Podcasts about Fission

In this fascinating episode, Bryan welcomes back longtime friend and nuclear industry veteran Bill Nowicki to discuss a recently released document from DHS and NUSTL that provides new recommendations for HVAC operations during nuclear events. Bill brings over 40 years of nuclear experience, starting as a 19-year-old Navy nuclear operator (after being deemed "not ready for the grill" at Friendly's restaurant) and progressing through various roles, including lead engineer on critical control systems at nuclear facilities. Bill shares his journey from nuclear plant evaluator to leadership trainer, now working internationally to help nuclear professionals develop their skills. His current podcast, "The Nuclear Leader," continues this mission alongside his passion project, "Navigating Mental Illness: Parent Stories." Bill provides an accessible explanation of nuclear reactor operations, using the analogy that "contamination is the poop and radiation is the smell" to help listeners understand the difference between radioactive material and radiation itself. He walks through the three-barrier system in nuclear plants: fuel cladding, reactor coolant system, and containment structures. The discussion covers how fission works, the controlled chain reaction process, and what happens when these systems fail, using examples from Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima to illustrate different failure modes. The episode explores the current nuclear renaissance driven by AI data centers and industrial companies seeking clean baseload power. Bill explains how private industry is now directly funding nuclear projects, bypassing traditional utility structures, with companies like Microsoft and ExxonMobil investing billions in new nuclear facilities. This represents a dramatic shift from the post-Three Mile Island era when nuclear construction essentially stopped in the United States. The core discussion focuses on updated emergency guidance that reverses previous recommendations. Instead of the old "shelter in place and shut off your AC" advice, the new guidance suggests keeping HVAC systems running while eliminating outdoor air intake. This approach recognizes that modern, well-sealed buildings with high-efficiency filtration can provide better protection by maintaining positive pressure and filtering recirculated air rather than allowing uncontrolled infiltration. Bill and Bryan discuss how building characteristics dramatically affect the best response strategy. High-performance homes with tight construction, MERV 13+ filters, and controlled ventilation systems offer significant advantages, requiring only the ability to shut off outdoor air intake. Conversely, older, leaky buildings may still benefit from complete system shutdown to prevent contamination circulation. The conversation highlights how lessons learned during COVID-19 about airborne contamination and filtration directly apply to nuclear emergency preparedness, emphasizing the importance of case-by-case analysis rather than one-size-fits-all approaches. Topics Covered Nuclear industry career paths - From Navy nuclear training to civilian plant operations and leadership roles Basic nuclear physics - Fission process, chain reactions, and the difference between contamination and radiation Nuclear plant safety systems - Three-barrier containment approach and historical accident analysis Current nuclear renaissance - AI-driven power demand and private industry investment in new reactors Emergency preparedness evolution - How COVID-19 research influenced nuclear emergency HVAC guidance Building performance factors - Impact of construction quality, filtration, and ventilation design on safety HVAC system modifications - Importance of outdoor air shutoff capability and high-efficiency filtration Case-by-case response strategies - Why building characteristics determine optimal emergency procedures Podcasting journey - Early days of niche podcasting and building communities around specialized topics Leadership development - International nuclear industry training and professional development Personal stories - Navy submarine experiences and nuclear plant operational challenges   Here is the full document from the DHS: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2425/ML24250A059.pdf Have a question that you want us to answer on the podcast? Submit your questions at https://www.speakpipe.com/hvacschool. Purchase your tickets or learn more about the 7th Annual HVACR Training Symposium at https://hvacrschool.com/symposium. Subscribe to our podcast on your iPhone or Android. Subscribe to our YouTube channel. Check out our handy calculators here or on the HVAC School Mobile App for Apple and Android



My fellow pro-growth/progress/abundance Up Wingers,Nuclear fission is a safe, powerful, and reliable means of generating nearly limitless clean energy to power the modern world. A few public safety scares and a lot of bad press over the half-century has greatly delayed our nuclear future. But with climate change and energy-hungry AI making daily headlines, the time — finally — for a nuclear renaissance seems to have arrived.Today on Faster, Please! — The Podcast, I talk with Dr. Tim Gregory about the safety and efficacy of modern nuclear power, as well as the ambitious energy goals we should set for our society.Gregory is a nuclear scientist at the UK National Nuclear Laboratory. He is also a popular science broadcaster on radio and TV, and an author. His most recent book, Going Nuclear: How Atomic Energy Will Save the World is out now.In This Episode* A false start for a nuclear future (1:29)* Motivators for a revival (7:20)* About nuclear waste . . . (12:41)* Not your mother's reactors (17:25)* Commercial fusion, coming soon . . . ? (23:06)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversation. A false start for a nuclear future (1:29)The truth is that radiation, we're living in it all the time, it's completely inescapable because we're all living in a sea of background radiation.Pethokoukis: Why do America, Europe, Japan not today get most of their power from nuclear fission, since that would've been a very reasonable prediction to make in 1965 or 1975, but it has not worked out that way? What's your best take on why it hasn't?Going back to the '50s and '60s, it looked like that was the world that we currently live in. It was all to play for, and there were a few reasons why that didn't happen, but the main two were Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. It's a startling statistic that the US built more nuclear reactors in the five years leading up to Three Mile Island than it has built since. And similarly on this side of the Atlantic, Europe built more nuclear reactors in the five years leading up to Chernobyl than it has built since, which is just astounding, especially given that nobody died in Three Mile Island and nobody was even exposed to anything beyond the background radiation as a result of that nuclear accident.Chernobyl, of course, was far more consequential and far more serious than Three Mile Island. 30-odd people died in the immediate aftermath, mostly people who were working at the power station and the first responders, famously the firefighters who were exposed to massive amounts of radiation, and probably a couple of hundred people died in the affected population from thyroid cancer. It was people who were children and adolescents at the time of the accident.So although every death from Chernobyl was a tragedy because it was avoidable, they're not in proportion to the mythic reputation of the night in question. It certainly wasn't reason to effectively end nuclear power expansion in Europe because of course we had to get that power from somewhere, and it mainly came from fossil fuels, which are not just a little bit more deadly than nuclear power, they're orders of magnitude more deadly than nuclear power. When you add up all of the deaths from nuclear power and compare those deaths to the amount of electricity that we harvest from nuclear power, it's actually as safe as wind and solar, whereas fossil fuels kill hundreds or thousands of times more people per unit of power. To answer your question, it's complicated and there are many answers, but the main two were Three Mile Island and Chernobyl.I wonder how things might have unfolded if those events hadn't happened or if society had responded proportionally to the actual damage. Three Mile Island and Chernobyl are portrayed in documentaries and on TV as far deadlier than they really were, and they still loom large in the public imagination in a really unhelpful way.You see it online, actually, quite a lot about the predicted death toll from Chernobyl, because, of course, there's no way of saying exactly which cases of cancer were caused by Chernobyl and which ones would've happened anyway. Sometimes you see estimates that are up in the tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of deaths from Chernobyl. They are always based on a flawed scientific hypothesis called the linear no-threshold model that I go into in quite some detail in chapter eight of my book, which is all about the human health effects of exposure to radiation. This model is very contested in the literature. It's one of the most controversial areas of medical science, actually, the effects of radiation on the human body, and all of these massive numbers you see of the death toll from Chernobyl, they're all based on this really kind of clunky, flawed, contentious hypothesis. My reading of the literature is that there's very, very little physical evidence to support this particular hypothesis, but people take it and run. I don't know if it would be too far to accuse people of pushing a certain idea of Chernobyl, but it almost certainly vastly, vastly overestimates the effects.I think a large part of the reason of why this had such a massive impact on the public and politicians is this lingering sense of radiophobia that completely blight society. We've all seen it in the movies, in TV shows, even in music and computer games — radiation is constantly used as a tool to invoke fear and mistrust. It's this invisible, centerless, silent specter that's kind of there in the background: It means birth defects, it means cancers, it means ill health. We've all kind of grown up in this culture where the motif of radiation is bad news, it's dangerous, and that inevitably gets tied to people's sense of nuclear power. So when you get something like Three Mile Island, society's imagination and its preconceptions of radiation, it's just like a dry haystack waiting for a flint spark to land on it, and up it goes in flames and people's imaginations run away with them.The truth is that radiation, we're living in it all the time, it's completely inescapable because we're all living in a sea of background radiation. There's this amazing statistic that if you live within a couple of miles of a nuclear power station, the extra amount of radiation you're exposed to annually is about the same as eating a banana. Bananas are slightly radioactive because of the slight amount of potassium-40 that they naturally contain. Even in the wake of these nuclear accidents like Chernobyl, and more recently Fukushima, the amount of radiation that the public was exposed to barely registers and, in fact, is less than the background radiation in lots of places on the earth.Motivators for a revival (7:20)We have no idea what emerging technologies are on the horizon that will also require massive amounts of power, and that's exactly where nuclear can shine.You just suddenly reminded me of a story of when I was in college in the late 1980s, taking a class on the nuclear fuel cycle. You know it was an easy class because there was an ampersand in it. “Nuclear fuel cycle” would've been difficult. “Nuclear fuel cycle & the environment,” you knew it was not a difficult class.The man who taught it was a nuclear scientist and, at one point, he said that he would have no problem having a nuclear reactor in his backyard. This was post-Three Mile Island, post-Chernobyl, and the reaction among the students — they were just astounded that he would be willing to have this unbelievably dangerous facility in his backyard.We have this fear of nuclear power, and there's sort of an economic component, but now we're seeing what appears to be a nuclear renaissance. I don't think it's driven by fear of climate change, I think it's driven A) by fear that if you are afraid of climate change, just solar and wind aren't going to get you to where you want to be; and then B) we seem like we're going to need a lot of clean energy for all these AI data centers. So it really does seem to be a perfect storm after a half-century.And who knows what next. When I started writing Going Nuclear, the AI story hadn't broken yet, and so all of the electricity projections for our future demand, which, they range from doubling to tripling, we're going to need a lot of carbon-free electricity if we've got any hope of electrifying society whilst getting rid of fossil fuels. All of those estimates were underestimates because nobody saw AI coming.It's been very, very interesting just in the last six, 12 months seeing Big Tech in North America moving first on this. Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and Meta have all either invested or actually placed orders for small modular reactors specifically to power their AI data centers. In some ways, they've kind of led the charge on this. They've moved faster than most nation states, although it is encouraging, actually, here in the UK, just a couple of weeks ago, the government announced that our new nuclear power station is definitely going ahead down in Sizewell in Suffolk in the south of England. That's a 3.2 gigawatt nuclear reactor, it's absolutely massive. But it's been really, really encouraging to see Big Tech in the private sector in North America take the situation into their own hands. If anyone's real about electricity demands and how reliable you need it, it's Big Tech with these data centers.I always think, go back five, 10 years, talk of AI was only on the niche subreddits and techie podcasts where people were talking about it. It broke into the mainstream all of a sudden. Who knows what is going to happen in the next five or 10 years. We have no idea what emerging technologies are on the horizon that will also require massive amounts of power, and that's exactly where nuclear can shine.In the US, at least, I don't think decarbonization alone is enough to win broad support for nuclear, since a big chunk of the country doesn't think we actually need to do that. But I think that pairing it with the promise of rapid AI-driven economic growth creates a stronger case.I tried to appeal to a really broad church in Going Nuclear because I really, really do believe that whether you are completely preoccupied by climate change and environmental issues or you're completely preoccupied by economic growth, and raising living, standards and all of that kind of thing, all the monetary side of things, nuclear is for you because if you solve the energy problem, you solve both problems at once. You solve the economic problem and the environmental problem.There's this really interesting relationship between GDP per head — which is obviously incredibly important in economic terms — and energy consumption per head, and it's basically a straight line relationship between the two. There are no rich countries that aren't also massive consumers of energy, so if you really, really care about the economy, you should really also be caring about energy consumption and providing energy abundance so people can go out and use that energy to create wealth and prosperity. Again, that's where nuclear comes in. You can use nuclear power to sate that massive energy demand that growing economies require.This podcast is very pro-wealth and prosperity, but I'll also say, if the nuclear dreams of the '60s where you had, in this country, what was the former Atomic Energy Commission expecting there to be 1000 nuclear reactors in this country by the year 2000, we're not having this conversation about climate change. It is amazing that what some people view as an existential crisis could have been prevented — by the United States and other western countries, at least — just making a different political decision.We would be spending all of our time talking about something else, and how nice would that be?For sure. I'm sure there'd be other existential crises to worry about.But for sure, we wouldn't be talking about climate change was anywhere near the volume or the sense of urgency as we are now if we would've carried on with the nuclear expansion that really took off in the '70s and the '80s. It would be something that would be coming our way in a couple of centuries.About nuclear waste . . . (12:41). . . a 100 percent nuclear-powered life for about 80 years, their nuclear waste would barely fill a wine glass or a coffee cup. I don't know if you've ever seen the television show For All Mankind?I haven't. So many people have recommended it to me.It's great. It's an alt-history that looks at what if the Space Race had never stopped. As a result, we had a much more tech-enthusiastic society, which included being much more pro-nuclear.Anyway, imagine if you are on a plane talking to the person next to you, and the topic of your book comes up, and the person says hey, I like energy, wealth, prosperity, but what are you going to do about the nuclear waste?That almost exact situation has happened, but on a train rather than an airplane. One of the cool things about uranium is just how much energy you can get from a very small amount of it. If typical person in a highly developed economy, say North America, Europe, something like that, if they produced all of their power over their entire lifetime from nuclear alone, so forget fossil fuels, forget wind and solar, a 100 percent nuclear-powered life for about 80 years, their nuclear waste would barely fill a wine glass or a coffee cup. You need a very small amount of uranium to power somebody's life, and the natural conclusion of that is you get a very small amount of waste for a lifetime of power. So in terms of the numbers, and the amount of nuclear waste, it's just not that much of a problem.However, I don't want to just try and trivialize it out of existence with some cool pithy statistics and some cool back-of-the-envelopes physics calculations because we still have to do something with the nuclear waste. This stuff is going to be radioactive for the best part of a million years. Thankfully, it's quite an easy argument to make because good old Finland, which is one of the most nuclear nations on the planet as a share of nuclear in its grid, has solved this problem. It has implemented — and it's actually working now — the world's first and currently only geological repository for nuclear waste. Their idea is essentially to bury it in impermeable bedrock and leave it there because, as with all radioactive objects, nuclear waste becomes less radioactive over time. The idea is that, in a million years, Finland's nuclear waste won't be nuclear waste anymore, it will just be waste. A million years sounds like a really long time to our ears, but it's actually —It does.It sounds like a long time, but it is the blink of an eye, geologically. So to a geologist, a million years just comes and goes straight away. So it's really not that difficult to keep nuclear waste safe underground on those sorts of timescales. However — and this is the really cool thing, and this is one of the arguments that I make in my book — there are actually technologies that we can use to recycle nuclear waste. It turns out that when you pull uranium out of a reactor, once it's been burned for a couple of years in a reactor, 95 percent of the atoms are still usable. You can still use them to generate nuclear power. So by throwing away nuclear waste when it's been through a nuclear reactor once, we're actually squandering like 95 percent of material that we're throwing away.The theory is this sort of the technology behind breeder reactors?That's exactly right, yes.What about the plutonium? People are worried about the plutonium!People are worried about the plutonium, but in a breeder reactor, you get rid of the plutonium because you split it into fission products, and fission products are still radioactive, but they have much shorter half-lives than plutonium. So rather than being radioactive for, say, a million years, they're only radioactive, really, for a couple of centuries, maybe 1000 years, which is a very, very different situation when you think about long-term storage.I read so many papers and memos from the '50s when these reactors were first being built and demonstrated, and they worked, by the way, they're actually quite easy to build, it just happened in a couple of years. Breeder reactors were really seen as the future of humanity's power demands. Forget traditional nuclear power stations that we all use at the moment, which are just kind of once through and then you throw away 95 percent of the energy at the end of it. These breeder reactors were really, really seen as the future.They never came to fruition because we discovered lots of uranium around the globe, and so the supply of uranium went up around the time that the nuclear power expansion around the world kind of seized up, so the uranium demand dropped as the supply increased, so the demand for these breeder reactors kind of petered out and fizzled out. But if we're really, really serious about the medium-term future of humanity when it comes to energy, abundance, and prosperity, we need to be taking a second look at these breeder reactors because there's enough uranium and thorium in the ground around the world now to power the world for almost 1000 years. After that, we'll have something else. Maybe we'll have nuclear fusion.Well, I hope it doesn't take a thousand years for nuclear fusion.Yes, me too.Not your mother's reactors (17:25)In 2005, France got 80 percent of its electricity from nuclear. They almost decarbonized their grid by accident before anybody cared about climate change, and that was during a time when their economy was absolutely booming.I don't think most people are aware of how much innovation has taken place around nuclear in the past few years, or even few decades. It's not just a climate change issue or that we need to power these data centers — the technology has vastly improved. There are newer, safer technologies, so we're not talking about 1975-style reactors.Even if it were the 1975-style reactors, that would be fine because they're pretty good and they have an absolutely impeccable safety record punctuated by a very small number of high-profile events such as Chernobyl and Fukushima. I'm not to count Three Mile Island on that list because nobody died, but you know what I mean.But the modern nuclear reactors are amazing. The ones that are coming out of France, the EPRs, the European Power Reactors, there are going to be two of those in the UK's new nuclear power station, and they've been designed to withstand an airplane flying into the side of them, so they're basically bomb-proof.As for these small modular reactors, that's getting people very excited, too. As their name suggests, they're small. How small is a reasonable question — the answer is as small as you want to go. These things are scalable, and I've seen designs for just one-megawatt reactors that could easily fit inside a shipping container. They could fit in the parking lots around the side of a data center, or in the basement even, all the way up to multi-hundred-megawatt reactors that could fit on a couple of tennis courts worth of land. But it's really the modular part that's the most interesting thing. That's the ‘M' and that's never been done before.Which really gets to the economics of the SMRs.It really does. The idea is you could build upwards of 90 percent of these reactors on a factory line. We know from the history of industrialization that as soon as you start mass producing things, the unit cost just plummets and the timescales shrink. No one has achieved that yet, though. There's a lot of hype around small modular reactors, and so it's kind of important not to get complacent and really keep our eye on the ultimate goal, which is mass-production and mass rapid deployment of nuclear power stations, crucially in the places where you need them the most, as well.We often think about just decarbonizing our electricity supply or decoupling our electricity supply from volatilities in the fossil fuel market, but it's about more than electricity, as well. We need heat for things like making steel, making the ammonia that feeds most people on the planet, food and drinks factories, car manufacturers, plants that rely on steam. You need heat, and thankfully, the primary energy from a nuclear reactor is heat. The electricity is secondary. We have to put effort into making that. The heat just kind of happens. So there's this idea that we could use the surplus heat from nuclear reactors to power industrial processes that are very, very difficult to decarbonize. Small modular reactors would be perfect for that because you could nestle them into the industrial centers that need the heat close by. So honestly, it is really our imaginations that are the limits with these small modular reactors.They've opened a couple of nuclear reactors down in Georgia here. The second one was a lot cheaper and faster to build because they had already learned a bunch of lessons building that first one, and it really gets at sort of that repeatability where every single reactor doesn't have to be this one-off bespoke project. That is not how it works in the world of business. How you get cheaper things is by building things over and over, you get very good at building them, and then you're able to turn these things out at scale. That has not been the economic situation with nuclear reactors, but hopefully with small modular reactors, or even if we just start building a lot of big advanced reactors, we'll get those economies of scale and hopefully the economic issue will then take care of itself.For sure, and it is exactly the same here in the UK. The last reactor that we connected to the grid was in 1995. I was 18 months old. I don't even know if I was fluent in speaking at 18 months old. I was really, really young. Our newest nuclear power station, Hinkley Point C, which is going to come online in the next couple of years, was hideously expensive. The uncharitable view of that is that it's just a complete farce and is just a complete embarrassment, but honestly, you've got to think about it: 1995, the last nuclear reactor in the UK, it was going to take a long time, it was going to be expensive, basically doing it from scratch. We had no supply chain. We didn't really have a workforce that had ever built a nuclear reactor before, and with this new reactor that just got announced a couple of weeks ago, the projected price is 20 percent cheaper, and it is still too expensive, it's still more expensive than it should be, but you're exactly right.By tapping into those economies of scale, the cost per nuclear reactor will fall, and France did this in the '70s and '80s. Their nuclear program is so amazing. France is still the most nuclear nation on the planet as a share of its total electricity. In 2005, France got 80 percent of its electricity from nuclear. They almost decarbonized their grid by accident before anybody cared about climate change, and that was during a time when their economy was absolutely booming. By the way, still today, all of those reactors are still working and they pay less than the European Union average for that electricity, so this idea that nuclear makes your electricity expensive is simply not true. They built 55 nuclear reactors in 25 years, and they did them in parallel. It was just absolutely amazing. I would love to see a French-style nuclear rollout in all developed countries across the world. I think that would just be absolutely amazing.Commercial fusion, coming soon . . . ? (23:06)I think we're pretty good at doing things when we put our minds to it, but certainly not in the next couple of decades. But luckily, we already have a proven way of producing lots of energy, and that's with nuclear fission, in the meantime.What is your enthusiasm level or expectation about nuclear fusion? I can tell you that the Silicon Valley people I talk to are very positive. I know they're inherently very positive people, but they're very enthusiastic about the prospects over the next decade, if not sooner, of commercial fusion. How about you?It would be incredible. The last question that I was asked in my PhD interview 10 years ago was, “If you could solve one scientific or engineering problem, what would it be?” and my answer was nuclear fusion. And that would be the answer that I would give today. It just seems to me to be obviously the solution to the long-term energy needs of humanity. However, I'm less optimistic, perhaps, than the Silicon Valley crowd. The running joke, of course, is that it's always 40 years away and it recedes into the future at one year per year. So I would love to be proved wrong, but realistically — no one's even got it working in a prototype power station. That's before we even think about commercializing it and deploying it at scale. I really, really think that we're decades away, maybe even something like a century. I'd be surprised if it took longer than a century, actually. I think we're pretty good at doing things when we put our minds to it, but certainly not in the next couple of decades. But luckily, we already have a proven way of producing lots of energy, and that's with nuclear fission, in the meantime.Don't go to California with that attitude. I can tell you that even when I go there and I talk about AI, if I say that AI will do anything less than improve economic growth by a factor of 100, they just about throw me out over there. Let me just finish up by asking you this: Earlier, we mentioned Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. How resilient do you think this nuclear renaissance is to an accident?Even if we take the rate of accident over the last 70 years of nuclear power production and we maintain that same level of rate of accident, if you like, it's still one of the safest things that our species does, and everyone talks about the death toll from nuclear power, but nobody talks about the lives that it's already saved because of the fossil fuels, that it's displaced fossil fuels. They're so amazing in some ways, they're so convenient, they're so energy-dense, they've created the modern world as we all enjoy it in the developed world and as the developing world is heading towards it. But there are some really, really nasty consequences of fossil fuels, and whether or not you care about climate change, even the air pollution alone and the toll that that takes on human health is enough to want to phase them out. Nuclear power already is orders of magnitude safer than fossil fuels and I read this really amazing paper that globally, it was something like between the '70s and the '90s, nuclear power saved about two million lives because of the fossil fuels that it displaced. That's, again, orders of magnitude more lives that have been lost as a consequence of nuclear power, mostly because of Chernobyl and Fukushima. Even if the safety record of nuclear in the past stays the same and we forward-project that into the future, it's still a winning horse to bet on.If in the UK they've started up one new nuclear reactor in the past 30 years, right? How many would you guess will be started over the next 15 years?Four or five. Something like that, I think; although I don't know.Is that a significant number to you?It's not enough for my liking. I would like to see many, many more. Look at France. I know I keep going back to it, but it's such a brilliant example. If France hadn't done what they'd done in between the '70s and the '90s — 55 nuclear reactors in 25 years, all of which are still working — it would be a much more difficult case to make because there would be no historical precedent for it. So, maybe predictably, I wouldn't be satisfied with anything less than a French-scale nuclear rollout, let's put it that way.On sale everywhere The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were PromisedMicro Reads▶ Economics* The U.S. Marches Toward State Capitalism With American Characteristics - WSJ* AI Spending Is Propping Up the Economy, Right? It's Complicated. - Barron's* Goodbye, $165,000 Tech Jobs. Student Coders Seek Work at Chipotle. - NYT* Sam Altman says Gen Z are the 'luckiest' kids in history thanks to AI, despite mounting job displacement dread - NYT* Lab-Grown Diamonds Are Testing the Power of Markets - Bberg Opinion* Why globalisation needs a leader: Hegemons, alignment, and trade - CEPR* The Rising Returns to R&D: Ideas Are not Getting Harder to Find - SSRN* An Assessment of China's Innovative Capacity - The Fed* Markets are so used to the TACO trade they didn't even blink when Trump extended a tariff delay with China - Fortune* Labor unions mobilize to challenge advance of algorithms in workplaces - Wapo* ChatGPT loves this bull market. Human investors are more cautious. - Axios* What is required for a post-growth model? - Arxiv* What Would It Take to Bring Back US Manufacturing? - Bridgewater▶ Business* An AI Replay of the Browser Wars, Bankrolled by Google - Bberg* Alexa Got an A.I. Brain Transplant. How Smart Is It Now? - NYT* Google and IBM believe first workable quantum computer is in sight - FT* Why does Jeff Bezos keep buying launches from Elon Musk? - Ars* Beijing demands Chinese tech giants justify purchases of Nvidia's H20 chips - FT* An AI Replay of the Browser Wars, Bankrolled by Google - Bberg Opinion* Why Businesses Say Tariffs Have a Delayed Effect on Inflation - Richmond Fed* Lisa Su Runs AMD—and Is Out for Nvidia's Blood - Wired* Forget the White House Sideshow. Intel Must Decide What It Wants to Be. - WSJ* With Billions at Risk, Nvidia CEO Buys His Way Out of the Trade Battle - WSJ* Donald Trump's 100% tariff threat looms over chip sector despite relief for Apple - FT* Sam Altman challenges Elon Musk with plans for Neuralink rival - FT* Threads is nearing X's daily app users, new data shows - TechCrunch▶ Policy/Politics* Trump's China gamble - Axios* U.S. Government to Take Cut of Nvidia and AMD A.I. Chip Sales to China - NYT* A Guaranteed Annual Income Flop - WSJ Opinion* Big Tech's next major political battle may already be brewing in your backyard - Politico* Trump order gives political appointees vast powers over research grants - Nature* China has its own concerns about Nvidia H20 chips - FT* How the US Could Lose the AI Arms Race to China - Bberg Opinion* America's New AI Plan Is Great. There's Just One Problem. - Bberg Opinion* Trump, Seeking Friendlier Economic Data, Names New Statistics Chief - NYT* Trump's chief science adviser faces a storm of criticism: what's next? - Nature* Trump Is Squandering the Greatest Gift of the Manhattan Project - NYT Opinion▶ AI/Digital* Can OpenAI's GPT-5 model live up to sky-high expectations? - FT* Google, Schmoogle: When to Ditch Web Search for Deep Research - WSJ* AI Won't Kill Software. It Will Simply Give It New Life. - Barron's* Chatbot Conversations Never End. That's a Problem for Autistic People. - WSJ* Volunteers fight to keep ‘AI slop' off Wikipedia - Wapo* Trump's Tariffs Won't Solve U.S. Chip-Making Dilemma - WSJ* GenAI Misinformation, Trust, and News Consumption: Evidence from a Field Experiment - NBER* GPT-5s Are Alive: Basic Facts, Benchmarks and the Model Card - Don't Worry About the Vase* What you may have missed about GPT-5 - MIT* Why A.I. Should Make Parents Rethink Posting Photos of Their Children Online - NYT* 21 Ways People Are Using A.I. at Work - NYT* AI and Jobs: The Final Word (Until the Next One) - EIG* These workers don't fear artificial intelligence. They're getting degrees in it. - Wapo* AI Gossip - Arxiv* Meet the early-adopter judges using AI - MIT* The GPT-5 rollout has been a big mess - Ars* A Humanoid Social Robot as a Teaching Assistant in the Classroom - Arxiv* OpenAI Scrambles to Update GPT-5 After Users Revolt - Wired* Sam Altman and the whale - MIT* This is what happens when ChatGPT tries to write scripture - Vox* How AI could create the first one-person unicorn - Economist* AI Robs My Students of the Ability to Think - WSJ Opinion* Part I: Tricks or Traps? A Deep Dive into RL for LLM Reasoning - Arxiv▶ Biotech/Health* Scientists Are Finally Making Progress Against Alzheimer's - WSJ Opinion* The Dawn of a New Era in Alzheimer's and Parkinson's Treatment - RealClearScience* RFK Jr. shifts $500 million from mRNA research to 'safer' vaccines. Do the data back that up? - Reason* How Older People Are Reaping Brain Benefits From New Tech - NYT* Did Disease Defeat Napoleon? - SciAm* Scientists Discover a Viral Cause of One of The World's Most Common Cancers - ScienceAlert* ‘A tipping point': An update from the frontiers of Alzheimer's disease research - Yale News* A new measure of health is revolutionising how we think about ageing - NS* First proof brain's powerhouses drive – and can reverse – dementia symptoms - NA* The Problem Is With Men's Sperm - NYT Opinion▶ Clean Energy/Climate* The Whole World Is Switching to EVs Faster Than You - Bberg Opinion* Misperceptions About Air Pollution: Implications for Willingness to Pay and Environmental Inequality - NBER* Texas prepares for war as invasion of flesh-eating flies appears imminent - Ars* Data Center Energy Demand Will Double Over the Next Five Years - Apollo Academy* Why Did Air Conditioning Adoption Accelerate Faster Than Predicted? Evidence from Mexico - NBER* Microwaving rocks could help mining operations pull CO2 out of the air - NS* Ford's Model T Moment Isn't About the Car - Heatmap* Five countries account for 71% of the world's nuclear generation capacity - EIA* AI may need the power equivalent of 50 large nuclear plants - E&E▶ Space/Transportation* NASA plans to build a nuclear reactor on the Moon—a space lawyer explains why - Ars* Rocket Lab's Surprise Stock Move After Solid Earnings - Barron's▶ Up Wing/Down Wing* James Lovell, the steady astronaut who brought Apollo 13 home safely, has died - Ars* Vaccine Misinformation Is a Symptom of a Dangerous Breakdown - NYT Opinion* We're hardwired for negativity. That doesn't mean we're doomed to it. - Vox* To Study Viking Seafarers, He Took 26 Voyages in a Traditional Boat - NYT* End is near for the landline-based service that got America online in the '90s - Wapo▶ Substacks/Newsletters* Who will actually profit from the AI boom? - Noahpinion* OpenAI GPT-5 One Unified System - AI Supremacy* Proportional representation is the solution to gerrymandering - Slow Boring* Why I Stopped Being a Climate Catastrophist - The Ecomodernist* How Many Jobs Depend on Exports? - Conversable Economist* ChatGPT Classic - Joshua Gans' Newsletter* Is Air Travel Getting Worse? - Maximum Progress▶ Social Media* On AI Progress - @daniel_271828* On AI Usage - @emollick* On Generative AI and Student Learning - @jburnmurdoch Faster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

Join us for Pastor Rick's last sermon with The Neighborhood Church of Palos Verdes Estates. Pastor Rick stepped in following the retirement of Pastor David Young and lovingly walked with us through times of both celebration and sorrow. His steady and compassionate presence helped carry us through the passing of our beloved Minister, Michael Moorhead, the career transition of Lauren Hardin, the retirement of our long-time Director of Music, David Sateren, and more. Through each shift and season, Pastor Rick offered wisdom, warmth, and unwavering care. As we prepare to welcome a new chapter in the life of our church, we pause to honor the one who has shepherded us so well through transition. Pastor Rick has been more than a guide—he has been a source of comfort, encouragement, and grace. His leadership will leave a lasting imprint on our community, and his absence will be deeply felt. We send him off with our heartfelt thanks and our sincerest prayers—for healing, for rest, and for joy in life’s simple pleasures. May this next season bring him peace, renewal, and the same deep care he has so freely given to us.

Join us for Pastor Rick's last sermon with The Neighborhood Church of Palos Verdes Estates. Pastor Rick stepped in following the retirement of Pastor David Young and lovingly walked with us through times of both celebration and sorrow. His steady and compassionate presence helped carry us through the passing of our beloved Minister, Michael Moorhead, the career transition of Lauren Hardin, the retirement of our long-time Director of Music, David Sateren, and more. Through each shift and season, Pastor Rick offered wisdom, warmth, and unwavering care. As we prepare to welcome a new chapter in the life of our church, we pause to honor the one who has shepherded us so well through transition. Pastor Rick has been more than a guide—he has been a source of comfort, encouragement, and grace. His leadership will leave a lasting imprint on our community, and his absence will be deeply felt. We send him off with our heartfelt thanks and our sincerest prayers—for healing, for rest, and for joy in life’s simple pleasures. May this next season bring him peace, renewal, and the same deep care he has so freely given to us.

JBS Journalist Micah Halpern asks whether the world will ever thank Israel for protecting it from Iran and explains why he believes the answer is no—this and more on this episode of "Thinking Out Loud" on JBS.

Weather may be out of our hands, but climate isn't. Sheran James of The Sharin' Hour on KX FM explores.

Any bites, wastelanders? The most important update to ever hit Fallout 76 finally arrived and Eric is on hand to deep dive and give all his thoughts on Gone Fission!https://bsky.app/profile/tapesfromthewastes.bsky.socialWe are also still on Twitter, just maybe posting less now:Tapes Twitter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/TFTWpod⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠KDB on BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/kdb-innit.bsky.socialSuliore on BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/engold08.bsky.socialCheck out our other shows (also most on BlueSky now too)!Gears Intel (Gears of War) - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/Gears_Intel⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠The Gaming Aroma Podcast (general gaming talk)Starfield Sandwich - A Starfield fan podcast ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/StarSandPod⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Tamrielic Adventures - an Elder Scrolls ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/TamrielicP⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Super Nintenfo (Nintendo Podcast) ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/NintenfoP⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠First Aid Spray (Resident Evil) ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/FASprayPod⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

We are back the roundtable crew talks about the new fishing aspects of fallout 76 hope you enjoy! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Join Ryan and Gerald as they talk everything gaming in The Official Gamestitch Podcast. In this episode, “Episode 643: Fission Blues” the guys talk about a little of this, that, and much more. We want to hear from you, the Gamestitch community! Do you have a comment or question for us? Feel free to email... Read More

Fallout 76 just released their latest update Gone Fission and Stella got to talk to the Fallout 76 developers on the last five years of creating the game, maintaining fresh updates, and what we the players might expect in the upcoming 5 year anniversary update!

Grab your poles and wiggle your worms cuz we'z a-going Fission! Fallout 76 Update 21 and more.Join our Discord:https://discord.gg/cVSN65jJoin in the Roundtable Fun with our Character Generators!Fallout 76: https://tinyurl.com/F76GeneratorFallout 4: https://tinyurl.com/Fallout4GeneratorFallout New Vegas: https://tinyurl.com/NewVegasGeneratorFallout 3: https://tinyurl.com/F3GeneratorDONATE:  https://fightcf.cff.org/site/TR/?fr_id=7889&pg=team&team_id=90760Shop:  optimistic.threadless.com/Patreon:  https://www.patreon.com/asapodcastingEmail: thefalloutfeed@gmail.comWeb: http://www.asapodcasting.com/#/the-fallout-feed/Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheFalloutFeedFB: facebook.com/groups/askyrimaddictpodcastSupport the show

Welcome to Spitting Nonsense—where two self-proclaimed amateurs, Jasmine and Zach, chat about all things nerdy (and plenty that's not). None of this is fact, but it's definitely our brand of nonsense! We're still recording regularly—no promises on hitting exact days anymore—but you can always count on us for plenty of off-the-wall commentary. And now, you can leave comments on Spotify! Tell us what's on your mind; we see every comment and might even respond on the show. Thanks for listening, and enjoy the nonsense!

Join Ryan and Gerald as they talk everything gaming in The Official Gamestitch Podcast. In this episode, “Episode 640: Wands and Fission” the guys talk about a little of this, that, and much more. We want to hear from you, the Gamestitch community! Do you have a comment or question for us? Feel free to... Read More

Nuclear is having a moment, and Fissionary is back to break it all down! In Season 4, we're diving headfirst into the next era of nuclear.Hosts Mary Carpenter and Jordan Houghton return to explore the bold ideas, and brilliant minds shaping the future of clean energy. From deep space to data centers, nuclear's time is now- and trust us, you'll want a front-row seat.Visit us at www.nei.org/fissionary.Music used in this episode was created by Beat Mekanik

Liz Muller is the CEO and Co-founder of Deep Fission, a company pioneering a new approach to the traditional light-water nuclear reactor. Rather than using concrete and constructed containment, Deep Fission places the reactor one mile underground, fundamentally changing the design paradigm.Liz was on the show over five years ago when she was building a company focused on storing nuclear waste deep underground—a related concept. Now, she's back with a fresh vision and a new venture. Deep Fission recently raised a pre-seed round led by Eight VC, and we wanted to catch up with her to hear how the idea came together and how she's approaching the challenge this time around.In this episode, we cover: [1:37] Liz's previous venture: Deep Isolation and lessons learned[4:19] The origin story of Deep Fission and the core insight that sparked it[9:37] Cost comparison between underground and traditional above-ground nuclear reactors[12:17] Deep Fission's modular, scalable reactor design[19:10] Plans for maintenance, refueling, and long-term waste disposal[22:25] Regulatory engagement with the NRC and path to licensing[23:24] Initial commercial partnership with Endeavor Data Centers[25:07] Advantages of Deep Fission's approach vs. traditional nuclear plants[28:23] Funding milestones and capital raised to date[29:10] Liz's vision for the future of nuclear energy[35:03] Who Deep Fission wants to hear from—and how you can helpEpisode recorded on March 27, 2025 (Published on April 10, 2025) Enjoyed this episode? Please leave us a review! Share feedback or suggest future topics and guests at info@mcj.vc.Connect with MCJ:Cody Simms on LinkedInVisit mcj.vcSubscribe to the MCJ Newsletter*Editing and post-production work for this episode was provided by The Podcast Consultant

This week, Brian Appelbe, Research Fellow at the Centre for Inertial Fusion Studies (CIFS) at Imperial College London, who specializes in Inertial Confinement Fusion (ICF) and High Energy Density Physics, joins the podcast.Fusion energy aims to create a miniature sun on Earth, utilizing the same process that powers the sun, where tiny atoms fuse together to release a massive amount of clean energy. Recent breakthroughs in fusion include experiments achieving net energy gain and private developers pledging to have grid-connected fusion electricity generation units by the mid-2030s.Here are some questions Peter and Jackie asked Brian: What are the advantages of fusion energy? How does it differ from nuclear fission? Realistically, how long before fusion is a commercial reality delivering electrons to the grid? How has the entrance of private companies and almost $7 billion in total private investment changed the pace of innovation? Do you think fusion energy will eventually be low-cost, and if so, what are the potential new uses of this abundant and cheap form of electricity?Content referenced in this podcast:Dr. Arthur Turrell's book: “The Star Builders – Nuclear Fusion and the Race to Power the Planet”2024 report by the Fusion Industry AssociationPlease review our disclaimer at: https://www.arcenergyinstitute.com/disclaimer/ Check us out on social media: X (Twitter): @arcenergyinstLinkedIn: @ARC Energy Research Institute Subscribe to ARC Energy Ideas PodcastApple PodcastsAmazon MusicSpotify 

Virginie Girod raconte le parcours de la physicienne Lise Meitner (1878-1968) et son rôle dans la découverte de la fission nucléaire. Née en Autriche, Lise Meitner rejoint l'Allemagne au début du XXe siècle. Elle forme alors un duo professionnel avec le chimiste Otto Hahn. Ensemble, ils étudient la radioactivité et font une découverte qui va changer le cours de l'Histoire : la fission nucléaire. En 1944 pourtant, seul Otto Hahn recevra le prix Nobel. Distribué par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

The future of clean energy is here, and it's nuclear. Welcome to Fissionary, your guide to the innovations, stories, and amazing possibilities of nuclear.Season 4 coming soon! Visit us at https://www.nei.org/news/fissionary

Hello, I'm Brett and I'll be your host for these amazing Old Time Radio Shows :) Dangerous Assignment was a thrilling NBC radio drama that captivated audiences from 1949 to 1953, starring the dynamic Brian Donlevy as the fearless U.S. special agent Steve Mitchell. It was broadcast across a range of media, including a syndicated TV series in 1951–52, and even inspired a reimagined Australian radio version from 1954 to 1956. Both the radio and TV series kept viewers on the edge of their seats with fast-paced plots filled with espionage, deception, and international intrigue. Series Premise: Each episode followed Steve Mitchell, an American agent dispatched by "The Commissioner," the enigmatic head of an unnamed U.S. State Department division. Steve's mission: to travel to exotic locations around the world to foil nefarious plots and uncover dangerous secrets. The show was designed to keep listeners in suspense, opening with a tantalizing scene before the action unfolded. Mitchell, posing as a suave foreign correspondent for an unspecified publication, navigated a maze of lies, betrayal, and violence—always emerging victorious by the end of the episode. Origins and Evolution: Dangerous Assignment was originally conceived as a summer replacement series for NBC in 1949. It quickly gained popularity, and its success led to a full radio series running until 1953. Brian Donlevy, who also narrated the show, brought an intense realism to his portrayal of Steve Mitchell, which contributed to the show's gripping atmosphere. The only other consistent voice on the radio version was Herb Butterfield, who played "The Commissioner." Guest stars included famous actors like Raymond Burr, William Conrad, and Richard Boone, each lending their talents to create a unique cast of characters across the episodes. After the American radio series concluded, Dangerous Assignment continued its journey abroad with a 1954 Australian radio adaptation. This version used remade American scripts and introduced Lloyd Burrell as Steve Mitchell, broadcasting a total of 39 episodes. The 1949 Summer Series: Dangerous Assignment first aired as a seven-week summer series in the summer of 1949, running on Saturdays from 8:30 to 9:00 PM EST. The character of Ruthie, the Commissioner's secretary, was played by Betty Moran, hinting at a possible romantic backstory with Steve Mitchell. The show's first episodes took listeners on adventures to locations like Messina, Sicily, Saigon, and Paris, where Steve investigated everything from stolen relief supplies to millionaire murder conspiracies. The 1950–1953 Radio Run: The show's popularity ensured its return to the airwaves in February 1950, although it faced some scheduling challenges. Over the next few years, Dangerous Assignment moved through various time slots, ultimately running for over 160 episodes. The radio series also attracted major sponsors, including Ford Motor Company, Wheaties, and Anacin, though it was largely supported by NBC itself. The episodes became more formulaic, often starting with Steve Mitchell being assigned a mission—usually involving espionage, sabotage, or international political conflict—followed by thrilling encounters with dangerous enemies. Syndicated Television Version (1951–1952): In 1951, Donlevy adapted the series into a syndicated television show. Rather than relying on a traditional TV network, Donlevy self-financed the production of 39 episodes, selling them individually to local stations across the country. This approach, aided by NBC's distribution assistance, allowed the show to reach a wide audience despite limited network support. Each episode remained faithful to the original radio scripts, with Donlevy reprising his role as Steve Mitchell and Herb Butterfield again playing "The Commissioner." Production Team and Legacy: The television version of Dangerous Assignment employed a talented team behind the scenes, including assistant director William McGarry, production designer George Van Marter, and film editor Edward Schroeder, A.C.E. The show's episodes were often fast-paced, with each story revolving around Mitchell's covert operations in places as diverse as Paris, Berlin, and the African jungle. Among the famous guest stars featured in the TV series were Hugh Beaumont, Paul Frees, and Michael Ansara, who appeared as a variety of different characters throughout the series. Notable episodes included titles like "The Alien Smuggler Story" and "The Atomic Mine Story," where Steve Mitchell faced off against spies, criminals, and saboteurs in a constant battle to protect U.S. interests overseas. The Man Behind the Character: Brian Donlevy: Brian Donlevy, born in Cleveland, Ohio, on February 9, 1901, was known for his tough, no-nonsense persona, both on screen and on the airwaves. With a career that spanned film, radio, and television, Donlevy brought a unique depth to his portrayal of Steve Mitchell. He was a familiar face in 1940s Hollywood, starring in classic films like Beau Geste (1939) and Wake Island (1942), and even earned an Academy Award nomination for his role in Beau Geste. In addition to his success in film, Donlevy was a major figure in the development of Dangerous Assignment, both as the star and as a key producer for the television adaptation. His tough-guy image made him a natural fit for the role of the action-packed American agent, and he remained a popular figure in postwar television, contributing to numerous anthology series like Kraft Theatre and Lux Video Theatre. Conclusion: Dangerous Assignment remains a notable chapter in both radio and television history. The series was a standout example of 1940s and 1950s action-adventure storytelling, blending espionage, drama, and international intrigue. Thanks to Brian Donlevy's magnetic performance, Dangerous Assignment continues to be remembered as a thrilling and influential series that helped set the stage for future espionage-themed shows and films.

Ever feel like the world is one big social media feud? Jesus didn’t come to take sides—He came to make peace, and science backs Him up. You weren’t just saved FROM something—you were saved FOR something.”

Welcome to Season 6!We're here for the Second Doctor's final season (which feels WILD to say), and our final season in black and white!On this episode, pop your armadillo suits on - and let's meet The Dominators!We do the Quark Dance, there's an excellent fashion discussion, and who the HELL is that sexy, sexy man?Get ready for some bizarre adventures in the Land of Fiction - we're back next week with The Mind Robber!You can get in touch via @whowatchpodcast, or send us some love via email - thewhowatchpodcast@gmail.com.You can also tip The Who Watch Podcast via Ko-Fi, if you'd like!Find socials, the Song Of The Story playlists, and other fun things here, including our occasional chats to the press, because we're proper famous, like.Music by Haydn WynnArtwork by Reece ConnollyPhotos from The Black ArchiveAll clips belong to their respective copyright holders and are used purely for parody purposes Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

I read from fish-eye to fission.     Me testing out my super fish-eye lens for my phone which I don't think I ever used again. What a great use of my money! https://youtu.be/3au6jUzhctE     Here are some tips about what to do when your car fishtails. https://www.firestonecompleteautocare.com/blog/driving/how-to-stay-safe-when-your-car-fishtails/     I misspoke about the original “The Invisible Man” (1933). Not sure if I've ever seen it but it looks like he “becomes murderously insane”. So yeah, he's probably the bad guy. But the way he becomes the bad guy is different in the new version.     The word of the episode is "fish-eye".     Use my special link https://zen.ai/thedictionary to save 30% off your first month of any Zencastr paid plan.    Create your podcast today! #madeonzencastr     Theme music from Tom Maslowski https://zestysol.com/     Merchandising! https://www.teepublic.com/user/spejampar     "The Dictionary - Letter A" on YouTube   "The Dictionary - Letter B" on YouTube   "The Dictionary - Letter C" on YouTube   "The Dictionary - Letter D" on YouTube   "The Dictionary - Letter E" on YouTube   "The Dictionary - Letter F" on YouTube     Featured in a Top 10 Dictionary Podcasts list! https://blog.feedspot.com/dictionary_podcasts/     Backwards Talking on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLmIujMwEDbgZUexyR90jaTEEVmAYcCzuq     https://linktr.ee/spejampar dictionarypod@gmail.com https://www.facebook.com/thedictionarypod/ https://www.threads.net/@dictionarypod https://twitter.com/dictionarypod https://www.instagram.com/dictionarypod/ https://www.patreon.com/spejampar https://www.tiktok.com/@spejampar 917-727-5757

Interview with Chris Frostad, President & CEO of Purepoint UraniumOur previous interview: https://www.cruxinvestor.com/posts/purepoint-uranium-tsxvptu-isoenergy-partnership-unlocks-district-potential-in-athabasca-basin-6109Recording date: 21st February 2025Purepoint Uranium Group (TSXV:PTU) is employing a distinctive joint venture strategy to explore for uranium in Saskatchewan's Athabasca Basin. The company has partnered with major industry players including Cameco, Orano, and IsoEnergy, allowing it to conduct extensive exploration while minimizing shareholder dilution.The company's flagship project, Hook Lake, where Purepoint maintains a 21% stake alongside Cameco and Orano, has seen over $15 million in exploration investment. The property is strategically located on trend with significant uranium discoveries, including NexGen's Arrow deposit and Fission's Triple R. The 2025 program at Hook Lake will focus on the Patterson Corridor and newly identified conductor trends that may host a second major deposit.Purepoint's joint venture model offers unique financial advantages. For every million dollars spent on exploration at Hook Lake, Purepoint contributes $210,000 but receives back $100,000 in management fees for operating the project. This structure allows the company to conduct exploration at the scale of a much larger organization while maintaining financial efficiency.A recent development is Purepoint's joint venture with IsoEnergy, covering a 98,000-hectare land package in the Athabasca Basin. The flagship Dorado project, which extends along the trend of IsoEnergy's Hurricane deposit, has secured a $5 million exploration budget for 2025.CEO Chris Frostad maintains a bullish outlook on uranium markets, despite recent price volatility. While spot prices experienced a speculative surge to over $100/lb in 2023 before correcting, Frostad believes the market is only "halfway through this bull market," noting that the industry has been operating with a supply deficit for six years.The long-term fundamentals for uranium appear strong, with global demand exceeding primary mine supply for nearly a decade. Current mine supply covers only about 80% of reactor requirements, with the gap being filled by secondary supplies and inventories. This deficit is expected to become more acute as secondary supplies diminish and utility demand increases with the growth of nuclear power globally.Looking ahead, Purepoint is positioned to capitalize on rising uranium prices through its portfolio of exploration projects. The company's joint venture approach provides multiple opportunities for discovery while maintaining financial discipline. With several drill programs planned for 2025 and strong partnerships in place, Purepoint offers investors exposure to uranium exploration in one of the world's premier mining jurisdictions.View Purepoint Uranium's company profile: https://www.cruxinvestor.com/companies/purepoint-uranium-group-incSign up for Crux Investor: https://cruxinvestor.com

Lise Meitner was the most important female physicist of the 20th century. She made fundamental discoveries on the atom, including, most famously, being the first to discover the idea of fission. This she did as she puzzled over experimental results generated by her colleague Otto Hahn. Hahn, but not Meitner, received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for this monumental discovery. More generally, Meitner overcame profound obstacles facing women in science to become a central figure in physics during its heyday as she worked with the likes of Niels Bohr and Albert Einstein to understand the atom, and hence the universe. With us to discuss the life and legacy of Lise Meitner is Marissa Moss. Marissa is the award-winning author and illustrator of over 70 books for children and young adults, including the book we discuss today, The Woman Who Split the Atom: The Life of Lise Meitner.

Dave writes in wanting to know whether there is any way to get nuclear energy onto the grid without heating up water to turn a steam turbine. A great question that sees James Tytko dip his toe into the uranium heated waters of nuclear engineering... Like this podcast? Please help us by supporting the Naked Scientists

Nuclear propulsion has been on NASA's radar for more than 60 years, but new advances could soon change the way we explore the solar system.

Tune in this week as we discuss how to safely store nuclear material? Why don't we just shoot it into space? Where do we store all our dangerous material? And what is to stop future generations from finding it. Introducing the WHIP and our human instince to go deeper. Thanks for listening and remember to like, rate, review, and email us at: cultscryptidsconspiracies@gmail.com or tweet us at @C3Podcast. We have some of our sources for research here: http://tinyurl.com/CristinaSourcesAlso check out our Patreon: www.patreon.com/cultscryptidsconspiracies. Thank you to T.J. Shirley for our theme.

Ever thought nuclear energy and abstract art could be connected? In this episode, we sit down with Angel “Ralph” Rafael Vázquez-Concepción, an artist, educator, and advocate who blends nuclear technology with the beauty of abstraction. From uranium glass to abstract expressionism, Ralph explores the atomic world through a creative lens, using art to challenge our views on nuclear power. We dive into his story, his vibrant creations, and how he uses art to spark conversation about energy, climate change, and humanity's future. From education to activism, Ralph's work challenges us to rethink our approach to science, technology, and the future of energy.Angel “Ralph” Rafael Vázquez-Concepción: Website | Ralph's Uranium CollectionVisit us at www.nei.org/fissionary.Music used in this episode was created by Beat Mekanik

This week, our guest is Chris Levesque, President and CEO of TerraPower. Founded by Bill Gates, TerraPower is advancing fourth-generation nuclear reactor technology in the United States, using a Natrium reactor and molten salt. The company recently made the 2024 Fortune "Change the World" list.Here are some of the questions Jackie and Peter asked Chris Levesque: What is a fourth-generation nuclear reactor, and how does it differ from the operating reactors in North America regarding safety, cost, and waste? Is the United States ahead of other countries in developing these fourth-generation nuclear reactors? What are the strategic benefits for the United States in developing this technology? How is this technology compatible with wind and solar electricity generation? What is the timeline for the regulatory and permitting process for the first facility? When do you expect to start up your first power plant in Wyoming? Does the uranium need to be enriched, and how will the waste be stored? Please review our disclaimer at: https://www.arcenergyinstitute.com/disclaimer/  Check us out on social media: X (Twitter): @arcenergyinstLinkedIn: @ARC Energy Research Institute Subscribe to ARC Energy Ideas PodcastApple PodcastsAmazon MusicSpotify 

Rhino poaching remains a critical issue, threatening the survival of their species while fueling illegal trade networks. Luckily, there is hope for these creatures as new anti-poaching methods like the Rhisotope Project emerge.In this episode, James Larkin, the director of the radiation and health physics unit at the University of the Witwatersrand and the founder of The Rhisotope Project, shares how one conversation led him to develop an innovative method to fight back. He explains the global implications of rhino poaching, the criminal syndicates behind it, and how his project aims to protect the species using radiation.James Larkin: The Rhisotope ProjectVisit us at www.nei.org/fissionary.Music used in this episode was created by Beat Mekanik

For years, the Government Accountability Office has called out the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for its policy on so-called dirty bombs. Radiological threats from terrorists who obtain fission material. Auditors say NRC policy doesn't take into account all of the potential consequences of dirty bombs. Details now from the G-A-O's director of natural resources and environment, Allison Bawden.https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-107014 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

For years, the Government Accountability Office has called out the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for its policy on so-called dirty bombs. Radiological threats from terrorists who obtain fission material. Auditors say NRC policy doesn't take into account all of the potential consequences of dirty bombs. Details now from the G-A-O's director of natural resources and environment, Allison Bawden. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-107014 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Vocalist & guitarist, Jack Underkofler, of alt rock band, Dead Poet Society, joins us on this episode of The Adamantium Podcast. We discuss their impressive sophomore album, Fission, and our favourite singles “My Condition” and “HURT.” We also talk about his true feelings about his time at Berklee College of Music, debuting in the Mexican music scene, and our mutual love for Alter Bridge.

Welcome back to Fissionary! A podcast dedicated to exploring the potential of nuclear energy in addressing the climate crisis and securing our energy future. As our podcast continues to grow, we're diving even deeper into how nuclear technology is being used to heal, power, and save our planet.Season 3 launches on October 10, 2024! Make sure to subscribe so you don't miss out.Sign up for our Newsletter: https://www.nei.org/news/fissionary

This week on Pathfinder, we sit down with Lindsay Kaldon, NASA's Fission Surface Power Project Manager, to explore NASA's plans for deploying small nuclear reactors on the Moon and Mars as part of the Artemis missions. Before her current role at NASA, Lindsay spent over a decade in the DoD, where she worked as an Air Force officer specializing in electronic warfare, keeping pilots safe at extreme altitudes. With a background in both electrical and nuclear engineering, Lindsay's experience spans high-altitude spy planes, drones, and EMP defenses for Navy ships, giving her a unique perspective on technology in extreme environments.In this episode, Lindsay walks us through NASA's efforts to deploy small nuclear reactors on the Moon as part of the Artemis missions and beyond. She also explains how her defense background prepared her for managing the technical and regulatory complexities of space nuclear power.In addition, we cover:The history of nuclear systems in space, from SNAP-10 to today's advancementsNASA's collaboration with industry partnersThe role of nuclear power in supporting long-term lunar and Martian missionsThe technical challenges of fission in spaceThe potential future of nuclear propulsion and energy solutions for space explorationAnd much more… • Chapters •00:00 - Intro00:28 - Lindsay's role at NASA01:07 - Power reactors in space08:05 - Highly enriched uranium11:56 - Importance of NASA's long-term nuclear goals15:28 - RPS vs FSP18:20 - Lindsay's background25:50 - Nuclear subs?31:30 - How does the team evolve in the next 5 years?39:36 - Overall architecture of NASA's FSP needs42:19 - Supply chain problems46:32 - Technical challenges of nuclear in space52:36 - Who regulates space nuclear?54:31 - DoD & NASA59:54 - Milestones to monitor02:42 - The state of nuclear on Earth • Show notes •NASA FSP website — https://www.nasa.gov/tdm/fission-surface-power/Mo's socials — https://twitter.com/itsmoislamPayload's socials — https://twitter.com/payloadspace / https://www.linkedin.com/company/payloadspacePathfinder archive — Watch: https://www.youtube.com/@payloadspacePathfinder archive — Listen: https://pod.payloadspace.com/episodes • About us •Pathfinder is brought to you by Payload, a modern space media brand built from the ground up for a new age of space exploration and commercialization. We deliver need-to-know news and insights daily to 19,000+ commercial, civil, and military space leaders. Payload is read by decision-makers at every leading new space company, along with c-suite leaders at all of the aerospace & defense primes. We're also read on Capitol Hill, in the Pentagon, and at space agencies around the world.Payload began as a weekly email sent to a few friends and coworkers. Today, we're a team distributed across four time zones and two continents, publishing five media properties across multiple platforms:1) Payload, our flagship daily newsletter, sends M-F @ 9am Eastern2) Pathfinder publishes weekly on Tuesday mornings (pod.payloadspace.com)3) Polaris, our weekly policy briefing, publishes weekly on Tuesdays4) Payload Research, our weekly research and analysis piece,  comes out on WednesdaysYou can sign up for all of our publications here: https://payloadspace.com/subscribe/

Commander Desmond Walker (USS Stout) checked into the pod for a conversation that we'd been waiting to have. In honor of Suicide Prevention Month, they touch on the importance of mental health awareness, going into a very stressful holiday season. They also discuss the disconnect between some Navy policies and their implementation at the command level. Commander Walker discusses his personal experience of joining the Navy and whether his upbringing in Mississippi had an impact on his outlook as an African American Sailor. Damo asks him about any experiences with racism in Mississippi. He discusses his enlisted life, including his deployments and the challenges of being separated from his wife. Cdr. Walker also talks about his transition to becoming an officer and the importance of mentorship and teamwork. He highlights his various assignments and leadership roles, emphasizing the need for empathy and open communication within the command structure. CDR Walker details his leadership philosophy. Damo opens up a discussion on the “us versus them” mentality and the importance of seeing leaders as part of the team. What are the biggest differences between an XO tour and a CO tour? They also touch on the importance of using social media to celebrate and engage with sailors, as well as the different standards of accountability for khaki and junior enlisted personnel. Damo highlights his appreciation for the growth of the podcast's audience. Are Khaki and junior enlisted Sailors held to different standards when it comes to corrective actions for disciplinary issues? The pod has a convo about the need for leaders to make timely decisions, have difficult conversations, and take appropriate action to maintain discipline and uphold standards. CDR Walker details what a “loss of confidence” means for a Commanding Officer. They also touch on the importance of diversity and inclusion in the Navy and the challenges faced by African-American officers. Cdr. Walker reflects on a mentor who inspired him in his early as an enlisted Sailor. Cdr. Walker honors the hard work of his crew on the USS Stout. He emphasizes the need for transparency, communication, and mentorship in creating a positive and inclusive culture. As a CO, how does he prepare his crew and family for deployment? Cdr. Walker reflects on the mentors and leaders who have influenced his career, from his early days in the Navy to his current command. He highlights the importance of investing in others and the impact that strong leadership can have on personal and professional growth. He emphasizes the need for leaders to see and appreciate the individuality of their team members and to assess their performance based on a known metric. Cdr. Walker concludes by sharing his motivation to continue serving in the Navy and the responsibility he feels to be an example and representation for others. Remember to follow the ‘Permission to Speak Freely' podcast on TikTok, Facebook, Discord, Instagram, and Twitter, and subscribe on YouTube.   To have your “Do Better” reviewed on a future episode please contact us at ptsfpodcast@gmail.com.     Keep up with the ‘Permission to Speak Freely' podcast on our social media and YouTube - https://linktr.ee/Ptsfpodcast   Cdr. Walker's Book Recommendations: The Right to Lead (John C. Maxwell) - https://lifeandleadership.com/book-summaries/maxwell-the-right-to-lead/ Black Officer, White Navy (Reuben Keith Green) - https://www.kentuckypress.com/9781985900295/black-officer-white-navy/ It Worked For Me (Colin Powell) - https://www.harpercollins.com/products/it-worked-for-me-colin-powell?variant=32129897431074       Suicide Prevention Month Resources: The following resources are available 24/7 for mental, physical, emotional, and spiritual support:   - National Suicide Hotline: Dial 988   - Veterans/Military Crisis Line: Dial 988 (press 1) or Text 838255   - Psychological Health Outreach Program (PHOP): 1-866-578-PHOP (7467)    - Military OneSource: 800-342-9647 / [www.militaryonesource.mil](https://www.militaryonesource.mil)   - Vet Centers: 877-WAR-VETS (877-927-8387) / [www.vetcenter.va.gov](https://www.vetcenter.va.gov)   - DON Civilian Employee Assistance Program (DONCEAP): 844-DONCEAP (1-844-366-2327) / [www.magellanascend.com](https://www.magellanascend.com)   - Local Resources: Fleet and Family Support Centers, Marine and Family Services, Military Family Life Counselors, chaplains, and your leadership       Additional Credits: PTSF “Theme Music” - Produced by Lim0

Space nuclear propulsion is a technology that draws energy from fission instead of traditional chemical reactions, providing a virtually unlimited energy source.

Can nuclear fusion become the ultimate renewable energy source? Neil deGrasse Tyson and co-host Chuck Nice answer fan questions about transporters, the smallest unit of time, expansion, and other ideas that push the boundaries of our understanding of the universe.NOTE: StarTalk+ Patrons can listen to this entire episode commercial-free.Thanks to our Patrons Day53, May Jo Williams, Tisha Bernal, Jeff Holcombe, Lorenzo & Elisabetta, C Hahn, Charles Maluf, Paul Levine, Crystal Barnes, and Peter Brush for supporting us this week.

For Fissionary's season 2 finale, Mary and Jordan speak with some nuclear power players!  We're joined again by Dr. J'Tia Hart, along with Kaylee Cunningham (Ms. Nuclear Energy) and Ryan Pickering who are working hard to advocate for a cleaner world powered by nuclear. They discuss the current state of the nuclear industry, the challenges they face when educating others on nuclear, and where they hope to see the world in 2050.  J'Tia Hart: Website | YouTube | LinkedIn Kaylee Cunningham: Website | TikTok | LinkedIn Ryan Pickering X (Twitter) | LinkedIn Visit us at www.nei.org/fissionary. Music used in this episode was created by Beat Mekanik

✈ A quick note: I will be traveling through the middle of the month and will be posting a bit less than usual and perhaps a bit shorter than usual.After decades of resistance to nuclear power, growing concern over climate change, rising electricity needs, and a desire for greater energy independence are spurring renewed public interest in a future powered by atomic fission (perhaps fusion, too). Today on Faster, Please! — The Podcast, I talk to Dr. Mike Goff about the state of US nuclear power, the developing advancements in nuclear technology, and what it will take to reach our vast potential.Goff is the acting assistant secretary and the principal deputy assistant secretary for the Department of Energy's Office of Nuclear Energy. He previously spent over 30 years at Idaho National Laboratory, including a major advisory and management role. He has written over 70 publications on the nuclear fuel cycle.In This Episode* Atomic Age 2.0 (1:31)* Major concerns (7:37)* Out of practice (11:04)* Next-generation policy (17:38)* Human capital (21:48)* Fusion forecast (23:12)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversationAtomic Age 2.0 (1:31)The Energy Secretary recently spoke about adding a lot more nuclear capacity, tripling it, I think, by 2050 or so. And before we get into whether that's possible, I wanted to ask you: As you understand it, what is the current consensus explanation for why the Nuclear and Atomic Age of the '50s and '60s, why that kind of ended? Because when the secretary spoke about building more capacity, I thought about the — and this is something maybe a lot of people are unaware of, that President Nixon had a plan to build a lot of more nuclear reactors in this country back in the '70s during the oil crisis; that didn't happen, and we all know about Three Mile Island. But is there a consensus as to why Atomic Age 1.0 came to an end? Obviously we still get a lot of energy from nuclear, but not what people had imagined 40 years ago.There are a variety of reasons. We did build a lot at one point, and we were building 10 plants a year, pretty extensive builds out there. We did then have Three Mile Island in the late '70s, and then we got costs started going up, and schedules started increasing on the builds, and we ended up not having a lot of energy growth, in fact, we went for a long period where we weren't having a lot of energy growth, and we had a lot of other energy sources, natural gas, coal, and all. We had a lot of other energy sources out there as well. So yeah, we became pretty stagnated around 20 percent of the electricity. But now, like you say, yeah, there's been a big change in what we think the needs are for nuclear going forward, for a variety of reasons.My background is journalism, and as a journalist I've written, I know, multiple stories in my life about a Nuclear Renaissance. So I'm wondering why this time looks to be different. You suggested in your previous answer that there might be some reasons. What are those reasons that we may be entering a new age where we will see an expansion in the nuclear sector?I do think we will see that expansion, and, in fact, I think we have to see that expansion, and it's because of a lot of the positive attributes of nuclear right now. Obviously there's a lot of focus on trying to get more clean energy out there, and nuclear is a large base load source of clean energy. And it's not just CO2 emission, but it doesn't emit particulates and all, as well, so it's good air, good quality of life. So it has those key attributes. But there are other clean energy sources as well: renewables, hydro, and all that. But I think the recognition that, if you are going to go toward decarbonization, you need still base load electricity too. You need base load electricity to help intermittent sources like renewables to be able to expand more as well. So nuclear is very good at enabling decarbonization, not just by adding clean electricity to the grid, but enabling you to expand out other renewables like wind and solar and all, as well.Additionally, nuclear is very reliable. Of the energy sources, it has the highest capacity factor of any of the energy sources. In the United States, we run 93 percent of the time, so the existing fleet that we have out there of 94 plants, they're producing a 100 percent of the power 93 percent of the time, which dwarfs what any other energy source does out there as well.Nuclear is safe. At times people are concerned about safety, but, in reality, it's actually one of the safest energy sources out there and continues to demonstrate that.It's resilient for different weather-related events. It can still produce electricity out there as well. It also has a lot of energy security. And as we've learned, unfortunately, from Russia's unprovoked and unjustified invasion of Ukraine, we recognize energy security is national security, so nuclear really does help us on that national security front. It provides an energy source that we can largely on-source from us and our allies. We've got assured fuel supplies, and provides that long-term power. You can put fuel in it and it can last for two years or so.And I guess one other thing I'll add out there as well, is it's a job creator. Of the different energy sources, the amount of jobs associated with nuclear are some of the highest on the amount of electricity produced. And when you actually start building nuclear, like we saw in Vogtle in Georgia where they were building the two plants, it creates huge amounts of jobs. In fact, I heard a stat recently that 35,000 union workers were trained as part of the construction of the Vogtle power plant, so it's a good job creator in all, as well. And again, the power density is great, it doesn't take up a lot of space, and with the advanced technologies that we've developed in the United States, you've continued to increase in the safety, you can have plants of a variety of different sizes that can be easily deployed to, say, retiring coal plants. It just has a lot of flexibility that it hasn't had in the past, but also it's that key recognition of its clean energy attributes, but its energy security attributes as well.Major concerns (7:37)I did not major in nuclear science, I majored in history and political science, but I remember I took a class as an undergraduate at Northwestern University on the nuclear fuel cycle, and I remember to this day that my professor — of course, this was obviously a while ago, and I think what most of the students knew about nuclear energy was probably Three Mile Island — and I remember to this day distinctly the professor saying, “If they wanted to build a nuclear reactor in my backyard, I would be totally fine with it.” He had zero fear on the safety issue. Now when you give that rap that you just gave me about the wonders of nuclear energy before regular people, what is their response? Do they worry about the nuclear waste? Do they worry about safety? Are they immediately sold, or what are the concerns that typically get raised to you?You brought them up. I mean, safety is brought up because you do see these high profile accidents like Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima, which were accidents. They weren't good things that you want to have happen, but the industry's also a very learning industry. The improvements that come out of those events have just made the industry even safer and safer. And again, it's still safer than most any other electricity-producing industry out there as well.Waste does get brought up. We have not implemented a final disposal solution for the spent fuel from our reactors, but we have safely stored and managed the spent fuel over the last six decades, and the amount of fuel that's generated, I think the stat that gets tossed around, you could fit it all in a Walmart parking lot. This is not a lot of material because it's a high energy-density fuel. It's not a lot of material, and again, we safely manage that and store that. We have countries now that are moving forward with geological repositories, which we need to be doing in the United States. In fact, just last week, I went and visited the repository that hopefully will be operating next year in Finland for disposing of their spent fuel. We can do that, it's not a technical issue, so we can safely manage the spent fuel.The other issue that always comes up is still cost. We do have to demonstrate now that we can build these plants safely, and efficiently, and at a reasonable cost. On the Vogtle plant there were cost overruns and schedule overruns, but between Vogtle Unit 3 and Unit 4, there was about a 30 percent reduction in costs between those plants, so we are starting to get to where we can be deploying nth-of-a-kind cost plants out there as well. And hopefully with some of the small modular reactor designs and all that are going to rely more on modular construction, we can even get to nth-of-a-kind cost even quicker. It still takes some pushing and understanding to make sure that people do understand the advancements that have been made on nuclear technology, that it's not our parents' nuclear technology, there's a new round of technology out there.Out of practice (11:04)You raised two good points there. The cost issue, and that's a great stat about the Vogtle plant and the reduction between the two reactors. Is it your sense that the fact that we haven't been consistently building reactors and learning from the previous build, and having trained people who've worked on multiple reactors, that each one has become like this bespoke mega project? It's my sense, and it seems logical, at least to me, that that has been a cost driver, that we haven't been able to churn these out like 10 a year, every year, decade after decade, because clearly, if that was the case, I don't see how we don't learn how to build them better, faster, and more efficiently. But that's not what we've been doing, obviously.That's right. It's not. Even when I say with Vogtle, you had to stand back up the whole supply chain, you had to retrain the workforce, so there was a lot of learning in that process, even though, too, we did recognize on that plant you need to have designs very well finalized and standardized as well. One of the problems we realized from the buildout of the 90-something plants that we have now is no two plants were ever that similar. Everyone wanted to make a tweak in their plant, so we never got to where we had standardized designs. So I think now that we're getting that trained workforce, getting the supply chain up there, and our vendors are really saying, “We're doing standardized plants. If someone else wants to make a tweak on this plant, they have to go somewhere else,” that people are going to go with standardized designs so we can really replicate these and get that cost benefit from it. The challenges that you brought up, we have to overcome, and I think we're set up now to be able to overcome that. I appreciate all the effort that went into building Units 3 and 4 at Vogtle. We've got enough benefit from that learning there and hopefully build very soon here.There's a world where we have tripled our nuclear generating capacity, as Secretary Granholm said. Can that be a world where we get all our nuclear power from light water nuclear reactors, or must there be different kinds of reactors? You mentioned the small modular reactors, and I've interviewed startups doing microreactors, I don't know, maybe they'll be used to power data centers, but can that world of greatly increased nuclear generation, even with improvements in light water reactors, must there be different kinds of reactors?I wouldn't say “must.” I think there will be. I think we will have that variability. I think we will still have large plants being built. I think maybe five years ago you wouldn't hear that people were talking about building gigawatt-sizes plants again. I think we'll have the gigawatt-size plants, we'll have the small modular reactors that are water-cooled, but I think we will get some of those advanced reactors out there: the Generation IV reactors, the sodium-cooled fast reactors that have the capacity to be able to burn waste better and also increase the sustainability of the amount of fuel they use. I think you'll also have the high-temperature gas reactors that are helium-cooled, that use TRISO fuel. You'll have those because we need to not only decarbonize the electricity sector, we've got to decarbonize the industrial sector. That's much more challenging, and the high temperatures that can be provided from those reactors will help us in that decarbonization process. So I think we will have a mixture out there. There are cases where the Gen IV systems are going to be better than the gigawatt-sized plants for the needs that are out there, but large power plants are going to be needed as well. Especially, like you say, you bring up the data centers, the amount of growth that we're hearing for electricity right now, I think again, we'll see gigawatt-sized plants will be needed to be able to meet that growth.Yeah, I tell you, nothing frustrates me more than reading about what AI could perhaps do for our economy and then having people say, “Well, but we know we can't do it because we can't supply the power” or “We can't supply enough clean power,” I mean, well then it'd be sure great to have more nuclear energy. And I wonder, as you sort of tick off some of the potential advances and new kinds of reactors, maybe I look backward too much, but I can't help but wonder what nuclear reactors would be like today, where we would be today, maybe we would already have fusion reactors had we proceeded with this kind of momentum every decade since 1980. It drives me crazy, and you're a nuclear engineer, that must drive you crazy.It does, I've been doing this . . . my first job in the nuclear industry was almost 40 years ago when I was still in college, and there have definitely been ups and downs in funding. In fact, there were some periods where there was almost zero research and development dollars spent in the government on nuclear energy. Luckily, though, the thing that we have is, under the four presidential administrations, there's been a real steady climb in the recognition of the importance of nuclear, and the funding to support it. So I'm happy that we have had this period that goes back to the early 2000s that's been really steady growth in recognition of nuclear. If we would've not had some of those laws in the late '80s and '90s, yeah, we could probably be further ahead, especially on some of the advanced technologies. Because yes, some of those advanced technologies started on research that was back in the '50s, '60s and '70s: the sodium-cooled fast reactor, the molten salt reactor, all of those were based on R&D that we did back in the early days, as well.Next-generation policy (17:38)Which leads me to this question: You work for the government. I work for a public policy think tank, so of course I'm going to think about: Given where we are today, what government needs to do going forward, both on the R&D front and on the regulatory front, are we doing enough basic research for whatever the next, or the next next generation of nuclear is, and do we now have the kind regulatory framework we need for that next generation of reactors?I'll go to the research one first—and I should note, my background is, I'm an R&D person, I came out of the national labs, so of course we always need more research and development. But that said, we have been blessed by funding from Congress and the administration that there's a significant amount of money for research and development in the United States. And I'll say that's good, because the one thing I will note, I do believe innovation in the US, as far as the nuclear technology, we are the best. The technologies that we're developing and our vendors are deploying it, really, it is the cutting edge technology, so it's good we have that R&D, and it's important, as you know, we need to continue to have it to move forward on that next generation of technologies and continue to make improvements on the technologies out there. So I think we have a good research base.There's some infrastructure that we still need if we start deploying, say, when we mentioned that sodium-cooled fast reactor, we don't have a testing capability for that type of system. We shut down our last testing system on a fast reactor in 1994. We would probably need some additional infrastructure. But again, we have a pretty good base. And I'll say that also on the regulatory side. We do have a pretty good base as well. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is obviously focused on light water reactors throughout its history, but they've actually been doing a good job at being able to work with some of the developers. We have three entities out there that are working on Generation IV reactors. TerraPower did submit their construction authorization to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and they've accepted it, so they're working well with them, even though they have a water-based system. Hopefully X-energy, who's doing a high-temperature gas reactor, working with the government and all, as well, will be moving forward, as well. And we've had a third that's working in the molten salt space, a molten salt-cooled reactor that has already received a construction permit to go forward on a prototype reactor, a Kairos company.I'm sure there's got to be reforms still on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and make sure that we are timely and responding to license applications, but they are moving in the right direction. There's been a lot of interface with various laws, whether it's the NEICA (Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act), or NEIMA (Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act), two bills that were passed a little while back looking at reforming. And I think there still needs to be improvements and still need to be increase in the resource and capacity of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, but they're heading in the right direction.We have a good regulator, and that's one of the things that helps us make sure we feel that we can deploy this technology safely here, but also helps us in exporting our technology, where we can say, “Our technology has been licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,” which has such a high view externally in other countries, that helps us. So I want them to continue to be that safe regulator, but again, they are continuing to work to improve and streamline the process. Hopefully we get toward where we're standardizing, that we don't have to have a lot of interface and we don't — that'll come to the utilities, too — we don't make changes once we've got something approved, so we hopefully can speed up the process from the utility side, and all is well.Human capital (21:48)Are we going to turn out enough nuclear engineers? I imagine that, for a while, that probably seemed like a hard sell to someone who had an interest in science and engineering, to be in this industry versus some others. Probably a little easier sell; are we going to have enough people going into that to build all these reactors?We are going to need to continue to increase it. We're already seeing the uptick, though, in that area. I'll note: Our office, the office of Nuclear Energy, we've really — going back to the 2010 timeframe — really recognized that we needed to do more in that area, so we actually started investing almost 20 percent of our R&D budget to the universities to hopefully foster that next generation. And in fact, this year we just hit the mark where we've now spent $1 billion since the start of those programs on the universities to make sure we're doing R&D there and getting that next generation of folks out there. It's something that we've got to continue to focus on to make sure that we do. Because yeah, if we triple, it's going to need a lot more nuclear engineers. But I also note, the thing I'm concerned about also is making sure we have the right trades and all, as well. If we're building these plants, making sure you have the welders, the pipe fitters, and all, that's going to be a big challenge, as well, especially if we're going to start building, say, 10 plants a year. That's a lot of people out there.Fusion forecast (23:12)I'm excited about the prospects for nuclear fusion, and I've talked to people at startups, and it has probably looked as promising as it ever has. How promising is it? How should I think about it as being part of our energy solution going forward, given where we're at? In fact, there are no commercial nuclear fusion reactors right now. Obviously people at startups give a lot of optimistic forecasts. How should I even think about that as being a partial solution in the coming decades? How do you look at it, at least?I think it can be part of the solution in the coming decades. I think some of the changes that's taken place, especially over the last two years where there is more of a change to focus on, not fusion as a science program, but fusion as deployment, as an energy producer, you look at it as an applied energy. I think that's an important change that's occurred over the last two years, and the fusion programs within the Department of Energy are much more focused to that. It's similar to what's happened somewhat with fission. Fission, about 15 years ago, it was government-driven, and you pull along industry, until about 15 years ago you started having industry investing a lot of money and pulling along the government. You're now starting to see that happen in fusion, where people are doing a lot of a private investment, they're pulling along the government, and the government's working to see, how can we use the resources of the government to enable it? So I think it will happen. I don't think fusion is going to be producing electricity to the grid this decade, but I think the vision that's been put forth by the government is their bold, decade-old vision to have a fusion pilot facility sometime within the decade. I think that is feasible. So maybe before the 2050s you can start having fusion generating some of our electricity. I'm a fission person at my heart, but I think fusion is, we're getting much more focused on moving it forward as an electricity source, and that'll help it be able to be deployed sometime here in our lifetime.Faster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Micro ReadsHow Elon Musk and SpaceX Plan to Colonize Mars - NYTWhat happened to the artificial-intelligence revolution? - Economist The EV trade war between China and the West heats up - Economist Defeated by A.I., a Legend in the Board Game Go Warns: Get Ready for What's Next - NYTPfizer pins hopes on daily pill to crack market for weight-loss drugs - FTRise of the Restaurant Robots: Chipotle, Sweetgreen and Others Bet on Automation - WSJSaudi Arabia's Trillion-Dollar Makeover Faces Funding Cutbacks - BbergAI Spending: Goldman Strategists Say Big Tech's Splurge Worries Investors - BbergIt's Time for AI to Start Making Money for Businesses. Can It? - WSJFaster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

Is nuclear power the key to a carbon-neutral future or an accident waiting to happen? Non-hydro renewables such as wind and solar are predicted to play a major role in the future. However, one of these energy solutions has divided public opinion more than others. To mention the name "nuclear" is to conjure up the boogie man or "he who must not be named". By 2050, some 10 billion people will need some form of energy to eat, travel, work and protect themselves from the weather. McKinsey's Energy 2050 research report predicts that demand for electricity will grow twice as fast as demand for transport, while at the same time fossil fuels will decline. So how will we power the future?In this episode of 2050 Investors, Kokou Agbo-Bloua delves into the controversial topic of nuclear power, exploring its history, potential benefits and risks in the context of the global energy transition. He also highlights the dual nature of nuclear energy as both a powerful source of clean energy and a potentially catastrophic force capable of altering life at the atomic level. To explore the issue further, Kokou orchestrates a virtual Oxford-style debate between experts for and against nuclear power. The pro-nuclear side includes Bill Gates, Ernest Moniz, George Monbiot and James Hansen, advocating for nuclear power as a necessary tool to combat climate change. The anti-nuclear side includes Tom Steyer and Mark Jacobson, who criticise its economic feasibility and safety concerns. Each expert presents their opening statement, outlining their position and the key matters surrounding nuclear power.This episode will help you understand the fears, facts, and fission, so that you can make up your own mind about nuclear power.About this showWelcome to 2050 Investors, your monthly guide to understanding the intricate connections between finance, globalisation, and ESG.Join host Kokou Agbo-Bloua, Head of Economics, Cross-Asset & Quant Research at Societe Generale, for an exploration of the economic and market megatrends shaping the present and future, and how these trends might influence our progress to meeting 2050's challenging global sustainability targets.In each episode, Kokou deep-dives into the events impacting the economy, financial markets, the planet, and society. Through a magical blend of personal anecdotes, in-depth research and narratives overlaid with music, sound effects, and pop culture references, there's certainly something for everyone.Kokou also interviews industry-leading experts, personalities, entrepreneurs and even Nobel prize winners! You will learn from the best on a wide range of subjects on current affairs, market shifts, and economic developments.If you like 2050 Investors, please leave a five-star review on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Your support will help us spread the word and reach new audiences. If you're seeking a brief and entertaining overview of market-related topics and their business and societal implications, subscribe now to stay informed!Previous episodes of 2050 Investors have explored ESG, climate change, AI, greenflation, globalization, plastic pollution, food, healthcare, biodiversity and more.CreditsPresenter & Writer: Kokou Agbo-Bloua. Editors: Vincent Nickelsen, Jovaney Ashman, Linda Isker & Jennifer Krumm. Production Designer: Emmanuel Minelle, Radio K7 Creative. Executive Producer : Fanny Giniès. Sound Director: Marc Valenduc. Music: Rone. Graphic Design: Cédric Cazaly.Whilst the following podcast discusses the financial markets, it does not recommend any particular investment decision. If you are unsure of the merits of any investment decision, please seek professional advice.Hosted by Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

Share This Inteview: https://youtu.be/8Q5YL1vLbEo F3 Uranium - https://f3uranium.com/ Corporate Presentation: https://f3uranium.com/investors/presentations/ F3 Uranium is advancing the newly discovered high-grade JR Zone on the PLN Property in the Western Athabasca Basin. This area of Saskatchewan is poised to become the next Uranium producer and home to large uranium deposits including Tiple R, Arrow and Shea Creek. F3 Uranium currently holds 18 projects across the Athabasca Basin. During the fall 2022 exploration drill program, F3 Uranium made a new uranium discovery at the A1 conductor on its 100%-owned Patterson Lake North (‘PLN') property. Discovery hole PLN22-035 intersected extremely radioactive and off-scale (65,535 CPS) pitchblende mineralization. Uranium assay results from the discovery hole returned one continuous 15.0 m interval averaging 6.97% U3O8 including a high-grade 5.5 m interval averaging 18.6% U3O8, which further includes an ultra-high grade core which assayed 59.2% U3O8 over 1.0 m. Three follow up holes intersected up to 63,400 cps and expanded the high-grade mineralization both up-dip and 23 m along strike, grid south. A 21 hole winter drill program was recently completed that resulted in extending the strike length of the JR Zone to a length of 105m. This new discovery is located 25 km northwest of the Patterson Lake area, host to Fission Uranium's Triple R and NexGen's Arrow world class uranium deposits which is poised to become the next major area of development for new uranium operations in northern Saskatchewan. The Company's management headed up by Dev Randhawa as CEO & Chairman, with Raymond Ashley, as President, and Sam Hartmann as VP Exploration, is the team that founded Fission Uranium in 2012 and made the Triple R discovery at Patterson Lake. The same team also founded Fission Energy, making the J-Zone discovery at Waterbury Lake in the eastern Athabasca Basin, and built Fission into a TSX Venture 50 Company. In April 2013 Fission Energy sold the majority of its assets to Denison Mines and certain assets were spun out into Fission Uranium. F3 Uranium was incorporated in October 2013 as a wholly owned subsidiary of Fission Uranium. F3 Uranium Corp. is the third generation Fission run by one of Canada's leading uranium exploration teams. On November 2013, Fission 3.0 completed a plan of arrangement under the Canada Business Corporations Act involving Alpha Mineral and Fission Uranium pursuant to which Fission Uranium acquired Alpha Minerals' 50% interest in the Patterson Lake South (PLS) project. As a result of the transaction, certain properties and assets of Fission Uranium, including the Patterson Lake North (PLN) property, became assets of F3 Uranium Corp. which is no longer a wholly owned subsidiary of Fission Uranium. WEBSITE: https://provenandprobable.com/

From the Manhattan Project to the Oscars—Oppenheimer brought nuclear back into the mainstream. Charles Oppenheimer, grandson of J. Robert Oppenheimer, is building a legacy of his own with The Oppenheimer Project. In this episode, Charles reflects on seeing his grandfather portrayed on the big screen, funding a nuclear future, and the importance of distinguishing between nuclear weapons and nuclear energy.Charles Oppenheimer: Website | LinkedIn Visit us at www.nei.org/fissionary.Music used in this episode was created by Beat Mekanik

Will fission be the future of energy on Mars? Join us for an out-of-this-world conversation with Trudy Kortes, the director of technology demonstrations at NASA, and one of the minds behind the Fission Power Project. In this episode, Mary and Jordan dive into the fascinating ways NASA is harnessing nuclear technology to fuel our missions to the Moon (and Mars!) as well as the importance of listening to your intuition when navigating your career. Trudy Kortes: Website | LinkedInVisit us at www.nei.org/fissionary.Music used in this episode was created by Beat Mekanik

Grab your headsets and controllers because the future of nuclear operations is here! Join Mary and Jordan as they discover how nuclear is harnessing the power of virtual reality with their guest, Derek Kultgen from Argonne National Laboratory. Derek shares how his team is using video game technology to revolutionize how we work in the nuclear industry, making operations safer, more efficient, and more accessible. Argonne National Lab: Website | METAL | LinkedInVisit us at www.nei.org/fissionary.Music used in this episode was created by Beat Mekanik

The worlds of nuclear energy and reality TV collide in this episode with Survivor alum and nuclear engineer, J'Tia Hart! As Director of Nuclear Non-Proliferation at Idaho National Laboratory, J'Tia is paving the way for the future of nuclear energy all while championing diversity and representation in STEM. She shares her unique journey with Mary and Jordan as they chat about energy security and the exciting future of the nuclear industry!J'Tia Hart: Website | YouTube | LinkedInVisit us at www.nei.org/fissionary.Music used in this episode was created by Beat Mekanik

Perhaps the most overlooked scientist who played critical roles in the development of the atomic bomb was Leo Szilard. With us to explore Szilard's numerous contributions to science and society is William Lanouette. Bill is a writer and public policy analyst who has specialized in the history of nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. He received an A.B. in English with a minor in Philosophy at Fordham College in 1963, and M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in Political Science at the London School of Economics and the University of London in 1966 and 1973, respectively. Bill then worked as a journalist for Newsweek, The National Observer, and National Journal, and he was the Washington Correspondent for The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. He has also written for The Atlantic, The Economist, Scientific American, The New York Herald Tribune, The Washington Post, and many other outlets. Bill also worked as a Senior Analyst for Energy and Science Issues at the US Government Accountability Office. Bill's first book was Genius in the Shadows: A Biography of Leo Szilard, the Man Behind the Bomb, published by Scribner's in 1992, with later editions published by the University of Chicago Press and Skyhorse Publications. Bill also published, in 2021, The Triumph of the Amateurs: The Rise, Ruin, and Banishment of Professional Rowing in The Gilded Age. In this episode, we discuss all things Szilard: the man, the war, the bomb, the innovations, the collaborations, the accusations of espionage, the conflicts, and even the Martians.

What do two physicists think about the movie Oppenheimer? Neil deGrasse Tyson sits down with theoretical physicist Brian Greene to discuss Robert J. Oppenheimer's work on the Manhattan Project, the science in Christopher Nolan's film, and the dawn of quantum physics. NOTE: StarTalk+ Patrons can listen to this entire episode commercial-free here: https://startalkmedia.com/show/breaking-down-oppenheimer-with-brian-greene/Thanks to our Patrons Kiril Stoilov, aaron tanenbaum, Oswaldo Asprino, cary mannaberg, Taylor Jenkins, BeerandBrat, and J Maz for supporting us this week.

Jack Collins is the guitarist in Dead Poet Society, a band formed at Berklee College of Music in Boston. The band just released their latest album Fission, and heads to Europe this week to start a hectic touring schedule. Jack caught up with Mistress Carrie driving to tour rehearsal to talk inspiration, School of Rock, his first guitar, U2, songwriting, traveling, the MSG Sphere, naming albums, Boston, picking setlist, and so much more! Episode #193 Check out the custom playlist for Episode #193 here Hear Jack Underkofler on Episode #50 See Dead Poet Society 5/6 at Sinclair in Cambridge, MA. Find Dead Poet Society Online: Facebook Instagram Twitter Website Youtube Find Mistress Carrie online: Official Website The Mistress Carrie Backstage Pass on Patreon X Facebook Instagram Threads YouTube Cameo Pantheon Podcast Network Find The Mistress Carrie Podcast online: Instagram Threads Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices