SMRs but as yet they lack a little bit in modularisation that is propagandised for SMR designs. In fact india has gone ahead with indigenous development and construction of 540 MWe and 700 MWe PHWRs too, though these may not be called SMRs. As has been observed (in above quoted post), 220 MWe NatU PHWRs would have a larger footprint than the Western SMRs.

Elsewhere all over the world of NPPs, the advertised Unique Selling Point is their compactness, modularity, & capability for factory assembly and transport. To achieve this, the reactor vessel and hence the core needs to have as small a diameter as possible, which means greater fraction of neutrons produced in the core would escape ("leak") without participation in fission reaction, than when compared to a larger dia core. This means (a) enriched uranium would be necessary as fuel and (b) lower neutron economy than a D2O moderated larger dia core as in India's PHWRs.

Now, India needs to garner every neutron possible usefully so that as many atoms of Th232 can be subsequently converted to U233, which will be India's future. In view of this, my hunch is that it may not be in India's interest to go in for too many SMRs of the compact variety; a few could be built for special use in Himalayan ranges for supplying of (room/area) heating and electricity, for defence and other establishments. India is said to have very low mineralisation of NatU. So it must make best use of the mined mineral; this would preclude enrichment of India-mined NatU for any use other than strategic purposes (including marine propulsion). As of now India cannot import enriched U without submitting to the International Inspection regime, with all its relevant upstream and downstream (of the NPP) facilities that use/process even one atom of imported (fresh or spent) fuel, with 'pursuit in perpetuity' clauses in force in the supply agreements.

[Amber G.]

^^^ In the post aboven from Santanana , there is a typo... the quotes are NOT my quotes..

For clarity my original post was this:

How small can small be - as in what are the limits to shrinking the size? Can I get a small nuclear reactor for my house? If not, how about my neighborhood?

Asking, because small seems a misnomer here since what is being called small here is larger than the original CANDU PHWRs.

Per physics- As reactors get smaller, cooling and heat removal become more challenging. You can't shrink the reactor too much without compromising safety and efficiency.
Also Economics, ( the cost per unit of electricity generated increases as size decreases) so:

House (at least my house ) No.
Neighborhood: Unlikely, but potentially possible with future advancements. "Micro-reactors" or "small modular reactors" might serve a small community or neighborhood, but would still require significant infrastructure and safety measures.

At present SMRs are designed for industrial or commercial applications, not residential use. ..May be in future like iPWRs or molten salt reactors, which might lead to smaller ones.

(RTG's/RHU's -- not reactors but which use nuclear energy - are quite small -- they have gone up with Chandrayaan though)

__ In Military (there are submarines etc) etc..and I guess there are designs for as small as 5MW reactors but at present in operations (only China and Russia (and may be few others) are the one who uses them at present ) - smallest one are about 100 MW -- buildings to house them about 20mx40m or larger..

Adding that to response to Sanatanan's post : (Speaking as physicist):

..My views: CANDU type reactors using NatU, designed for about 200 MWe capacity, could be classified nowadays as SMRs...

CANDU PHWRs are NOT classified as SMRs due to their larger footprint and lack of modularization, despite their 200-220 MWe capacity. While designs for small reactors exist, like 5 MW, current operational small reactors are around 100 MW, mainly in China and Russia. CANDU PHWRs prioritize neutron economy for future thorium conversion, making compact SMRs - in some respects - less suitable for India's needs, which focuses on maximizing neutron utilization due to limited natural uranium resources.

[sanman]

[Tanaji]

The Chinese Tokamak EAST has run for 1006 seconds breaking its own record

https://charmingscience.com/chinas-arti ... -millionf/

The Chinese are on a tear with advances across all major technology fronts

[Tanaji]

The Chinese thorium reactor (reported earlier on this thread) seems to be operational

https://amp.scmp.com/news/china/science ... ar-reactor

Apologies for the scmp link… and hence the bombastic tone.

There arent much details though. A second reactor is coming up but that one seems to be 10 MW only. Which seems to suggest they havent fully managed to solve all the issues for full comercial viability. Meanwhile the elephant is plodding along with its AHWR..hopefully we get there!

[Tanaji]

The Chinese seem to be using a molten salt design as opposed to the AHWR which seems to be a conventional design. It is an interesting design choice, but likely because they based it off the American studies in the 1960s and took it further.

I think the MSR design added complexity with the already unknowns of the Th fuel cycle which probably explains why their output seems to be low. The AHWR in contrast is at 300 MWe.

@AmberG any insights?

[Amber G.]

^^^ Few comments:
China's thorium reactor, reportedly operational at 2 MW, marks a significant R&D milestone, despite its small scale. The planned 10 MW upgrade suggests cautious scaling, likely due to lingering engineering challenges inherent to molten salt reactors (MSRs), such as corrosion and fission product containment.

In contrast, India's Advanced Heavy Water Reactor (AHWR) takes a more conservative approach, using thorium in solid fuel form and building on existing Pressurized Heavy Water Reactor (PHWR) technology. ( it's a significant scale-up—but it's still a prototype .. It uses thorium in a solid fuel form, with some reprocessing required, and borrows heavily from PHWR technology—giving it a more “conventional” engineering pedigree.)

China's MSR design draws from 1960s US research (They even recruited engineers who had worked on MSR experiments in the US), offering potential for innovation but also inheriting old challenges.

IMO, the low output doesn’t diminish the experimental significance. It’s not about power now—it’s about feasibility. Thorium’s fuel cycle still lacks closed-cycle maturity, and MSRs add reprocessing and materials uncertainties on top. India’s AHWR tries to stay closer to existing infrastructure, which may make it more commercially practical in the medium term.

Both approaches represent different risk-reward balances: China is betting on a disruptive MSR design, while India opts for an evolutionary path. China's focus is on feasibility and long-term potential, whereas India's approach may prove more commercially practical in the medium term..

[ernest]

What are the benefits of their proposed MSR over traditional PHWR like designs? I've heard from some online discussions that MSR is the favored design for the future, and we should pivot to it. Is it just online gossip, or is there some substance to it?
on the cons side, how is reprocessing affected negatively in MSR? Is it due to constant mixing of molten salt from old depleted fuel and fission products?
Thanks

[Amber G.]

What are the benefits of their proposed MSR over traditional PHWR like designs? I've heard from some online discussions that MSR is the favored design for the future, and we should pivot to it. Is it just online gossip, or is there some substance to it?
on the cons side, how is reprocessing affected negatively in MSR? Is it due to constant mixing of molten salt from old depleted fuel and fission products?
Thanks

Great questions...
My take:
1. MSR vs PHWR: Our traditional designs are PHWRs — like the 220 MWe and 700 MWe designs — optimized for using natural uranium and later part of our three-stage program to breed plutonium and then move to thorium.

Molten Salt Reactors (MSRs), on the other hand, have some theoretical advantages:

Higher efficiency: (MSRs operate at higher temperatures and lower pressures than PHWRs ==> better thermal efficiency & simpler containment designs.

Fuel flexibility: MSRs can, in principle, use uranium, plutonium, or even thorium directly in the salt mixture. ( matching India's long-term interest in thorium)

Some MSR concepts allow continuous removal of fission products while the reactor is operating, potentially leading to better fuel utilization.

Inherent safety & Waste reduction.



ie : higher efficiency, safety, fuel flexibility, and synergy with thorium programs — which is why some people online say MSRs are the future.

However.. much of it is theory or at early-stage research.. India already has mature PHWR technology, built supply chains, regulatory expertise, and trained workforce around PHWRs. MSRs would need a complete new ecosystem.

----
Is it just online gossip, or is there substance? ..There's definitely some substance. U.S. (TerraPower, ORNL), China (see above post), and Europe — are actively working on MSRs. (In India, BARC has done some studies)..

But — moving from "promising research" to "gigawatt-scale reliable reactor fleet" is a multi-decade process. It took India 30–40 years to perfect PHWRs to today's standards.

...MSRs have real potential, but pivoting immediately would be disruptive.. as said before for India (IMO) PHWR may be correct answer for medium term..

--
Reprocessing Challenges -- in MSRs You're exactly right in your understanding.

In a PHWR the fuel stays in sealed bundles. After burnup, it's removed and sent to reprocessing plants

In an MSR The fuel is already in molten form. Fission products are mixed throughout the salt. Reprocessing would need to be online and continuous: removing poisons like xenon, chemically separating actinides and fission products while the reactor runs.

Thus, while online reprocessing sounds elegant, in practice it's extremely hard, and that's a major bottleneck for MSRs becoming commercial today.