Editing Thorium Reactor Comparison With Conventional Nuclear (section)

== Summary Comparison Table ==

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Feature !! Conventional LWR || Thorium LFTR/MSR
|-
| Primary fuel || Enriched U-235 (3–5%) || Thorium-232 (fertile, breeds U-233)
|-
| Fuel abundance || Uranium: 40× less common than thorium || Thorium: 3–4× more abundant than uranium
|-
| Enrichment required || Yes — expensive, energy-intensive || No — natural thorium used directly
|-
| Fuel utilisation || 2–3% of raw uranium || Up to 99% of thorium (in breeder mode)
|-
| Operating pressure || 150–160 atmospheres (PWR) || Near atmospheric
|-
| Operating temperature || ~315 °C (coolant) || 600–700 °C (or higher)
|-
| Thermal efficiency || 30–35% || 45–50% (Brayton cycle)
|-
| Coolant || Water (pressurised or boiling) || Fluoride molten salt
|-
| Meltdown risk || Yes — solid fuel can overheat and melt || No — fuel already liquid; no melt scenario
|-
| Passive shutdown || Partial (some designs) || Complete — freeze plug, negative temp. coeff.
|-
| Hydrogen generation risk || Yes (Fukushima mechanism) || No — no water or zirconium
|-
| Annual waste per 1 GW || ~30 tonnes spent fuel || ~1 tonne fission products
|-
| Long-term waste radiotoxicity || 100,000+ years || ~300 years
|-
| Weapons-grade material produced || Significant (Pu-239) || Negligible
|-
| Online refuelling || No — shutdown required || Yes — continuous
|-
| Known commercial scale || Yes — mature industry || No — China TMSR-LF1 at 2 MWth (2023)
|-
| Development cost to commercialise || Already spent || Estimated $1–5 billion for first commercial plant
|}