I want to know why we use molten salt for heat storage in solar thermal system, In spite of the fact that molten salt has less specific heat capacity than water ?
May be because the boiling point of molten salt is greater than that of water, it does not produce high pressure at high temperatures about 300 degree Celsius ?
Thank you ❤️
You would use molten salts generally because you need to pump liquid. Phase change mediums generally have high latent heat and high melting point. Why use them in thermal energy storage?
At one point I recall reading in a thread somewhere about a technology invented in the 1960s that allows for the conversion of heat directly in to electricity using molten salt. What is it called?
I can’t find the comment or even the thread that it was in, and Google only wants to show me batteries and fission reactors.
Edit- found it: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alkali-metal_thermal_to_electric_converter
molten alkali metal, not molten salt. That’s probably why I couldn’t find it
Taken from r/Energy
A molten salt reactor is just a reactor that uses chloride or fluoride salts to cool a fuel. In some models, the fuel is mixed in. In others, tiny fuel pellets 0.5 mm in diameter are encapsulated in baseball-sized bzlls of graphite. Unlike conventional reactors, they aren't under pressure and, likewise, are much smaller. The current reactors we use are pressurized to about 140 atm, requiring vast concrete and steel buildings to encompass them and giant steel chambers. Many of these tough structures have resulted in significant delays on construction. Not only does molten salt avoid this, but the two reactors built and 2 being built now have a Lego-like construction set up, meaning they're modular, light, and simple to assemble, the bulk of which are planned for factory production. Currently, reactors are tailored to the site and, likewise, don't get the learning curve and constant improvement other forms of energy recieved. Currently, there are two major construction projects. One is occurring in Indonesia, lead by ThorCon, and the other is taking place in Canada, lead by Moltex. There's also a reactor is China, however I'm doubtful that they'll share much of their findings. While it was able to pass the first of three regulatory hurdles in Canada, progress for molten salt fueled reactors is slow in the US. Currently, the initiative that's planning on an American reactor in the next 10 years uses the solid fuel pebbles in salt to avoid proliferation issues and regulatory hurdles. Overall, the various companies tend to list construction times at 3 years for the industrious and 8 for the more advanced reactors (these numbers apply to 1 GWe, it's likely different for higher or lower capacities). Of course, this is all still speculation, there hasn't actually been a running reactor yet. Fortunately, it inherently avoids the issues of delays, construction costs, zoning sizes, and insurance (on account of the low operating pressure that prevents radioactive isotopes from being launched). As it's nuclear, it will only have a very limited growth and likely won't make up more than 10% of the global energy market in my opinion. What are people's thoughts on this form of energy? Will it likely make up 10% or more of the world's energy market? Does it have a place as an industrial heat source to produce steel, hydrogen, fertilizer, and/or other heat-intensive operations that require non-intermittent operation?
https://www.avanza.se/placera/pressmeddelanden/2019/09/19/saltx-technology-holding-ab-saltx-berlin-pilot-plant-shows-very-promising-results.html
Was working on a non-nuclear related project and came across molten salt energy storage. (TL;DR: capture primary heat before conversion to electricty, store as ~600C salt, use hot salt to make turbine-grade steam.) Turns out it's surprisingly efficient (90%+), and scales much better than most other storage technologies.
So, wondering, have there been any projects trying to integrate this with nuclear plants? Seems like a natural fit: nukes love storage, have plenty of heat, are experienced at exotic plumbing, and already have steam turbines.
(Not talking about molten salt reactors; for storage, the salt would be part of the secondary cooling and not touch the glowey parts.)
A molten salt reactor is just a reactor that uses chloride or fluoride salts to cool a fuel. In some models, the fuel is mixed in. In others, tiny fuel pellets 0.5 mm in diameter are encapsulated in baseball-sized bzlls of graphite. Unlike conventional reactors, they aren't under pressure and, likewise, are much smaller. The current reactors we use are pressurized to about 140 atm, requiring vast concrete and steel buildings to encompass them and giant steel chambers. Many of these tough structures have resulted in significant delays on construction. Not only does molten salt avoid this, but the two reactors built and 2 being built now have a Lego-like construction set up, meaning they're modular, light, and simple to assemble, the bulk of which are planned for factory production. Currently, reactors are tailored to the site and, likewise, don't get the learning curve and constant improvement other forms of energy recieved. Currently, there are two major construction projects. One is occurring in Indonesia, lead by ThorCon, and the other is taking place in Canada, lead by Moltex. There's also a reactor is China, however I'm doubtful that they'll share much of their findings. While it was able to pass the first of three regulatory hurdles in Canada, progress for molten salt fueled reactors is slow in the US. Currently, the initiative that's planning on an American reactor in the next 10 years uses the solid fuel pebbles in salt to avoid proliferation issues and regulatory hurdles. Overall, the various companies tend to list construction times at 3 years for the industrious and 8 for the more advanced reactors (these numbers apply to 1 GWe, it's likely different for higher or lower capacities). Of course, this is all still speculation, there hasn't actually been a running reactor yet. Fortunately, it inherently avoids the issues of delays, construction costs, zoning sizes, and insurance (on account of the low operating pressure that prevents radioactive isotopes from being launched). As it's nuclear, it will only have a very limited growth and likely won't make up more than 10% of the global energy market in my opinion. What are people's thoughts on this form of energy? Will it likely make up 10% or more of the world's energy market? Does it have a place as an industrial heat source to produce steel, hydrogen, fertilizer, and/or other heat-intensive operations that require non-intermittent operation?
