Podcasts about Fukushima

This show has been flagged as Clean by the host. -------------------- 01 Introduction This is the second follow up to my 8 part series on nuclear power. In this episode I will attempt to answer a question posed by brian in ohio in a comment on HPR4583. In that comment he said: 02 -------------------- Loving this series. Maybe Whiskey Jack could give some cost comparisons between large and small reactors. He could also give us a realistic look at nuclear plant safety/accidents compared to conventional power production. Looking forward to the episode on FORTH generation reactors ;-) -------------------- 03 End of quote. The first question I answered in my previous follow up, which was HPR4628. In this episode I will attempt to answer the second question, which was about the safety of nuclear power compared to other sources of electrical power generation. One of the HPR janitors encouraged me to make this episode, so I think we can thank him for getting another HPR episode made. 04 Defining the Scope First, let's define the scope of the question. This will cover electrical power generation only. Within that scope I will consider only the following sources of energy. 05 Coal Oil Natural Gas Hydroelectric Nuclear Wind Solar I won't cover geothermal, wave, or tidal power as these are only used in very small amounts and so there simply isn't enough literature on them to base a discussion on . 06 Foreshadow Conclusion I should mention right away that I cannot provide absolute answers to this question in the form of a nice, neat ranking table based on numbers from peer reviewed scientific sources. The reasons for this will become apparent, but to put it briefly, the data on which to base such a ranking simply doesn't exist. I will however provide context within which people can think about the issue. Wherever possible, I will provide links to the references that I used in the show notes so you can read further on this yourself. -------------------- 07 Energy Catastrophism versus Energy Uniformitarianism First though I need to go off on a slight geological detour in order to explain an important analogy that I will use. 08 In the 19th century there was a great debate among geologists over what is known as catastrophism versus uniformitarianism. In seeking to explain the origins of the earth and of the landscape that we see around us, there were two points of view. 09 One was "catastrophism". This is the belief that the mountains, valleys, and plains that we see around us were formed as a result of great catastrophes which occurred relatively recently in earth's history. This explanation was necessary in order to fit geological features into an earth that was believed to be only a few thousands of years old. This view was heavily influenced by religious belief. In this view Noah's flood was the great catastrophe and the fossils of dinosaurs were the remains of animals who had not been saved on the ark and so had died in the flood. 10 The other point of view was uniformitarianism. This was the hypothesis that the landscape we see around us can be explained by the very slow accumulation of very small changes over very long periods of time. For this to be true however, the earth had to be far older than the few thousand years that a literal reading of the bible would suggest. The earth in fact had to be many, many, millions of years old. 11 Eventually, the uniformitarian view won out and people understood that while some catastrophes can take place, the shape of the landscape is overwhelmingly due to small changes over very long periods of time. 12 How is this Relevant to this Episode You Ask? How this is relevant is that I will use this analogy to explain how we need to think about energy and safety. Very small numbers of deaths and injuries multiplied over many occurrences can add up to big numbers, comparable in scale or possibly even larger than a single catastrophe or even several of them. 13 I don't know if anyone else has used this analogy before, I have just thought of this when writing the script for this podcast. None the less, I think it is a very useful way of helping to understand the issues. 14 As an example of this, think about the well known case of the safety of flying versus the safety of travelling in your car. Air crashes are catastrophes that make the headlines. Automobile crashes are seldom more than local news at best. You have probably heard many times the claim that if you making a trip somewhere, you are safer to fly than to drive yourself in your car. 15 Example - Hydro versus Solar I will now present an example of this. Hydro electric power has some notable large scale catastrophes associated with it. Roof top solar power does not have any notable catastrophes that I am aware of. However, which is safer? 16 Hydro Catastrophes Here are three examples of hydro electric catastrophes in just one country, Italy. The Vajont Dam which collapsed in1963 An estimated 1,917 to 2,500 people died. The Sella Zerbino dam which collapsed in 1935. More than 100 people died. The Gleno Dam which collapsed in 1923. An estimated 350 people died. https://damfailures.org/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4997708/ 17 I haven't tried to compile a global list of the worst hydro electric dam collapses, as this sort of information is actually very difficult to find, even on web sites dedicated to dam failures. An additional problem is that information on whether a dam was used for electric power generation or not is often not available. 18 Dam failures where contradictory or insufficient information is available on whether there was an associated hydro power plant include the 1975 Banqian Dam failure, where death estimates range up to a quarter of a million. 19 Solar Panel Slow Accumulation Contrast this with roof top solar panels. Many small accidents can add up to big numbers as well. 20 Health and safety literature discussing solar panel safety mention things such as Falls from roofs. Electric shock. Arc flash (burns from electrical arcing). Normal electrical safety procedures which are based around locking out sources of energy do not work with solar panels which makes safety more difficult. Heat stress due to working exposed in the hot sun. Warning from US government on falls by solar panel installers. https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/228946 https://www.osha.gov/green-jobs/solar 21 Why We Cannot Compare the Two Hydro catastrophes are not well documented, but we can at least find records of some of the most notable ones. However, even those have very large variations in estimates of deaths. 22 Roof top solar deaths however are largely undocumented. The industry is largely unregulated. There is no central authority which accumulates many individual deaths or injuries. At best there are worker and public safety bodies who simply accumulate those statistics into general construction or household injuries. 23 Thus we have no reliable means of comparing the two energy sources on a comparable basis. We face the same problem with all other major electrical energy sources. So far as I am aware, there are no peer reviewed scientific studies which compare the relative safety of all of the major electrical energy sources we are considering here based on actual numbers. -------------------- 24 Safety Risks I will now try to list some the major hazards for each of energy sources we are considering. There is however limited data available. In many cases we just have reference to worker safety organizations as to what the hazards are. I will not attempt here to put numbers to these here. Categories 25 Coal, Oil, Natural Gas The hazards are Air pollution Mining and oil field accidents Pipeline explosions Transportation accidents. These- move a lot of material so these are significant. 26 Hydroelectric These include Dam collapse Drowning 27 Nuclear These include Radiation exposure 28 Wind These include Falls Confined space deaths (there is not much detail on this) Electric shock Ice throws (that is, throwing pieces of ice off the blades) This technology has a significant problem with people working alone which greatly increases risks associated with other dangers. 29 Solar These include Falls Electric shock Arc flash Heat stress 30 I have not tried to cover all possible risks associated with each category, just the ones which each industry considers to be the risks they concern themselves with. There does not exist any means by which risks of similar types are compared across different industries. 31 Reliability of Supply is Also Safety In a completely electrified net zero society, reliability of supply is a safety matter. People will die in very large numbers in cold climates if they do not have heat. If we have no fossil fuels, we need to also consider how reliably does a grid based on any of the options work. I have not seen anyone attempt to address this question and will not attempt to address it here. However, it must be addressed in any comprehensive attempt to rank safety. -------------------- 32 Studies or Articles on Estimates of Relative Safety Despite the difficulties of comparing the safety of different sources of energy, some people have attempted this anyway. Different estimates done at different times had different focuses, so unfortunately we do not have a nice set of studies that we can neatly use to cross check one another. I will however list the names and the authors and summarize the results. -------------------- 33 The Health Hazards of Not Going Nuclear By Dr. Petr Beckman Published in 1976 The author of this book tried to address the relative safety of different sources of energy in the mid 1970s. However, it is old at this point, so I won't bother digging through its pages to find his figures. 34 He mainly focused on comparing electric power generated with coal to nuclear. His conclusion was that if the goal was to prevent deaths or ill health in the process of generating electricity, then the logical conclusion was to replace coal fired power plants with nuclear. 35 The book was relatively well known at the time, as least as far as books on energy are concerned, so I thought it was still worth mentioning. I happen to have a copy of this book which I bought back in that time period It was the 8th printing of the book, so it would appear to have had relatively good sales. 36 The author did address the issue of what I have termed "catastrophism" in his comparison of different energy sources, although I don't know if he used this phrase. I don't know if he was the first to use this sort of analysis, but he certainly was very influential in terms of popularizing it. -------------------- 37 Risk of Energy Production by Herbert Inhaber Publication AECB 1119 March 1978 This study is a scientific paper from the same time period as the book "The Health Hazards of Not Going Nuclear". 38 He based his risk estimates largely on estimates of the amount of material which was used in the construction and operation of various power sources. While we could argue over whether or not this is a valid methodology, I think any such argument would be pointless as I think the age of the study alone renders it not relevant today anyway. Advancements in materials have changed the basis results significantly by now. However, as it exists I thought I would mention it to show that the idea of comparing energy sources to each other is not a new one. The author compared a wider variety of potential sources than Beckman did. 39 Here's his conclusions. He assumes equal amounts of energy produced by each method. The numbers are normalized such that the total sums to 100%. You can think of it in terms of what proportion of total deaths or injuries would result from each source if each were equally used. 40 Coal 27.5% Oil 25.6% Methanol 16.7% Wind 10.8% Solar photovoltaic 9.2% Thermal 8.1% Solar space heating 1.5% Ocean thermal 0.4% Nuclear 0.13% Natural Gas 0.08% 41 His natural gas estimate is drastically different from that of other authors. I am not going to worry about explaining it however, as the study is as I said old enough to be not very relevant anyway. I am mainly including this here out of historical interest. 42 As a footnote, the methanol he refers to would be synthesized from wood. This was a popular idea in that era as a means of providing liquid fuels for transportation. Practical battery electric cars in those days were strictly science fiction. 43 The ocean thermal category is a real blast from the past and I had forgotten all about that concept. It was a very popular idea at that time and was supposed to be *the* big and upcoming thing in renewable energy. It involved various means of attempting to extract energy from differences in water temperature at different depths in the ocean. It gradually faded away however, as despite great efforts being put into it, designs never proved to be practical. -------------------- 44 Electricity generation and health Anil Markandya, Paul Wilkinson Published in the Lancet, Vol 370, 15 September 2007 45 This is more recent than the previous one, although it is nearly 20 years old at this point. Unfortunately it doesn't cover wind or solar, just fossil fuels and nuclear. However it is still useful, and the Lancet is a very reputable peer reviewed journal. 46 I will present just the results rather than discussing the whole paper. The authors break it down into deaths among the public, occupational deaths, and air pollution related deaths, serious illness, and minor illness. 47 They break the energy sources down into lignite, coal, gas, oil, biomass, and nuclear. Lignite is a type of very low grade coal used mainly for electric power generation. In this paper biomass refers to energy crops and forest residues. 48 I will summarize the results by category rather than trying to describe a table that has 6 rows and 5 columns. All numbers are normalized in terms of deaths or cases per TWh. 49 Occupational deaths from accidents lignite 0.1 coal 0.1 gas 0.001 oil no data biomass - no data Nuclear is 0.019. 50 Deaths among the public from accidents lignite 0.02 coal 0.02 gas 0.02 oil 0.03 biomass no data Nuclear 0.003 51 Air pollution deaths lignite 32.6 coal 24.5 gas 2.8 oil 18.4 biomass 4.63 Nuclear 0.052 52 Air pollution serious illnesses lignite 298 coal 225 gas 30 oil 161 biomass 43 Nuclear 0.22 53 Air pollution minor illnesses lignite 17,676 coal 13,288 gas 703 oil 9,551 biomass 2,276 Nuclear no data 54 Natural gas edges out nuclear power slightly in terms of occupational safety, but in every other category nuclear is drastically lower in terms of ill effects than any of the alternatives. -------------------- 55 2020 Fatalities for US Roofers Increased 15% as Solar Roof Installations Increase Published in The Next Big Future July 6, 2021 by Brian Wang 56 This seems to be written by someone who has a popular science blog. I'm not familiar with it personally, but he addresses the subject so I'll list it. The title implies that it's all about rooftop solar, but he provides comparative numbers for the other energy sources of interest, so that is useful for our purposes. However, he doesn't describe his methodology, so we need to treat them with some caution. Here are his results These are deaths per thousand terawatt hours. 57 Coal - 100,000 Oil - 36,000 Natural gas - 4,000 Hydro - 1,400 Rooftop solar - 440 Wind - 150 Nuclear - 90 58 If we plot these numbers on a bar chart, coal and oil are so large that all of the others are squished to the bottom of the chart and are difficult to see at all. Let's therefore look at these in terms of orders of magnitude. Keep in mind that this is a logarithmic scale. This means that the difference between 4 and 5 is much greater in linear terms than the difference between 1 and 2. 59 Coal - 5 Oil - 4 Natural gas - 3 Hydro - 3 Rooftop solar - 2 Wind - 2 Nuclear - 1 60 Each of these numbers represents an order of magnitude, that is a power of ten. We can see that with rooftop solar, wind, and nuclear, the numbers are so close and the uncertainties are so great and their relative values so small compared to say coal that they can be seen as equivalent so far as safety is concerned. -------------------- 61 What are the safest and cleanest sources of energy? by Hannah Ritchie Published in Our World in Data First published in 2017, updated in 2022 and 2024 62 The author of this study addressed both deaths and greenhouse gas emissions. Deaths from accidents and air pollution are normalized to per TWh of electricity, while greenhouse gas emissions are normalized to GWh of electricity over the life cycle of the plant. 63 Here are the death figures. Coal 24.6 Oil 18.4 Biomass 4.6 Natural Gas 2.8 Hydro power 1.3 Wind 0.04 Nuclear 0.03 Solar 0.02 64 For greenhouse gas emissions the figures are Coal 970 tons Oil 720 tons Natural gas 440 tons Biomass 78 to 230 tons Solar 53 tons Hydro power 24 tons Wind 11 tons Nuclear 6 tons 65 If we take the death figures and rank them by order of magnitude as we did with the previous article, we get the following. 66 Coal - 4 Oil - 4 Biomass - 3 Natural Gas - 3 Hydro power - 3 Wind - 1 Nuclear - 1 Solar - 1 67 Keep in mind that the previous article covered only rooftop solar and not large industrial installations, and so is not directly comparable. Also the units are different, with the previous article being in terms of thousand TWh, and this one being in TWh. If we exclude solar (as the numbers are not comparable), Brian Wang's numbers are between 1.5 to 4 times higher than Ritchie's, except for hydro which are almost identical. I think this latter is due to both sets of numbers are dominated by one exceptionally big hydro accident. 68 Overall however, the relative rankings are quite comparable. Ritchie's numbers for deaths from coal, oil, and natural gas appear to be directly from the study by Markandya and Wilkinson mentioned above. For the benefit of those who are wondering, Ritchie specifically states that her numbers for nuclear include the Chernobyl and Fukushima accidents. -------------------- https://www.iaea.org/publications/magazines/bulletin/21-1/solar-power-more-dangerous-nuclear Direct link to file https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/publications/magazines/bulletin/bull21-1/21104091117.pdf https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(07)61253-7/abstract https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2021/07/2020-fatalities-for-us-roofers-increased-15-as-solar-roof-installations-increase.html -------------------- 69 Conclusion from Studies Remember that in engineering terms, when comparing groups of numbers which contain both both very small numbers and one or more very large numbers, the differences between the small numbers are often not significant. The differences between the small numbers may be the product of our ability to measure these things rather than any real differences. 70 For example, in the article by Ritchie wind power would appear to be twice as dangerous as nuclear. However, the difference between them is 0.02 compared to 24.6 for coal. In other words, the difference between apparently "dangerous" wind and apparently "safe" nuclear is equivalent to 0.08% of the total for coal. It's therefore meaningless and a red herring to even worry about. 71 With the above taken into consideration, generally the different sources of energy fall into two broad categories in terms of number of deaths, injuries, and illnesses. The fossil fuels and biomass fall into one group and wind, solar, and nuclear into another group. 72 Hydro power would seem to fall into the higher risk category or at least somewhere between the two, but this I suspect is mainly due to one exceptionally large dam collapse in China, the Banqian Dam failure in 1975. This is mentioned as being specifically included in the article written by Ritchie. This was a multi-purpose dam, and information on this dam is difficult to find. It is not clear to me whether it had a hydro electric generator associated with either it or another dam that was part of the same system. 73 Some people therefor may argue for its exclusion from the numbers. Of course some people may argue for its inclusion anyway, as it was a dam regardless of whether it actually had an electric generator attached. If we exclude it, then I think the numbers for hydro power would fall into the same range as for nuclear, wind, and solar. 74 Most people would consider hydro power to be safe and clean enough regardless of this and I will rank it as such in any conclusions that I come to. As you can see, even if we have numbers, it can be a matter of opinion as to how to interpret them. -------------------- -------------------- 75 Taking a Systems Approach Now let's take a look at the broader energy picture today and into the future. Many countries in many parts of the world have committed to the concept of "Net Zero", which means eliminating carbon emissions on a net basis. Net zero essentially means the complete electrification of society. We must therefore have electrical energy on demand and at low cost. We must as a result of this look at complete electrical systems rather than individual sources in isolation. 76 At one time many electrical systems were entirely coal or entirely hydroelectric. This is no longer the case. There are now major amounts of wind and solar involved in many countries. However these are inherently intermittent. This means that other sources of energy are inherently also required to have a functional system. 77 If any particular solution inherently requires fossil fuels to meet part of the demand, then the safety, pollution, and climate issues relating to those fossil fuels have to be factored in to that complete system when trying to come up with a relative ranking. Talking about Individual sources in isolation are therefore meaningless in these countries. 78 There are battery systems, but these are mainly used to stabilize and regulate the grid plus to a lesser degree to smooth out short term daily peaks in demand. They do not have the ability to store large amounts of electricity on a large scale for an entire grid for days, weeks, and months to make up for intermittency. 79 So a serious attempt to rank sources of energy would need to look at a variety of representative countries and for each one come up with a plan that involves 'x' megawatts from source 'a', 'y' megawatts from source 'b', etc., and total up the values for each. 80 I am not aware of anyone who has studied this larger issue. However, the problem has to be addressed from this perspective in order for any answer to be useful. Not taking this into account is like ordering a diet soft drink to go with with a high calorie meal and assuring yourself that your plans to diet are fine. 81 This is not to imply there is anything inherently wrong with wind or solar. It does mean that if your goal is to achieve both net zero and a clean environment, you have to look at your entire energy system as a complete system rather than focusing on what you feel are the most reassuring parts of it while ignoring the rest. This does however add to the argument that it is in fact inherently very difficult to come up with a system of ranking energy sources for safety. -------------------- 82 Nuclear, Climate, and Clean Air - Contrasting Examples To give a tangible example we will now look at two different places that followed two divergent paths at roughly around the same time frame. These are the province of Ontario in Canada, and Germany. 83 Ontario had a mix of coal, hydro electric, and nuclear generating plants. Germany had a mix of coal, nuclear and natural gas plants. Ontario shut down their coal fired plants and kept their nuclear plants. Germany however shut down their nuclear plants and kept their coal fired plants. 84 The Phase Out of Coal in Ontario In 2003 Ontario decided to close all of its coal fired generating plants, which consisted of 19 units (that is boilers and turbines) totalling 8,800 MW. This phase out was completed by 2014. 85 Here are the figures for amount of power generated by each energy source in 2003 and 2014. Nuclear went from 42% to 60% Hydro went from 23% to 24% Gas went from 11% to 9% Coal went from 25% to 0% Non-hydro renewable went from 0% to 7%. 86 As you can see, the bulk of that replacement came from increased use of nuclear power. Furthermore, this did not result in simply replacing coal with natural gas. While gas is cleaner than coal, it still has emissions and if you recall from the studies that we looked at earlier, had an estimated death rate roughly 2 orders of magnitude greater than nuclear, solar, or wind. 87 To put this in more practical terms, at one time Toronto regularly had clouds of smog obscuring it, to a large extent due to these coal fired power plants With the phase out of coal, smog days went to zero in 2015 compared to 53 a decade earlier. The 2023 figures for Ontario show carbon emissions of 53 grams per kWh of electricity generated. We can use this as a rough benchmark comparison for total emissions. 88 The Phase out of Nuclear in Germany Until March of 2011, Germany generated one quarter of its electrical power from nuclear. Starting in 2011 however, they began shutting down their nuclear power plants. These were then phased out over the next decade. However, the coal plants were to be kept to 2038. In 2026 Germany began talking about increasing use of coal in order to save gas. In the same year the German chancellor Friedrich Merz stated that the phase out of nuclear was a quote “serious strategic mistake”. EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said it was "a strategic mistake for Europe to turn its back on a reliable, affordable source of low-emissions power". 89 I won't go into the details of the phase out, but let's look at some emissions numbers for Germany. If we look at the official numbers from the European Environmental Agency for 2024, for Germany their emissions were 298 grams per kWh of electricity generated. Recall that we are using emissions as a very rough guide to amount of air pollution, and that this has a direct effect on the safety of the overall electrical energy system. 90 So, who actually made their people safer, Ontario who phased out their coal plants and kept their nuclear plants, or Germany who phased out their nuclear plants and kept their coal plants? 91 If you want a comparison directly within Europe, then Germany has one of the highest rates of emissions per kWh of electricity generated, whereas France, who use mainly nuclear power, have one of the lowest at 43 grams per kWh of electricity generated. Again, who is making their people safer, Germany or France? 92 I don't want to make it sound like I am picking on Germany. I am also not going to tell them how they ought to run their country. However they provide a good real world example of how we need to look at things in overall context when we are thinking about the choices that we make. https://www.ontario.ca/page/end-coal https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/smog-study-shows-significant-decreases-in-pollutants-in-ontario-1.4151183 https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/greenhouse-gas-emission-intensity-of-1 https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-g-n/germany https://www.politico.eu/article/friedrich-merz-is-right-to-reject-germanys-nuclear-phase-out-says-iea-chief-fatih-birol/ https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-considers-ramping-up-coal-power-to-avert-energy-crisis/ https://www.iea.org/countries/estonia/electricity https://www.iea.org/countries/malta/electricity -------------------- 93 Conclusions As we can see, there don't appear to be an abundance of peer reviewed scientific studies that we can simply point to in order to answer the question of safety of all possible major different energy sources once and for all. Collecting the data to even attempt to answer the question is inherently very difficult as we cannot readily conduct experiments to answer the question, and sources of data are not collected or consolidated in a manner which can answer this question adequately. 94 The essence of the problem is that most energy industries are not as tightly regulated and monitored to the same degree that say nuclear power or commercial airliners are, so this data is simply not being systematically recorded. However, a number of people have attempted to make estimates. 95 Their conclusions would seem to be that nuclear, wind, and solar are roughly equivalent in terms of safety. All fossil fuels are much less safe than nuclear, wind, and solar, by as much as several orders of magnitude. 96 We can however say with a reasonable degree of certainty that if a country shut down their nuclear power plants and kept their fossil fuel plants, particularly coal, then they probably made their people less safe than if they had done things the other way around. 97 I hope that I have provided some context in which to think about the issue. Thanks again to brian in ohio for providing the question upon which this episode is based. -------------------- Provide feedback on this episode.

Back to where it all began – Three Mile Island This Week’s 15th ANNIVERSARY SPECIAL A Look Back at a Decade-and-a-Half of Nuclear Hotseat! Nuclear Hotseat started as a conference call (I didn’t know how to do a podcast) on June 14, 2011, only three months after the Fukushima nuclear disaster began. In the 15...

A federal court restores the 5% safe harbor for wind tax credits, Norway’s parliament pauses the 35 billion krone Utsira Nord floating wind program, and the crew digs into Australia’s battery boom and the looming blade technician shortage. Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly newsletter on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard’s StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on YouTube, Linkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary’s “Engineering with Rosie” YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us! Uptime324 Matthew Stead: [00:00:00] The Uptime Wind Energy podcast, brought to you by StrikeTape. Protecting thousands of wind turbines from lightning damage worldwide. Visit StrikeTape.com. And now, your hosts Allen Hall: Welcome to this edition of the Uptime Wind Energy podcast. I’m Allen Hall here with Matthew Stead, Rosemary Barnes, and Yolanda Padron. And our week starts off in the courtroom. And if you’ve been watching the news lately, there’s a pretty substantial IRS case involving large-scale wind and solar having to do with the, uh, production tax credit and, uh, investment tax credit at the same time on the safe harbor, 5% safe harbor rule. Uh, a federal judge handed the wind industry and solar industry a pretty substantial legal win that could reshape how the [00:01:00] projects qualify for tax credits. So a judge up in, uh, the District of Columbia vacated IRS Notice 2025-42. So if you remember that, uh, from a- about a year or so ago, uh, f- it found that the, that notice was arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act. The notice, which was issued following a July 2025 executive order, had eliminated the 5% safe harbor for wind projects, uh, a provision developers have relied on since about 2013 to establish construction start dates without breaking ground. The court found the IRS failed to justify removing it, ignored industry comments, which I had read, and I agree with that, and gave no reason for treating wind differently f- than other clean energy technologies. So That his executive order came down and said, “Hey, we don’t like wind. [00:02:00] IRS, write a rule and make it hard for wind to get installed in the United States.” And so they dutifully did it, but a court is throwing it out. This has some pretty significant implications because if you hadn’t broken ground before this ruling, I think the– what was happening was be- if you hadn’t broken ground by July 4th, your project wouldn’t qualify for some tax credits. But now, if you have 5% safe harbor, you still are in the game, at least for now. Now, Wanda, that’s gonna make a big difference to asset managers and developers, won’t it?  Yolanda Padron: Yeah, it’s really exciting. I think it opens up the, the playing field for, for some of these projects that might be a little bit behind schedule. Um, of course, a lot of teams had to change their plans and their pipeline when, um, you know, the big, beautiful bill passed and, I mean, it’s– of course, it adds a little bit of additional volatility, right, to, to wind and, and solar in the US, but it’s exciting to see at least things for, [00:03:00] for those of us that are in the wind and solar side, the, it’s a little, little bit of, of hope there. Allen Hall: And Matthew, uh, even in terms of opening up o-o-operations and, uh, getting contracts signed, this should make a big difference in sort of opening the floodgates a little bit. Although there is a short timeframe. We’re, we’re recording on, what, what is today? June 10th. So you have, in theory, less than 30 days before the July 4th deadline, but hopefully this stays. You think there’s a chance this just gets completely, uh, wiped out, the executive order and the IRS notice and- It’s back to what we remember for the, for the last, ooh, 12, 13 years?  Matthew Stead: Uh, yeah. I’m, I’m, I’m hopeful, and I, I agree with Yolanda. I think you, you said it really well. Um, I think this is a, a glimmer of hope in, um, a sometimes gloomy, um, environment. So I think that’s great. In terms of going back to where it was, um, I mean, I guess my observation has been that, [00:04:00] you know, things in the US were a bit, um, distorted. You know, distorted through the, the PTC, um, and the whole repowering thing after 10 years is quite a distortion. So I think, um, you’re not necessarily going back to the good old days, um, might be the way, what will happen. Allen Hall: I think there is a lot of people actively trying to dig holes at the moment, and I, I’m sure they’re gonna continue to do that. Yolanda, do you th- you think anybody’s gonna stop and kinda say, “Oh, we have the 5% rule. We’re, we’re good”? Do you think, or you think they’re gonna still go ahead and really start construction and then just keep things continually moving on site? Yolanda Padron: I don’t think they, they can really stop, right? Because you, you don’t know if, if anything strange happens. A lot of people didn’t think the, a lot of the provisions in the big beautiful bill were gonna, were gonna see the light of day, and they did. Um, but it does, I really hope it brings at least a little bit of breathing room for some people. I know it’s, it must be… I mean, I have some friends in development, and they’re, they’re q- a little [00:05:00] bit stressed right now just with everything going on. Um, so, so I really hope for them at least they, you know, if, if they’re a little bit behind schedule, then it, it’ll be, it’ll still be fine.  Allen Hall: Delamination and bondline failures in blades are difficult problems to detect early. These hidden issues can cost you millions in repairs and lost energy production. CIC-NDT are specialists to detect these critical flaws before they become expensive burdens. Their nondestructive test technology penetrates deep into blade materials to find voids and cracks traditional inspections completely miss. CIC-NDT maps every critical defect, delivers actionable reports, and provides support to get your blades back in service. So visit cicndt.com because catching blade problems early will save you millions[00:06:00] Norway’s Storting has voted to pause the 35 billion Norwegian krone support program for floating offshore wind at Utsira Nord. The Conservative Party secured a parliamentary majority for the external quality assurance review, a socioeconomic analysis, and a technology development assessment, all before the Storting will authorize any commitments. Equinor and Vårgrønn, along with EDF and Deepwind Offshore, each hold allocated 500-megawatt areas and were preparing to compete for that subsidy. Equinor says the project will continue for now. I think everybody is saying that at the moment. But, uh, Equinor cannot rule out consequences as framework uncertainty compounds in the already challenging nature of floating offshore wind development. So Utsira Nord is a massive project. So it’s, it’s about three and a half billion US dollars [00:07:00] to go do this. We had Mads Furuseth and Anders Naslund about a year or so ago, maybe a little bit longer, talking about the project and how big it was and how important it was that Norway did this for floating offshore wind. But with this, uh, recent change in the parliament of Norway, it does seem like they’re slowly going to try to kill it by putting in a number of, uh, reviews, which is how bureaucracies tend to kill things. Is put it under six, seven, eight reviews, different committees. They all take time to get together. They have to put out a report. It could be two, three years from now. At that point, the world has completely changed, and everybody’s moved on. Does that seem like the outcome here at the moment?  Matthew Stead: Yes.  Allen Hall: In my mind, there’s really two big areas for floating offshore, which UK, right? That there, there’s some massive projects there, Green Volt being one of them, and then there was Sue & Nord. So between the two, I feel like the, the UK one was going to [00:08:00] happen. The question whether the world was gonna move towards floating offshore wind was gonna happen up in Norway. If Norway decided to do it and could get it developed, and it has the capability to do it because, because they have that skill set, uh, right there in Norway. If they could do it in Norway, everybody in the world would learn from it and figure out how to do it. Does this really set back floating offshore wind globally?  Matthew Stead: Yeah. I mean, going back to what I said before, and I, I’ll defer to Rosie on this as well, but, um, when I was at, at Blades Europe, um, one of the, one of my long-term contacts, um, y- was in floating wind, um, and had, um, left the industry. He basically said i- in his view that the offshore wind industry was slowly, um, in decline or slowly dying. Um, so I’m just wondering if this is just evolution of viability of offshore wind.  Rosemary Barnes: Is offshore wind in decline? I think if you look globally, it’s, it’s not in decline. I, I haven’t looked in, in depth at the figures just based on what, you know, [00:09:00] headlines I’ve seen and podcasts I’ve heard, but I think that globally it’s still on the rise. It’s just that- It’s only in Europe that things are really moving with speed, right? Like, people were expecting heaps of growth in the US and now no- nobody expects that. Floating offshore wind, it’s… I th- I still think it’s too early to say. There are plenty of countries that don’t have any good energy options besides, um, floating offshore wind, like Japan. What their energy transition looks like is gonna depend a lot on their culture and what people think, ’cause, like, if you go through, like, the engineering solutions that Japan could have, the ones that make the most sense from an engineering point of view are not popular at all, are not politically viable. Like, Japan could easily have a subsea cable connecting it with, um, with China, for example, or Korea, but I don’t think anybody, anybody thinks that that will ever happen because, you know, politically it’s, it’s very far from being possible. What else could they have? Geothermal. They’ve got heaps of [00:10:00]geothermal resources, like really good traditional geothermal resources, but my understanding is that it’s super unpopular because their onsen, um, community doesn’t want it. Uh, my understanding is that they’re worried that if you put geothermal, um, if you exploit geothermal resources, then the onsens will not be hot anymore, and again, my limited research understanding is that it’s not true. It’s different resources. The two aren’t connected in any way. Um, and yeah, there’s actually a community geothermal, um, facility near Fukushima. I’m trying really hard to get over there, but I’m, I’ve got a roadblock at the moment because, uh, n- no one there speaks English, so I need to find somebody to, to come with me and, you know, I’ll have one, one day to try and get there on the fast train and back to Tokyo in, in a single day. So it’s, it’s a bit of a stretch, but I’m gonna try. But anyway, so yeah, what have we… We’ve ruled out, like, subsea cables, ruled out geothermal. Floating wind is good.  Allen Hall: Well, speaking of Fukushima, [00:11:00] there’s been a more recent push in Japan to start up some of the nuclear facilities. So after the tsunami, was that 2012, 2014 when that happened? It was a while ago. Uh, when the tsunami happened and h- had that, uh, nuclear accident, they, they s- shut down all the nuclear facilities in Japan, but it does seem like they’re trying to restart some of them And, and maybe it’s just the demand for energy and, and they’re trying to weigh that off with offshore wind or floating offshore wind. At what point, you know, which one do you choose? It has to be driven by cost and availability.  Rosemary Barnes: Yeah. And so Fukushima, I just looked it up, it was 2011. Um, and yeah, so I mean, I think it is very fair that they had a reaction to that and they wanted to put the handbrake on nuclear at that time, or they did more than put the handbrake on, they did like a handbrake turn. Allen Hall: They shut it down.  Rosemary Barnes: So, and it, you know, it’s gradually ramping up. I think that their target for nuclear now is to, to regain, um, 20% of their electricity from [00:12:00] nuclear by 2040, something like that. It was 30% prior to that incident. Um, so that will be part of it, but it’s not, um, it’s not all of it. And then even if you think of, uh, okay, so forget climate change, just, you know, we want, Japan just wants energy and they don’t care about climate change, you know, ’cause that, that, that could be true. What are their ch- choices for that? They import a whole bunch of… They, they import nearly all their energy. Everything that’s not nuclear basically is, is imported. Um, coal, but a lot of LNG, and, you know, that is not exactly an appealing prospect at the moment either. It’s not secure. Prices are very volatile. We’ve had, like, two fossil fuel shocks in the last, what, like four years or something like that, and how many more, how many more are we g- are we going to have? You know, like energy security is important, totally separate from climate change issues. So I don’t think we need to rely on Japan, like, you know, [00:13:00] steadfastly staying the course because their, their existing o- opportunities are not, are not great for fossil fuels either. Allen Hall: I don’t know what country’s gonna stay the course right now, really. Maybe the UK?  Rosemary Barnes: Oh, I think it’s- Countries that have other reasons for going to renewables are the ones that are gonna stay the, stay the course. Um, and there are plenty of examples of countries where it just, it is by far the easiest, cheapest, fastest option to get more electricity. Um, you know, like all of Africa, for example, is, is facing that as a, uh, a better development path than trying to build big, um, fossil fuel power plants. But even that, you know, like in India, they’re making a huge transition, Pakistan, not to mention Australia, where now batteries are having more of an impact on electricity prices than gas is. So our electricity prices now finally are dropping, um, this year for the first time because of how many batteries have come on and are now, you [00:14:00]know… Like they’ve just flattened. The evening price peak used to be on average about, like, I think $400 or something dollars a megawatt hour, and now it’s like 100. In one year we had that, we had that change, yeah, just from the amount of batteries that have come on in the last year or two.  Allen Hall: Why does that make such a big difference in the price of electricity, the battery aspect?  Rosemary Barnes: Because, so the way that Australia… Australia’s electricity market is pretty similar to Texas, so if you understand that, then you can probably understand Australia’s. But, you know, at any five-minute interval, people, like, they know how much demand there’s going to be, and then people are bidding in how much they would supply electricity for in that five minutes, in real time as well. It’s not like day ahead or anything like that in Australia. The, like, last one they need is what everybody gets paid. So, like, solar power is gonna bid in at, like, you know, practically zero, um, or maybe negative prices actually if they’ve got power purchase agreements in place. And then, you know, wind a little bit more, and then coal, uh, you know, a, a bit [00:15:00] more than that, and then gas, the open cycle gas turbines, the peakers, they’re very expensive. They’re bidding in at 400, $400 a megawatt hour. If there’s enough batteries that that gas doesn’t need to bid in, then all of a sudden we don’t have the gas price that everybody has to pay. We have the battery price that everyone has to pay, and that is very, very cheap and will become cheaper as there’s more of them in the, in the system. So it’s like a threshold event. You, you know, um, even if you’re using only a tiny bit of gas, if you need any gas at all, even like, you know, one megawatt of gas, everybody gets paid the gas price. If you just get a little bit more battery in and you don’t need it anymore, bam, the price just falls. So that’s what we… We’ve passed that threshold now.  Allen Hall: Isn’t that where the UK is trying to get, is to get past that threshold where renewables are that last addition to the grid and kick off peaker plants and some expensive other- fuel sources. That’s I, I [00:16:00] think where everybody’s gone because they have the same system where the, the last one in is what sets the price for everybody. Rosemary Barnes: Yeah. The UK’s a little bit different because one, they’re connected to Europe, and two, they’ve got nuclear, so they do have that kind of base load.  Allen Hall: Let’s go down the rabbit hole just for a second. So if the peaker plants don’t come on, that means that the battery electricity supplying the grid is pretty low in price. It seems like they are losing money on their investment in the battery That they were hoping the price would be higher. Because if the peaker plants are still going on, that would be a $400 price and they’re gonna come in at, like, 350, so that would make sense. It, it helps pay off the battery investment. But if they’re dropping the price down from 400 to 100, it would seem like the battery investment may not be a, a wise decision.  Rosemary Barnes: For sure they’re making less money, but it was– they were making crazy profits for the first little, the first few, few years of, you know, grid-scale batteries. And even [00:17:00] home batteries, people were making a l- a lot of money off that, and it was crazy. Like, I’m on some, um, some Reddit subreddits about, uh, you know, people with home batteries and-  Allen Hall: Slash battery?  Rosemary Barnes: Matt probably is too. Matt’s a Beta G enthusiast, so I’m sure that he is just as excited as me. But anyway, so on one of these subreddits, you know, people used to talk about, “Oh, I made 100 bucks last night,” um, or, or whatever, you know, just a household. And now all the posts are complaining about there’s been no price spikes all year. You know, I thought that I was gonna make heaps of money off my battery, but people are really change- changing how they think of it. And now it’s like… And l- like I want– used to want to do this. I don’t have solar panels yet ’cause we need a new roof, and I’ve been waiting a few years to, one, live in a house that I own, and then two, get a freaking new roof. Um, and I thought I’m gonna just, like, cover it in solar panels, get a huge battery, and I’m gonna be an energy trader in my free time and make heaps of money, and now that is [00:18:00] not the strategy anymore. The strategy is to just reduce your bills to the m- the minimum that you can. Um, that’s basically, that’s basically it. So you are right that some of this arbitrage is, um, the opportunity’s over, and that it will be less, um, exciting for, uh, opportunity for people to put more, more batteries in.  Matthew Stead: Just to add to that, through the middle of the day quite often there’s, uh, negative pricing. So if you’ve got a battery, you’re being paid to charge through the middle of the day. So that actually takes away some of the pain from having a lower, a lower price, um, during the peak.  Rosemary Barnes: But the thing about negative prices is that you need coal power plants for them to be… Like, the only reason we have such pervasive negative prices is not because solar plants have PPAs that are, you know, make it worthwhile for them to generate even when the price is slightly negative. The real thing is that coal power plants don’t want to turn down below, I don’t know, yeah, like 20, 30% during the middle of the day. They have to be on if they want to make money in the evening, and that means that they bid in at, like, [00:19:00] negative 50, um, so that people– so that they can stay running. And that’s where the bulk of our negative prices come from. So As coal power plants close, those negative prices will go away. Um, and when they close, we should get some better evening price spikes again. So, you know, like nothing ever stays the same for long, which is why it is such a fascinating hobby to have, being interested in the electricity market, because it’s never the same from one year to another. You’ll never understand it, ’cause it’s never, it never stays the same long enough to really get your head around it.  Allen Hall: You need other hobbies. You really do.  Matthew Stead: A friend of mine works in trading, and, uh, he said, “As long as there’s volatility, there will be progress.” So much like what Rosie was saying is the more volatile it is, the more opportunity there is for people to come in, um, and change it. Allen Hall: I just don’t know how the battery thing plays out once that threshold is reached. When you have more batteries on the system and you knock down the price that [00:20:00] much, I think battery sales, industrial batteries really slow down because they’re all looking for that quick ROI And they’re not gonna get it. Rosemary Barnes: You have to wait for all of the coal to close before you would find out what’s the right amount of batteries to have in the, in the grid.  Allen Hall: Yeah, yeah, yeah. That, I totally agree there, yeah.  Yolanda Padron: You’d still get, like in extreme weather events and stuff, you’d still get a big price spike, right, for all these batteries. Allen Hall: Back to Matt’s point, more volatility.  Rosemary Barnes: If you want the market to respond, you need to give enough incentive to invest in assets so you’ll have enough when it’s needed. And because it’s really infrequent, then it has to be a super high price to, um, bring on enough investment. And will this system… The system has worked absolutely, you know, pretty well in Aus- Australia at least. Will it continue into the future with more variable prices and renewables? I, I don’t know, and the government is starting to do some things like, uh, you know, like a lot of [00:21:00] electricity markets have, um, not just energy markets but also capacity markets where you will pay a battery or a gas plant something to be on standby basically, um, so that if there is, um, if there’s a shortfall then they, then they have to respond. So in Western Australia they have that, but across the east of Australia th- they currently do not, do not have that. It’s energy only.  Allen Hall: Really? How do you not have capacity payments?  Rosemary Barnes: The majority of their profits are made in just a few hours a year when there are those price spikes, so that’s, that’s h- part of their business case. Allen Hall: I mean, there, there is arbitrage happening on the electricity grid. That’s not the best place to be arbitraging things because you will have players that won’t provide electricity just to drive up the price.  Rosemary Barnes: Uh, and it happens in Australia too, but, um, you know, because batteries are such a distributed resource, it, it will become harder and harder to do that when, you know, the, um, the ownership of these batteries is, you know, households as well as, um, yeah, as well as [00:22:00] big companies. Matthew Stead: So offshore wind, I was talking to an OEM a, a little while ago and, uh, talking about blade repairs for offshore wind, you know, floating, floating wind. Um, so specifically floating wind. The OEM was extremely concerned about floating wind, um, because it makes it very, very, very hard to change blades. So the story was that if you’ve got an offshore floating platform, you’re basically gonna have to tow the wind turbine back to port to change a, a blade. Rosemary Barnes: They see that as a, as a pro, not a con though. Yeah. That, that’s because it’s very hard to… Like, it’s not only floating offshore wind where it’s very hard to remove a, a blade out at sea, like fixed bottom offshore wind, that’s incredibly expensive to remove a blade. So floating is like, well, you can just tow it back to shore and then you can do it all in the port. I, I, you’re looking skeptical, Matt, and I’m also skeptical about how it actually plays out. I know that, um, what was it? The, [00:23:00] the one- An EOL project off the coast of Scotland. I can’t remember what it’s called now. Like what, the first big one, the big wind farm, a floating offshore wind farm  Allen Hall: HiWind Scotland  Rosemary Barnes: They had a, a problem. I don’t know if it was a serial issue or also, like it’s the first big wind farm, and there might have been like some operating condition they weren’t aware of that caused some problems. They had to tow back everything to port, and they stayed there for months and months. So like maybe, maybe close to a year or over a year, I’m not sure. It was a really long time. And so, um, yeah. But then, you know, like what’s the alternative? If that had happened out at sea, it would’ve been more expensive. If, it still would’ve been shut down, not doing anything, and you would’ve had like helicopters out there every single day bringing teams and, um, you know, huge vessels with cranes and yeah. So like it’s, maintenance at sea is never good.  Allen Hall: But the whole point of the HiWind project was to get some of these problems figured out, and one of them was just towing it back to port and [00:24:00] doing major repairs or component exchanges make sense. I think it’s a, it’s a lesson well learned, and we’ve moved on. I guess the question is, does offshore, floating offshore in particular, have much of a future if Norway’s not willing to do it?  Matthew Stead: I think it’s a good comparison with, um, data centers in space.  Rosemary Barnes: You know where else they’re planning to put data centers? Not just space and offshore, also like, um, underwater ones, like on the deep ocean floor, um, on the moon somewhat. Like there’s an actual company that is apparently developing a, a data center on the moon  Allen Hall: As wind energy professionals, staying informed is crucial, and let’s face it, difficult. That’s why the Uptime podcast recommends PES Wind magazine. PES Wind offers a diverse range of in-depth articles and expert insights that dive into the most pressing issues facing our energy future. Whether you’re an industry veteran or new to wind, PES Wind has the high-quality content you need. Don’t [00:25:00] miss out. Visit peswind.com today. Well, in this quarter’s PES Wind magazine, there are a number of great articles, and if you haven’t downloaded your copy, you should do that at peswind.com. There’s a good article from Global Blade Services USA, and it’s talking about the technician problem and how it’s not gonna, it solve itself, obviously. But Global Blade Service is putting some numbers to it. And Rosemary, this is really directed at you. Blades represent roughly 20% of the total, total turbine capital cost and are the leading driver of unplanned downtime.  Rosemary Barnes: Yeah, 40% of O&M.  Allen Hall: Right, and 75% of all blade repairs are already handled outside OEM warranty. That number seems really high, but maybe after the warranty expires?  Rosemary Barnes: Do you say 30% of, of repairs are repaired under warranty? That’s, uh, unexpectedly high from my point of view. [00:26:00] But, you know, how would I know? No one’s getting in touch with me if, you know, they’ve got a problem with their blades and it just got fixed under warranty. Then they’re not paying a consultant to come sort it out. I only, I’m, I’m only there when the warranty is nearly up or it’s already over.  Allen Hall: So they, they’re saying that the, the ratio’s even gonna grow more towards out of warranty repairs. But the problem is having technicians. And the deeper problem is developing all those technicians in time as that need grows. Uh, reaching full structural repair competency takes a rope access technician eight to 10 years. A basket technician is five to seven, and a factory technician is four to five years, meaning the workforce, uh, the industry needs for the next decade has to start training now. I, I think we’re seeing this in full force. I- the issue is keeping good people in the industry as it fluctuates up and [00:27:00] down all the time and is very seasonal. Because there are really good rope technicians out there who know what they are doing, and it does take a, a minimum of three years to be competent. And then to be that lead person, it takes four or five solid. And to be, uh, the, the relied-upon person, especially for some of the more complicated repairs, it’s gonna be six, seven, eight years before you’re there. It’s just an exposure thing. Are we in a technician crisis?  Rosemary Barnes: Crisis is maybe a little bit inflammatory, but, uh, we’re in a technician challenge  Matthew Stead: But it’s a pretty, it’s a pretty basic topic, Allen, isn’t it? Like, um, you know, there’s more and more wind turbines, there have to be more and more technicians. It takes time to train. So, you know, it’s, it’s just, it’s pretty much basic maths and, um, you know, it’s like te- you know, tradies to build houses. Um, you know, unless you’ve got the tradies, you can’t build houses in a cheap way. Yolanda Padron: Part of the issue is that, you know, say there’s [00:28:00] 10 technicians that are available in the area, right? Then you … maybe they work under two different companies, and then one company goes bankrupt, so then they all work with the same company. Another company pops up, or someone gets kicked off site from the OEM side, and then a month later they’re back with the third party. And then it’s just really difficult to keep track of kind of who’s still there and who’s not, because some people have the certifications and maybe they’re not really, really great at what they do, or other people have a lot of training and a lot of experience, and it’s just difficult to track exactly, you know, where they are now. I know that the, the strategy here oftentimes is you’ll find one person that you like and you kind of follow him around, or follow them around whatever company they’re, they’re with at the moment, and then just use that company.  Matthew Stead: The other point I was going to make is that there’s also the seasonality, isn’t there? So you know, if you’ve got a great, a great technician, when it’s cold, they can’t earn cash from [00:29:00] repairing blades.  Rosemary Barnes: Aren’t they hired as, like, seasonal workers in America and they just don’t get paid for part of the year? That’s not how it’s done here. I mean, I guess we don’t have the climate where you have to, like, totally shut down, so they’re not, like, sitting around getting paid for nothing. But, like, that’s a really unim- unappealing feature of the of the, um, field, isn’t it? If you’re deciding what you wanna, what kinda job you wanna do, you want one where you can get paid for 12 months out of the year, not just, I don’t know, like eight or whatever it is.  Matthew Stead: I know there’s been a lot of discussion between, like, Australian US repair companies of, like, shipping technicians down here during the Northern Hemisphere winter and vice versa, and it gives, you know, chance of exploring the world. But, you know, if you’ve got kids and family, you’re not gonna necessarily wanna do that either.  Rosemary Barnes: It’s such a tiring job, though. I don’t… Like, there’s, um, I think it’s fine if people do it for, like, a hard 10 years and then, um, yeah, move on to… Because you obviously learn a lot as a technician, so y- you know, like, there’s a lot of office jobs that you would be really good at [00:30:00] because you had that physical experience. But yeah, like, I, I do think that there’s heaps of young people that are traveling the world being wind turbine technicians.  Yolanda Padron: At least in Texas, I know a lot of rural areas where they don’t necessarily have a lot of opportunities to get higher education, and so going to be a technician is a good route for them to then go into a larger part of the industry, um, to, to kinda get a head start there. Um, and they get a lot of really valuable skills, and oftentimes, like you said, Rosie, they’ll, they’ll get picked up by, um, by the owners or the OEMs or someone, um, because of their experience there. But it, but it is quite a bit of, of hard work and, and physical, physical labor. I climbed one tower and I was sore for two weeks, so really, really not my cup of tea. Rosemary Barnes: I’m always, like, so excited to, to be climbing towers ’cause I only do it, like, you know, sometimes no times in a year, sometimes twice a year. Um, yeah, so, like, I’m really excited to go climb, and it’s really cool the first day, and then the second day it’s like, “Oh, this harness is [00:31:00] so heavy. Am I really putting this on again? Oh my God.” Yeah, so it’s, uh, it’s ob- obviously you get used to it if you, um, if you do climb a lot. The last, uh, last site that I was at, a lot of the technicians were just climbing the ladders so that they wouldn’t have to, you know, go to the gym afterwards. So there’s a lift there, but they use the ladder because then they get their cardio for the day. So, you know, they’ve obviously got some surplus energy.  Allen Hall: I think it is kind of a myth outside the US, uh, uh, seasonal workers, uh, at least in Europe, I haven’t seen a lot of seasonal workers. It doesn’t mean they don’t exist, of course. But in the United States, there’s a lot of seasonal workers from construction and all kinds of other industries. People figure it out And it, it’s a lot more common than I think y- being an engineer you think it is, but there are a lot of seasonal workers. So being a, a wind technician is not a bad job.  Rosemary Barnes: I guess they’re just getting [00:32:00] paid extra for the time that they’re working and they just know they’re used to budgeting to cover the few months off. Allen Hall: They have a winter job. They’ll, they have employment. They already have it lined up where when it gets cold outside, they have someplace else to go. Back into construction for a few months. They’re maybe driving a truck or doing other things that, that bring in income. They have it pretty well figured out. When– At least the technicians I’ve talked to seem to have a, a plan about it, and they’re not sitting by the television for six months. That’s not what’s happening. It, that there’s a lot of employment opportunities here in the States, and so they, they’re pretty nimble. So if you haven’t read this article or a number of our other great articles in PES Wind, you should go to peswind.com right now and download a copy today. That wraps up another episode of the Uptime Wind Energy podcast. If today’s discussion sparked any questions or ideas, we’d love to hear from you. Reach out to us on LinkedIn, and don’t forget to subscribe so you never miss an episode. [00:33:00] For Yolanda, Rosemary, and Matthew, I’m Allen Hall, and we’ll see you here next week on the Uptime Wind Energy podcast.

Welcome to the Art Life Faith Podcast, and I’m your host, Roger Lowther. We are recording live from the JCAMM conference in downtown Tokyo with the theme of “The Beauty of Japan・The Beauty of Heaven.” It’s a week-long conference from Friday, May 22 to Wednesday, May 27, 2026, where we are talking about the arts of Japan, the beauty of Japan, and how that helps us worship God. We’ve had so many amazing guests this week, and now I have the privilege of sitting down with one of our key presenters, a band like no other I’ve ever seen in the world called IziBongo. They sing not only in the various languages of the world, but they use the various instruments of the world and the various styles and genres of the world so people can see what it looks like for the nations to praise God and how that can lead us all in praise of God. So I wanted to sit down with them and have a conversation. I’ve also asked Akira Mori to sit down with us. He is our MC for the conference, and he’s a longtime friend and partner. We got to know each other very well through the 2011 earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear disaster. He’s the pastor of Global Mission Chapel in Iwaki, Japan, not too far south of the nuclear power plants in Fukushima. And his amazing church was one of the key centers for relief work for all of Tohoku. Through the years, we’ve gotten to know each other better, and I’ve so appreciated not just his encouragement and the way he leads especially movements of prayer in Japan but the way he’s encouraged me personally and for his friendship. And so I invited him to be the MC for this conference and also to be with us for this podcast episode. So thank you, all of you, for being here. Why don’t we start with a quick introduction? Please tell me who are you and where this name IziBongo came from. It’s kind of an interesting name. Cory Sure, Izibongo is a Zulu word which means praises intoned in honor of a person. It’s a kind of praise poetry. This is a second generation of the group itself, originally called the Wycliffe World Music Band, which came from Wycliffe Bible Translators. Roger Not as catchy… Cory Yeah…, which came from Wycliffe Bible Translators. Roger Okay, so what do you do? Why did you form IziBongo? Cory Originally, the Wycliffe World Music Band was meant to be an illustrative form of the music of the world and to promote Bible translation. That was one of the hopes for the people who organized it. We would go to Christian music festivals and perform there to show how the nations would worship or do their songs. Paul I might add that originally it was an ad hoc group of students in a particular class learning about some of these principles of music and worship around the world. The leader of that class was our mentor, Tom Avery. He would gather the students and throw instruments at them and say, “Sing this and let’s play this.” And so it was just to appreciate the worship around the world. This developed out of that educational starting point to more of a worship focus and whatever it is today. Cathy Another point that Tom would make when teaching us these songs was that music is not a universal language, it’s a universal phenomenon. But different peoples have different ways of singing. We think we might understand what they’re singing about. We might make a judgment if we hear another culture’s music and say, “That’s demonic,” or, “You could not praise God with that music.” But he was teaching us that we need to understand when we go into cultures their music systems. We can’t just go in and say, “No, you have to sing it this way.” Mary And to follow up on that is the focus of outsider-insider, an outsider trying to understand from the insiders, “What does this mean to you? What is the content?” because as outsiders, we can really miss it and not understand what’s actually being expressed. So we have terms. We say etic and emic, outsider/insider perspectives, that we talk about in our courses and our learning. Roger Help us to see what this looks like a little bit more concretely. What countries, what groups are you representing, and what kinds of instruments are you playing? Paul Well, I’m playing about 3 or 4 instruments here. One is a charango from Bolivia, which I bought on the River Walk in San Antonio from a real live player. I’m also playing a Moroccan oud, which we use for other instruments as well. We don’t carry 50 instruments, we carry about 10. And I’m playing a Greek bouzouki, but I’m using that to represent music from other parts of the world as well if the instrument sounds similar to the sounds. So again, we’re approximating all these. We’re never being exactly authentic. We are just Americans. We’re not trying to pretend that we’re something else. But we love the sounds of the world and the praises that they lift up. So we want to approximate those sounds so that you will learn to appreciate their music. As for the countries that we actually sing songs from, we could give a list if you’d like. Cory We do some from South America, so there’s Brazil, Venezuela, Bolivia…Ghana, Democratic Republic of Congo… Cathy Nigeria… Cory Egypt… Paul Tunisia, Papua New Guinea, Bhutan, South Korea…We don’t have a Japanese song yet. Roger Okay, well, we’ll have to fix that. Paul Exactly! We’re working on it. Roger So tell me more about why you do this. What is your purpose in singing these different styles—using different instruments, different languages, representing different countries? Paul Well, for myself, and I think for my wife as well, we were worship leaders in a local church and trying to find the most relevant ways to help people worship in our culture. It was mostly not a mixed culture. It was mostly just a normal American church in Texas, but still we had to wrestle with contemporary versus older styles and who was there and what kind of music they liked. In the South it’s a little more Baptist hymnal kind of songs, which I wasn’t that familiar with. So you always have to learn and find out from the congregation that you’re worshiping with, what helps them express their heart, because that’s really what a worship leader is trying to do, just help the people worship from their heart. So that was where we started, and when we ran into Tom and he was doing that in the jungles of Brazil, it sounded radically different, of course. So we learned from him how to approximate that sound so that we could present it. Cathy So the first time we performed this kind of music, we thought we were just going to give people an educational experience and say, this is what your brothers and sisters sound like over in Africa, or this is what they say to God in their songs. The people that heard us in Memphis, Tennessee, on that very first trip were crying. They said, “This is a kind of worship that we’ve never experienced before.” It wasn’t necessarily something they could participate in, but it was like when you look up at the stars and go, “Wow, God, that’s amazing.” And you get a glimpse of the worship that God is preparing for himself across the world. And it does increase your love for your brothers and sisters. So we wanted to give more people that kind of understanding and that kind of love for brothers and sisters that they’ve never met, maybe an experience that would have them want to pray for those brothers and sisters. And so when we go to a mission conference, we hope, too, that it opens people’s eyes to understand that we want to encourage authentic ethnic worship and not just press our Western songs onto others. Mary I was just going to say one word, beauty. Well, I’ll say a few more words than just that. We have a colleague who decades ago said, why would God have created birds that only sing one song? And so we think about the diversity of artistic communication and think about the beauty of how we can all be different and have different artistic expression, but that it can be unified in the worship of our Creator, and to learn to appreciate that, but also know that it’s perfectly great to have those styles and songs and ways that you can sing and worship that come really from a deep place in your heart. So, we want to get into what that is in each culture to lead people to that place of beauty. Paul It makes me think also the necessity that we feel of presenting things with authentic instrumentation as much as possible and with some costuming. It’s not like we’re not trying to appropriate someone else’s culture. We’re trying to represent so that you will have a deeper appreciation of those—the beauty, not just the sound, but the beauty of those cultures in their expression of worship. Roger I’m glad you all are talking about this because that was one of my next questions is like, why is this important? You know, when I first came to Japan, the first thing that people wanted me and my wife to do is, as musicians, help with worship. And there’s basically two choices you can do. Contemporary or you can do traditional. One or the other. If you play organ and piano, well that’s traditional. If you use the guitar, well then that’s going to be contemporary. Those are the only two choices, so choose. If you go back and forth between the two, then that’s blended, a little of both. So to hear what you all do is so far outside people’s expectations of what worship can be. And that message, I feel, is especially needed in Japan. I would love Mori-Sensei to comment on that. Have you heard anything like this in Japan, this group? Mori No. That’s it. Roger And is it important then for Japan? Mori Absolutely. Japanese people like to feel safe, I guess, and don’t want to be criticized. Therefore, they try to conform to whatever is the mainstream, whether it’s a small group of 3, 4, 5 or a bigger group of 50–100. But that’s what I sense, and that’s what I find in myself from the past. So, especially when you think about the Christian church. The gospel was brought by typically Caucasian Western missionaries, and I don’t think they had any other way than to just do what they were used to. And without being intentional, I believe a kind of very clear line between Christians and non-Christian Japanese was drawn. When I was a teenager and a church member, the pastor said secular songs shouldn’t be sung, not even for yourself when you’re alone. So there was a very clear line, and I think in every church it was the same. And if you dare to play jazz or, rock was not so much in Japan in those days, then you were looked at as unspiritual, not a good Christian. So naturally, for those reasons, the Japanese ethnic or original music was separated from the church. It is still very much the same, I think. Therefore, it’s very difficult to take different styles of music and even ethnic music into the church. We don’t have any group like IziBongo. I don’t know if any other countries do either, but it is great riches brought to the church. Roger You know, when I first came to Japan, I was in language school that first year. We made friends with a clarinetist, and she was feeling turmoil about being in the church because the church told her she couldn’t play. She was a professional clarinet player, but they would not allow her to play clarinet in church because that was not appropriate for Christian worship. But, they said, you can play the piano because we need someone to play the piano. She was like, but I’m not a keyboardist and don’t play the piano very well, and it was hard for her to worship while playing the piano. When we came in, they asked us as missionaries to come give a concert, and we invited her to join us. There were tears in her eyes because that was the first time anyone in the church had ever heard her play the clarinet, which was her heart language. And I was like, wow, well, maybe it’s just this church. Well, then we went and were helping to plant another church out in Chiba, where we met a pastor whose son played the saxophone. And it was the same story. He invited his son to play saxophone once in worship, and the church members got so upset. Saxophone is not appropriate for worship, they said. It sounds worldly. It sounds like jazz, you know. And we’ve come across stories like that over and over again. And I want to tell you one more. Sorry I’m talking so much! But there’s this other story when we met this koto player. She was featured in one of our videos during the conference. I think I’ve shared this in a past podcast episode, but we invited her to come and play koto in worship. That’s a traditional Japanese harp, and it was so beautiful. We loved it, but there were so many people upset afterwards. And there were so many meetings afterwards, not the kind of meetings that you really want to have happen, you know, like with the pastor and the elders. Okay, this person’s upset, and they felt like it was connecting to the non-Christian culture in Japan. They said, “You can’t use the koto in worship. You were distracting me from worship. I was not able to worship God because you had the koto there.” And, you know, the way—I’ve shared this with some of you before—the way that we were able to bring healing to that situation is when they realized how she was able to worship God through her heart language, through the koto, it drew them in and they were able to worship God by seeing how she was worshiping God. It wasn’t a gimmick, you know, it wasn’t like we’re trying to force something on the church, but that this is how she worshiped, and they were able to worship through her. It was that relational key that made all the difference. Mori Um, can I ask you a question? Roger Sure. Mori That was your experience in the beginning. Is that still very much the same in the Japanese churches? Roger I do sometimes continue to hear stories, yeah… Mori This is my subjective, biased opinion, but around 20 years ago, God raised a young man and gave him song after song. An authentic Japanese young man, producing Japanese praise songs, worship songs, and they did some gatherings using yukatas and guitars on the stage, dancing and singing. And those worship songs created by those people, they have quite rapidly spread all across Japan. Roger Oh, wow. I’d like to hear them. Mori Yes. Oh, you know him. Taka. His songs, I believe, have changed the atmosphere of Japanese churches. Nagasawa Takafumi wrote that famous song, “Sono Hi Zen Sekai Ga” (“On That Day”). He started out as a worship leader in his father’s church. Now, he’s the senior pastor. But he was invited as a worship leader to a church in a different place, totally different place, and the pastor, as the congregation sang that song, proudly said to Taka, “Don’t you think this is an awesome song?” He didn’t know that Taka wrote that song, and Taka did not tell him. But today, more instruments are naturally taken into church services. Different styles are tolerated. Not every church, but, by and large, so many churches are resembling Western American churches, worship band in front and leading songs with guitars and drums and bass guitars and keyboard. And it’s spreading. And I just think that change has been happening. But still though, not Japanese authentic instruments or styles. Roger Yeah, that's still pretty rare. Mori Yeah, because of the schism that happened, right in the beginning, the Christians somehow feel that those instruments are not theirs. And to me, that’s okay if Christians don’t play any koto or shakuhachi. Of course, they’re greatly considered by Christians to be a special genre of instrument. Roger Generally. Yeah, Cathy? Cathy That’s one thing that seems to happen when we play. We had an experience in Singapore. A Japanese gal came up and talked to me afterwards and said, “This makes me want to go home and find what is unique from my culture that I can offer to God. It makes me want to go home and find or make something unique from my culture. And so, I think that IziBongo sometimes has that effect when we show what other cultures are doing. Roger Yeah, I also wanted to ask you all, I know that like sometimes I hear this word “appropriation” in the States, because you are not from those cultures, because you are Americans doing that music. If someone was to come at you and say, “Hey, that’s not appropriate for you to be doing that,” how would you respond to them? Paul Well, it depends who it’s coming from, I think, is where we start. We have never had anyone come to us from those nations with a problem with us. In fact, all we’ve ever heard is appreciation that we at least attempted to sing in their language. And again, we don’t do it perfectly. We had one experience up at Prairie Bible College where we played a First Nations song, a Native American song, and there was one young gentleman there who was a young man from the First Nations, and he was so excited. He wanted to sing the song. It was very simple, so he wanted to lead it. It was so amazing to him that he could do that. And almost immediately, we got strong pushback from a missionary couple who’d been there for 30 years working with First Nations peoples who felt like that was very inappropriate for the church. So let me say it this way: What we do is not try to impose on the church what you should do. What we’re doing is saying praise is happening all over the world, not always on Sunday morning. In fact, most of this wouldn’t be in Sunday morning worship, but it’s worship. Some of it’s on the streets of Brazil, a samba. And it was a Christian song sung on the streets of Carnaval. I mean, that’s not Sunday morning. So again, what we’re presenting is just the various expressions of praise. Whether they fit on Sunday morning in the church, your pastor and your worship leaders need to work that out. And we shouldn’t be judging them. They’re the ones who are to guide and guard the flock. So pray for your pastors that they might have vision even when they have reservations. Cathy I would say it’s also not only praise, but Scripture memory songs, storytelling, telling of Bible stories, and historical things. So there are other ways to use the music. Cory And the use of the music that we do when we perform are based on relationships that we have with the communities themselves, either through a Bible translation project or actual one-on-one. So, we have gotten permission to do these songs according to the communities that we’ve come in contact with. Mary And I’ll say that coming back to the U.S. from West Africa and starting to hear this word appropriation, I was a little bit shocked because I was like, oh, what does that mean? You know, I had to say, what does that actually mean? Because to be in West Africa or in that particular culture, you dress with the cloth and you learn their songs and they are thrilled that you are learning their language and wearing their clothes. So appropriation is not about using these things for our own benefit, but it’s about lifting up and respecting that culture. Roger We are almost out of time, but I want to give Mori Sensei the last word. So, think about what you’re going to say. Let me just say that I’ve been moved by talking with all of you, you know, outside this interview, the stories you’ve told me about how people respond saying, wow, I had no idea I could worship God in that way through my culture, through my art, and how it’s encouraging them, empowering them really. You are empowering the nations to say, God has given you these gifts to worship him, and it’s just such an important message. Thank you so much for the time and money you’ve spent to come all the way to Japan to share this with us. We really appreciate it. Mori Sensei, do you have any final comments? Mori Well, thank you very much. I’m so honored. Change is happening in the Japanese churches. It’s not only negative. In one church, 45 minutes away from Tokyo, they started using enka. Enka is very secular, many love songs. They were the songs church members' husbands especially loved. So they invited the husbands and did a couples' night. They served beer and they sang enka. And the people loved it. Actually, the wives loved it too. So, some changes are happening. Also, Japanese instruments—koto, shakuhachi, shamisen—are not widely used in the churches. I think that’s because nowadays Japanese people have grown up without those instruments nearby. But those who have, they should be invited to the churches to perform and make them feel at home. Still, the Japanese churches are very much under the control of pastors. So these gatherings would be excellent for the Japanese pastors to know and come attend, listen to, hear the stories. That’s probably the challenge for the near future. Roger Thank you. Thank you so much, all of you. I really appreciate it. God bless you. You've been listening to the Art Life Faith Podcast. To watch the video of this podcast or many other videos from the conference, please go to our website: www.communityarts.jp. As we say in Japan, “Ja, mata ne.” We'll see you next time.

Chris and Ed kick off the second annual Summer of Fear with guests Cassidy and Amanda from "Drinking the Koolaid" for a terrifying deep dive into tsunamis. From the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami and the 2011 disaster in Japan to ancient waves that may have helped topple civilizations, the crew explores what causes tsunamis, why they don't look like movie waves, and why seeing one usually means it's already too late to run.SHOW NOTESBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/scared-all-the-time--7084296/support.Get the latest episodes of our bonus show NEW FEAR UNLOCKED -- and a whole lot more! --by supporting the show on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/ScaredAllTheTime

This week's show features stories from France 24, NHK Japan, and Radio Havana Cuba. http://youthspeaksout.net/swr260612.mp3 (29:00) From FRANCE- First, June 8th was World Ocean Day which was celebrated at the UN with the release of the third in a series of world ocean assessments- it pointed out the need to change course, to cease disrupting fragile ecosystems, and a warning that the Arctic could become ice free in the 2030s. Then three press reviews. First press on the 100 days of the US Israeli war on Iran. Press analysis on the Chinese Presidents visit to North Korea and an attempt to balance Russian influence. Press on the race riots in Belfast following the knife murder of a white irishman by a Sudanese immigrant- many black homes have been torched- Elon Musks anti-immigration agenda is discussed along with rapid rise in the hands of a few multi-billionaires. From JAPAN- The Japanese nuclear regulator released radiation levels across the Fukushima prefecture after 15 years- 30% of the area is still considered unsafe, though this will drop to 20% 15 years from now. The Japanese Defense Ministry is transported a missile launcher to their eastern most island in the Pacific, 2000 km SE from the main island. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute released their annual report on Monday, pointing out the nuclear armed countries have 12,000 nuclear weapons and a number of countries are expanding their stockpiles. Russian officials have criticized Britain, France, and Germany for their military support of Ukraine. 3 Indian crew members on a tanker in Hormuz were killed when the US military- the Indian Foreign Ministry condemned the attack. Pete Hegseth gave a speech at Guantanamo Prison, continuing the threats to Cuba. From CUBA- A ship arrived in Cuba with 1700 tons of food and other supplies from Mexico and Belize. Cuba mentioned the US propaganda radio station, Radio Marti, aimed at the Cuban island for 41 years. A Congressional research report said that the US military has lost 42 aircraft, worth $2.6 billion, during the first 40 days of the war on Iran. US activist Medea Benjamin claims that the US government is losing its mind with its war on Cuba. Available in 3 forms- (new) HIGHEST QUALITY (160kb)(33MB), broadcast quality (13MB), and quickdownload or streaming form (6MB) (28:59) Links at outfarpress.com/shortwave.shtml PODCAST!!!- https://feed.podbean.com/outFarpress/feed.xml (160kb Highest Quality) Website Page- < http://www.outfarpress.com/shortwave.shtml ¡FurthuR! Dan Roberts "The most basic activism we can have in our lives is to live consciously in a nation living in fantasies." --bell hooks Dan Roberts Shortwave Report- www.outfarpress.com YouthSpeaksOut!- www.youthspeaksout.net

Programa Nº 176 de "Voces del Misterio", vigésimo tercero de la Temporada 2010/2011. “Efemérides (18 de Marzo), Lugares de poder, Mentiras y Escándalos en el Vaticano, Los Sueños, La central nuclear de Fukushima, Las Calaveras de Cristal, Las arenas del desierto, etc”. Comenzaremos por nuestras Efemérides (18 de Marzo). Hablaremos con Juan Ignacio Cuesta de los lugares de poder. Nuestro co-director, José Manuel García Bautista, nos traerá otra nueva entrega de "Mentiras y Escándalos en el Vaticano". Mª Ángeles Leiva nos hablará de los Sueños. José Luis Tajada nos hablará de la reciente tragedia en Japón y sus consecuencias en la central nuclear de Fukushima. José David Flores nos hablará de las Calaveras de Cristal y en "la Aldea Irreductible", con Javier Peláez, iremos a las arenas del desierto... Todo esto y mucho más en “Voces del Misterio”. Un programa dirigido y presentado por Jesús García con José Manuel García Bautista. Audio perteneciente a la primera etapa, en Radio Betis. Fecha de emisión: 18/03/2011 RECORDAROS que este PODCAST NO es el OFICIAL del programa “Voces del Misterio”. Para comentarios sobre los temas tratados o las opiniones de los colaboradores, podeís contactar directamente con el programa a través de su web (https://www.vocesdelmisterio.com) o el correo electrónico: "vocesdelmisterio@gmail.com". PARANORMALIA: https://paranormaliaweb.github.io/ (WEB), https://www.facebook.com/paranormaliaweb/ (Facebook) y https://x.com/paranormaliaweb (X).

Dans ce nouvel épisode de Kaiwa Podcast Japon, Mathieu et Nico reviennent sur un événement qui a profondément marqué le Japon contemporain : le séisme du Tōhoku du 11 mars 2011, le tsunami qui a suivi, et les bouleversements humains qu'ils ont engendrés.Tout commence avec le visionnage du film La Famille Asada (Asadake!), qui aborde avec sensibilité les conséquences de la catastrophe à travers le regard d'une famille et le travail de préservation des souvenirs. Ce film sert de point de départ à une discussion plus large sur les tremblements de terre au Japon, leur place dans le quotidien des habitants et la manière dont ils façonnent la société japonaise.Au fil de l'épisode, Mathieu et Nico évoquent les images qui ont marqué le monde entier en mars 2011, les témoignages de survivants, les répliques qui ont continué à secouer le pays pendant des mois, mais aussi le rôle des techniciens de Fukushima, parfois comparés aux liquidateurs de Tchernobyl. Ils s'intéressent également aux élans de solidarité qui ont suivi la catastrophe, aux lieux de mémoire comme la célèbre cabine téléphonique du vent, ainsi qu'à la manière dont les Japonais vivent avec le risque sismique au quotidien.L'épisode est aussi l'occasion de partager des souvenirs plus personnels. Mathieu revient sur son premier voyage au Japon en 2012, à peine un an après la catastrophe, tandis que Nico raconte son retour à l'université la même année, dans un pays encore marqué par les événements mais déjà tourné vers la reconstruction.Entre mémoire collective, résilience, culture du risque et expériences vécues, cet épisode propose un regard sensible sur l'une des plus grandes catastrophes de l'histoire du Japon moderne et sur les traces qu'elle continue de laisser dans la société japonaise d'aujourd'hui.Sortie le 8 juin 2026#japon #日本 #fukushima 

With the 2026 FIFA World Cup just around the corner, Dan Orlowitz re-joins the Krewe to preview Japan's tournament outlook. We break down Samurai Blue's final roster, key players to watch, group-stage matchups, and what a successful World Cup would look like for Japan. Plus, Dan shares his predictions for the tournament's biggest surprises, disappointments, and who he thinks will be lifting the trophy when it's all said and done. Whether you're a diehard soccer fan or a once-every-four-years World Cup viewer, this episode is the perfect primer before kickoff. ------ About the Krewe ------ The Krewe of Japan Podcast is a weekly episodic podcast sponsored by the Japan Society of New Orleans. Check them out every Friday afternoon around noon CST on Apple, Google, Spotify, Amazon, Stitcher, or wherever you get your podcasts.  Want to share your experiences with the Krewe? Or perhaps you have ideas for episodes, feedback, comments, or questions? Let the Krewe know by e-mail at kreweofjapanpodcast@gmail.com or on social media (Twitter: @kreweofjapan, Instagram: @kreweofjapanpodcast, Facebook: Krewe of Japan Podcast Page, TikTok: @kreweofjapanpodcast, LinkedIn: Krewe of Japan LinkedIn Page, Blue Sky Social: @kreweofjapan.bsky.social, & the Krewe of Japan Youtube Channel). Until next time, enjoy! ------ Support the Krewe! Offer Links for Affiliates ------ Use the referral links below & our promo code from the episode! Support your favorite NFL Team AND podcast! Shop NFLShop to gear up for football season! Zencastr Offer Link - Use my special link to save 30% off your 1st month of any Zencastr paid plan!  ------ Past KOJ Sports-Related Episodes ------ Bridging Communities Through MLB Players Trust ft. Amy Hever & Chris Capuano (S6E18) Japanese Soccer on the World Stage ft. Dan Orlowitz (S6E6) Meet the J.League ft. Dan Orlowitz (S6E4) Kendo: The Way of the Sword ft. Alexander Bennett, 7th Dan in Kendo (S4E16) The Life of a Sumotori ft. 3-Time Grand Champion Konishiki Yasokichi (S4E10) Talking Sumo ft. Andrew Freud (S1E8) ------ About Dan Orlowitz ------ Dan's Socials & Writings J-Talk Podcast ------ JSNO Upcoming Events ------ JSNO Event Calendar Join JSNO Today!

On this episode of Japan Station, we're talking about food you have to eat the next time you visit Fukushima.

Programa de Como el perro y el gato, presentado y dirigido por el veterinario Carlos Rodríguez. Repasamos la actualidad animal con Iván Cortés y escuchamos la carta de Kenji, el oso más buscado de Fukushima. Además, Beatriz Ramos actualiza el caso de Cielo, la gata rescatada por la Fundación Mascoteros, y respondemos consultas sobre salud felina, residencias para gatos, apatía en gatos senior y alimentación en perros con problemas dentales. Realiza Pedro Manjón. Produce Beatriz Ramos Jiménez.

One of the biggest artificial intelligence developers, the US firm Anthropic, has proposed a coordinated global slowdown on building advanced AI systems, saying that the latest large language models could escape human control. Also: President Putin delivers a keynote address at an annual economic forum in St Petersburg, insisting that the Russian economy remains strong. The director-general of the World Health Organisation says significant challenges remain around the development of a vaccine for the new species of Ebola. Prosecutors in El Salvador say leaders of the infamous MS-13 gang currently on trial will be sentenced to thousands of years in prison. The military government in Mali bans motorcycles outside major cities to combat militant attacks. And the authorities in Japan say they are still searching for an "extremely intelligent" bear that's evaded capture after attacking people in Fukushima province.The Global News Podcast brings you the breaking news you need to hear, as it happens. Listen for the latest headlines and current affairs from around the world. Politics, economics, climate, business, technology, health – we cover it all with expert analysis and insight. Get the news that matters, delivered twice a day on weekdays and daily at weekends, plus special bonus episodes reacting to urgent breaking stories. Follow or subscribe now and never miss a moment. Get in touch: globalpodcast@bbc.co.uk Photo: Anthropic logo Credit: REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo

This week, Ryan Sprague is sharing a special feed drop from a podcast he thinks Somewhere in the Skies listeners will love: Supernatural Japan. Hosted by Kevin O'Shea, Supernatural Japan explores the fascinating crossroads of folklore, history, true crime, and the paranormal across Japan. In this featured episode, "Strange Skies in Japan: UFOs in Fukushima," you'll journey to the legendary UFO Village of Iino, home to decades of UFO sightings, mysterious lights, close encounter reports, and the famous Iino UFO Museum. Discover how this small town became Japan's UFO hotspot and what its enduring mysteries reveal about belief, folklore, and the unknown. If you've ever been curious about the stranger side of Japan, this is an episode you won't want to miss. Enjoy this special feed drop, and be sure to subscribe to Supernatural Japan wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more at: www.supernaturaljapan.com Send us a voicemail: https://www.speakpipe.com/SomewhereSkiesPod Patreon: http://www.patreon.com/somewhereskies ByMeACoffee: http://www.buymeacoffee.com/UFxzyzHOaQ Substack: https://ryansprague.substack.com/ All socials and books: https://linktr.ee/somewhereskiespod Email: ryan.sprague51@gmail.com Copyright © 2026 Ryan Sprague. All rights reserved. #FeedDrop #Fukushima #Supernatural #Japan #Folklore #TrueCrime #Paranormal #UFOs #Aliens #Ghosts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Vị thế « kinh đô » công nghiệp bán dẫn thế giới của Đài Loan được củng cố thêm khi lãnh đạo tập đoàn Nvidia tại Đài Bắc hôm 01/06/2026 thông báo « mở ra một kỷ nguyên mới » trong lĩnh vực máy tính cá nhân, chen chân vào câu lạc bộ rất khép kín của các nhà sản xuất các bộ vi xử lý trong tay Intel và AMD. Chiến tranh Iran và khủng hoảng ở eo biển Hormuz đe dọa cột trụ vững chắc nhất của nền kinh tế Đài Loan là công nghiệp bán dẫn ? Giải pháp nào cho hòn đảo phải nhập khẩu đến 97 % năng lượng để bảo đảm nhu cầu tiêu thụ cho 24 triệu dân và cỗ máy công nghiệp ? Các nhà sản xuất chip tiên tiến nhất của Đài Loan sẽ bị tác động đến mức độ nào từ cuộc khủng hoảng Trung Đông lần này do phụ thuộc đến 80 % khí heli của Vùng Vịnh ? Về an ninh năng lượng, an ninh công nghiệp, Đài Bắc có thể rút ra được những bài học nào trong trường hợp eo biển Đài Loan bị phong tỏa trong một cuộc xung đột quân sự với Bắc Kinh ? RFI tiếng Việt mời nhà nghiên cứu Adrien Simorre, cộng tác viên Viện Quan Hệ Quốc Tế Pháp IFRI trả lời các câu hỏi trên. Là một nhà báo và một nhà phân tích độc lập làm việc lâu năm tại Đài Bắc, Adrien Simorre nguyên là thông tín viên thường trực của đài RFI và của báo Libération. Từ đầu tháng 3/2026 eo biển Hormuz bị phong tỏa. Giao thương quốc tế xuyên qua một trong những cửa ngõ quan trọng nhất bị tê liệt. Dầu hỏa, khí đốt, khí hóa lỏng, phân bón, hóa chất, nhôm, lưu huỳnh, ammoniac … trở nên khan hiếm. Eo biển Hormuz, Đài Loan trong tâm bão Khác với chiến tranh Ukraina mà Nga khai mào năm 2022, lần này xung đột tại Trung Đông từ ngày 28/02/2026 đã đẩy châu Á vào một cuộc khủng hoảng năng lượng : 40 % nhập khẩu dầu và hơn 25 % khí hóa lỏng tiêu thụ tại châu Á phải đi qua eo biển Hormuz. Đài Loan là 1 trong 9 nền kinh tế thế giới phụ thuộc nhiều nhất vào khí hóa lỏng của Trung Đông cho nên cuộc xung đột này đang thử thách sức chịu đựng của mô hình công nghiệp và chính sách năng lượng trên hòn đảo với 24 triệu dân này. Về năng lượng, Đài Loan có nhiều nhược điểm : Thứ nhất, là một hòn đảo, Đài Loan không thể phát triển các hệ thống đường ống dẫn dầu hay khí đốt dưới lòng biển, trên bộ như của Trung Quốc hay châu Âu. Thứ hai là khác với Bắc Kinh, Đài Bắc không phát triển quan hệ với các nguồn cung cấp từ phía các quốc gia « bất hảo » bị quốc tế tẩy chay (Iran, Venezuela và Nga). Điểm thứ ba khả năng dự trữ năng lượng của hòn đảo này tuy có – và đủ sức bảo đảm các nhu cầu tiêu thụ trong « nhiều tháng », nhưng lại đặc biệt hạn chế đối với khí hóa lỏng như Adrien Simore đã ghi nhận trong bài nghiên cứu đăng trên trang mạng của Viện Quan Hệ Quốc Tế Pháp IFRI. Trả lời RFI tiếng Việt, tác giả bài nghiên cứu, Adrien Simorre nói rõ hơn :   « Hệ thống điện của Đài Loan phụ thuộc rất nhiều vào năng lượng từ Trung Đông vì gần một nửa lượng điện của hòn đảo được sản xuất từ khí tự nhiên hóa lỏng (LNG). Trong số lượng LNG đó, hơn một phần ba là mua của Qatar. Ngoài Qatar, thì Úc (33,5 %) và Mỹ (9,9 %) là hai nguồn cung cấp quan trọng khác cho Đài Loan. Vấn đề đặt ra là khả năng dự trữ LNG của Đài Loan chỉ có hạn, tương đương với tiêu thụ trong 10 ngày. Cho nên bất kỳ sự gián đoạn nào trong nguồn cung cũng có thể nhanh chóng làm cạn kiệt lượng dự trữ. Eo biển Hormuz bị phong tỏa, là một thách thức thực sự đối với Đài Loan (...)   Đây thực sự là một vấn đề rất nghiêm trọng, nhất là khi nhiều quốc gia khác trong khu vực như Nhật Bản, Hàn Quốc cũng phụ thuộc vào khí đốt nhập khẩu để sản xuất điện. Tuy nhiên, từ lâu nay các chính quyền liên tiếp ở Đài Bắc đã ý thức được rằng đây là một điểm yếu. Đài Loan là trung tâm hàng đầu thế giới về sản xuất chất bán dẫn tiên tiến, đây cũng là một lĩnh vực mang tính sống còn đối với kinh tế toàn cầu, đặc biệt là về trí tuệ nhân tạo. Bên cạnh đó còn có áp lực từ Trung Quốc : Bắc Kinh luôn tuyên bố chủ quyền đối với Đài Loan. Điều này làm dấy lên câu hỏi về khả năng duy trì nguồn cung ổn định cho Đài Loan trong trường hợp bản thân Đài Loan bị phong tỏa ». Hy sinh nhiều đề giữ « lá bùa hộ mệnh » Tháng 6/2024 Đài Loan đã ký kết với tập đoàn năng lượng QatarEnergy một hợp đồng bảo đảm các nguồn cung cấp dài hạn trong vòng 27 năm.  Chuyên gia Adrien Simorre lưu ý rằng Đài Loan chấp nhận chi ra rất nhiều tiền để bảo đảm nhu cầu năng lượng mà ưu tiên là để phục vụ ngành công nghiệp bán dẫn, vốn là « lá bùa hộ mệnh » của hòn đảo này trước những tham vọng về địa chính trị của Bắc Kinh. Tuy nhiên, năng lượng - dầu hỏa, khí hóa lỏng ... chỉ là một khía cạnh của cả một vấn đề để cho phép Đài Loan tiếp tục phát triển và giữ vững vị thế trên bàn cờ chip của thế giới. Adrien Simorre phân tích:   « Nhiều người nghĩ rằng ngành bán dẫn chỉ đơn giản là những nhà máy công nghệ cao với các cỗ máy vận hành gần như tự động. Nhưng cuộc khủng hoảng hiện nay cho thấy công nghệ bán dẫn phụ thuộc rất nhiều vào các nguyên liệu đầu vào nhập khẩu mà khí tự nhiên hóa lỏng là một ví dụ. Một thí dụ khác là khí heli. Đây là sản phẩm phụ của quá trình khai thác khí tự nhiên và được sử dụng trong nhiều công đoạn sản xuất chip. Về điểm này, Đài Loan cũng phụ thuộc rất lớn vào Qatar. Trong những năm gần đây, Qatar chiếm khoảng khoảng 80% lượng heli nhập khẩu vào Đài Loan. Nhưng nói đi thì cũng phải nói lại : một ông khổng lồ trong ngành như TSMC đương nhiên tập đoàn này đã có những sự chuẩn bị từ trước : TSMC đã xây dựng kho dự trữ và phát triển các hệ thống tái chế heli rất tiên tiến. Nhưng các doanh nghiệp Đài Loan không phải ai cũng có những bước chuẩn bị như TSMC. Số này có thể phải đối mặt với chi phí sản xuất tăng cao hoặc tình trạng chậm trễ trong sản xuất.  Song nếu cuộc khủng hoảng Trung Đông kéo dài nhiều tháng, điều là hiện vẫn còn quá sớm để dám khẳng định, sẽ tạo ra căng thẳng đối với một số nhà sản xuất chip có biên lợi nhuận thấp hơn, những hãng sản xuất các bộ xử lý phổ thông hơn. Hai bài học trước mắt từ căng thẳng ở eo biển Hormuz là mức độ phụ thuộc rất lớn của trí tuệ nhân tạo vào chip của Đài Loan và hai là bản thân cỗ máy sản xuất của hòn đảo này lại rất dễ đứt gẫy chuỗi cung ứng …». Ba ngõ thoát hiểm Vậy giải pháp nào cho Đài Loan để thoát khỏi thế bế tắc hiện nay ? Adrien Simorre đưa gia ba phương án : « Giải pháp đầu tiên đối với Đài Loan là đa dạng hóa nguồn cung cấp để bớt phụ thuộc vào Trung Đông. Mỹ và Úc có thể là những giải pháp thay thế. Khả năng thứ hai là quay lại với điện hạt nhân – và đây sẽ là một quyết định lớn về mặt chính trị, bởi vì sau tai nạn nhà máy điện hạt  nhân Fukushima năm 2011, Đài Bắc từng quyết định từ bỏ điện hạt nhân. Là một khu vực nằm trên vành đai địa chấn, Đài Loan cũng có những lo ngại tương tự như Nhật Bản. Mục tiêu của Đài Loan khi đó là thay thế điện hạt nhân bằng khí tự nhiên và năng lượng tái tạo. Tuy nhiên, quá trình phát triển năng lượng tái tạo diễn ra chậm hơn dự kiến. Khi lên nắm quyền cách đây hai năm, tổng thống Lại Thanh Đức đã bắt đầu đề cập đến khả năng khôi phục điện hạt nhân. Khủng hoảng ở Trung Đông hiện nay châm thêm củi lửa cho ông Lại Thanh Đức để phát triển điện hạt nhân. Giải pháp thứ ba là tăng cường dự trữ chiến lược : Đài Loan vốn đã triển khai kế hoạch mở rộng năng lực tích trữ LNG, một phần nhằm nâng cao khả năng đối mặt với nguy cơ xung đột hoặc sức ép từ Trung Quốc. Theo tôi, cuộc khủng hoảng hiện nay sẽ khiến Đài Loan gắn liền khái niệm 'an ninh năng lượng' với 'an ninh công nghiệp'. Đây sẽ là một trong những cột trụ trong chiến lược phát triển và an ninh của hòn đảo này. Cụ thể hơn, điều đó cũng có nghĩa là Đài Loan không chỉ chú trọng đến các khoản chỉ dự trữ năng lượng mà còn phải xây dựng những kho dự trữ các nguyên liệu đầu vào chiến lược như heli và nhiều vật tư công nghiệp khác cần thiết cho sản xuất chip. Về mặt địa chính trị, tất cả những điều này đều rất quan trọng. Đối với Đài Loan, vốn đang bị cô lập về mặt ngoại giao, mục tiêu là chứng minh cho thế giới thấy tầm quan trọng của hòn đảo này. Chỉ một hòn đảo nhỏ với 24 triệu dân có thể chi phối kinh tế toàn cầu, nhờ công nghệ bán dẫn trong thời đại phát triển trí tuệ nhân tạo. Cũng chính do vị thế quá mạnh của Đài Loan trong lĩnh vực chiến lược này mà tổng thống Mỹ Donald Trump những tháng gần đây, đã tỏ ra không hài lòng : không hài lòng thấy siêu cường kinh tế số 1 thế giới phải lệ thuộc vào bọ điện tử và các bộ vi xử lý của Đài Loan ». Tổng thống Lại Thanh Đức đang kỳ vọng khởi động lại hai nhà máy điện hạt nhân trước ngưỡng 2029. Ông là người của đảng Dân Tiến mà đảng này từ trước tới nay có lập trường chống sử dụng điện hạt nhân. Về vấn đề đa dạng hóa các nguồn cung cấp, Đài Loan trông cậy mở rộng hợp tác với Mỹ và Úc. Hoa Kỳ đang là nguồn cung cấp khoảng 10 % LNG cho Đài Loan nhưng  hòn đảo này kỳ vọng nâng tỷ lệ này lên tới 25 % vào ngưỡng 2029-2030. Có điều khí đốt của Mỹ đắt hơn so với của Qatar. Trung Quốc tự nhận là một giải pháp cho Đài Loan  Cùng lúc, phía bên kia eo biển Đài Loan, Bắc Kinh ý thức được những khó khăn của Đài Bắc để tự chủ về năng lượng. Phát ngôn viên bộ Ngoại Giao Trung Quốc từng hứa hẹn : Sau khi thống nhất một cách hòa bình Đài Loan, Hoa lục « hoàn toàn có thể bù đắp cho hòn đảo này những thiếu hụt về điện lực, về khí tự nhiên, hay dầu thô ». Trung Quốc cũng có thể là một « nguồn bảo đảm đáng tin cậy » đối với an ninh năng lượng cho hòn đảo này. Eo biển Hormuz bị phong tỏa và xung đột ở Trung Đông đương nhiên là một thách thức đối với ngành công nghiệp bán dẫn Đài Loan, với khả năng thích ứng của hòn đảo này trước một môi trường bất ổn hơn. Đây đồng thời là một cơ hội để Đài Bắc rà soát lại những biện pháp cho phép đối phó trong trường hợp eo biển Đài Loan bị phong tỏa hay hòn đảo này bị bao vây trước những tham vọng của Trung Quốc muốn đưa hòn đảo « nổi loạn (này) trở về với đất mẹ ».     

Detailing the odd Japanese case of the Fukushima Toilet Death and the conspiracy theories that followed, ranging from village and work tensions to a political coverup.Support us directly: https://www.redwebpod.comOn a cold, winter day in Japan, a woman settled into her quarters after a long day of teaching. However, her evening would be anything but peaceful. In her toilet, she would find a floating shoe, one that she would discover belonged to the deceased man trapped inside her septic tank. What unfolded after that led to local unrest and conspiracy theories denying the official story. Today, we're investigating the Fukushima Toilet Death.Sensitive topics: Mentions of suicide, voyeurismOur sponsors:Factor - Head to http://Factormeals.com/redweb50off and use code redweb50off to get 50% off and free daily greens per box!Rocket Money - Let Rocket Money help you reach your financial goals faster. Join at http://rocketmoney.com/REDWEBQuince - Go to http://quince.com/redweb for free shipping and 365-day returns.This show is brought to you by BetterHelp. Sign up and get 10% off at http://BetterHelp.com/redweb Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this episode of Japan Station, we're talking about Fukushima Prefecture! We're focusing on the geography, cultural quirks, language and food.

On this episode of The Unfinished Print: A Mokuhanga Podcast, I have the opportunity to speak with Kazuko Hioki, Head of Preservation and Preservation Librarian/Conservator at the University of Hawai'i at Mānoa. We discuss how washi was used in book preservation during the Edo period in Japan, its connection to mokuhanga, and the many ways washi was used during this period of Japanese paper history, including recycled paper practices, traditional papermaking methods, and the role of washi in book creation. Notes: may contain a hyperlink. Simply click on the highlighted word or phrase. Kazuko Hioki - here are some of Kazuko Hioki's articles where you can read and get a real understanding of her work.  Investigation of Historical Japanese Paper: An Experiment to Recreate Recycled Paper from 18th-19th Century Japan   Characteristics of Japanese Block Printed Books in the Edo Period: 1603–1867 Tamarind Institute - was originally founded in Los Angeles in 1960 by June Wayne, and is a world renowned center for fine art lithography. Established to revive and sustain the art of lithography, which was in decline in the United States, Tamarind quickly became a leader in the education and promotion of lithographic techniques. In 1970, the institute moved to the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque, where it continues to thrive as a key institution in the printmaking world. Dedicated to advancing the lithographic arts through rigorous education, collaborative projects, and the production of high-quality prints, the Tamarind Institute's influence extends globally, contributing significantly to the development and appreciation of lithography as a vibrant art form. More info, here.    Edo Bakufu, also known as the Tokugawa Bakufu, was the military government that ruled Japan from 1603 to 1868. During this period, Japan experienced remarkable political stability and economic growth, maintained through a strict social hierarchy and a system that required regional lords (daimyo) to alternate their residence between their domains and Edo. The Edo Bakufu fostered an environment in which culture, education, literature, theatre, and urban centres flourished. The bakufu came to an end with the Meiji Restoration in 1868, which restored imperial rule and marked the beginning of Japan's modernization.   Tohoku Region - is a region in Northern Japan which consists of six prefectures which are Aomori, Akita, Iwate, Yamagata, Miyagi and Fukushima.    Tosa, Kōchi - is a city located on Shikoku island, in the prefecture of Kōchi. Ki no Tsurayuki (872-945) was a court noble promoted as provincial governor of Tosa and promoted washi. More info can be found, here.    Eta -  were one of the outcaste groups of Edo-period Japan. Associated with occupations involving animal carcasses, leather production, butchery, and executions, they were marginalized within the social hierarchy. Their descendants are today generally referred to as Burakumin.   kusazōshi - were popular illustrated books made during the Edo Period combining text and imagery.    gōkan - were a type of kusazōshi popular in late Edo-period Japan. Longer and more complex than earlier forms, they featured historical tales, adventure stories, romances, and popular fiction. Their illustrations also highlighted the craftsmanship of the artists, carvers, and printmakers who produced them.   © Popular Wheat Productions logo designed and produced by Douglas Batchelor and André Zadorozny  Introduction music while working - Lester Young / Oscar Peterson  Disclaimer: Please do not reproduce or use anything from this podcast without shooting me an email and getting my express written or verbal consent. I'm friendly :)  

A manta ray glides through water as though it owns the ocean, then you remember the uncomfortable truth: many shark and ray species are sliding towards extinction, and we still do not have enough data to protect them properly. From Ishigaki in Okinawa, join adventurer Phoebe Smith as she becomes one of the first people in the world to complete the PADI  (Professional Association of Dive Instructors) Shark and Ray Conservation speciality and uploads her sightings to the Global Shark and Ray Census, showing how everyday divers can turn a camera and curiosity into citizen science that actually makes a difference.Also coming up:Detectorists and authors Roman Found (aka Eleanor Bruce and Lucilla Gray) talk treasure hunting and Thing We Found in the GroundTravel Hack: How to thrive on your first scuba dive10 lesser known destinations in JapanMeet the man who - following the devastating Tsunami at Fukushima in 2011 began an underwater clean-up efforts that would unite the entire community.Gear chat: what to pack in the tropicsLady Sarashina – said to be one of the world's first travel writers – is our Wander Woman of the Month.If you care about responsible travel, scuba diving, marine conservation, Japan and hidden histories, press play. Subscribe, share the podcast and leave a review so more people can find the show.Contact Wander Womanwww.Phoebe-Smith.com; @PhoebeRSmith

What if earthquakes could be forecast up to 25 days in advance? That's the premise behind one of the most unconventional companies in risk management today.Itamar Zabari, CEO and CTO of AstroTeq, joins host Pete Miller, CPCU, to explain how his company leverages cosmic radiation data combined with multi-channel machine learning to do exactly that. Itamar shares the origin story behind the venture — sparked by his wife Noemi's astrophysics Ph.D. research — and explains how their approach fundamentally differs from traditional seismology, which currently offers only seconds of warning at best.The conversation explores the enormous implications of early warnings. Itamar shares the example of nuclear power plants being able to move to safe mode ahead of a major event — potentially preventing disasters like the Fukushima meltdown in 2011, which caused nearly half a trillion dollars in damage and widespread radiation contamination.The episode also covers what advance warning means for insurance and risk management, where earthquake forecasting could eventually become a coverage requirement similar to sprinkler systems or anti-theft devices. Itamar also addresses the skepticism AstroTeq has faced from traditional seismologists — and makes the case that earthquake forecasting not only is possible today, but already is happening.Resources:AstroTeq.ai: https://astroteq.ai/The Institutes: https://web.theinstitutes.org/Predict & Prevent website: https://www.predictandprevent.org/Sign up for our weekly Predict & Prevent newsletter: https://www.predictandprevent.org/newsletter/

WBS: New Studio For Me #363 -- The gang is at it again. Brimstone is joined by his wing-man Alex DaPonte and his wife Danielle as they chat about Hell being up for sale, why they should buy it, and how Brim would run in. They chat about the new updates in the studio, mutant super pigs near Fukushima Japan, and the Disney guest who jumped off the Kilimanjaro Safari to take a leak. They discuss the Jim Henson Creature Workshop being open to the public now and Stephen Colbert trolls Trump with new Monroe Public Access show. Brim explains what gets Within Brim's Skin.

Following my recent pieces on Namibia, several readers got in touch asking pretty much the same question: Fine. But how do you actually invest there?Frontier markets are notoriously difficult to access. Interesting companies are privately owned, illiquid, unlisted or buried on obscure exchanges your broker has never heard of, or they carry their own small company risk that does not reflect the broader themes of the country.To try and answer the question properly, I spoke to economist Rowland Brown, founder of Cirrus Capital, the country's largest stockbroker, to discuss the best ways to invest in Namibia and where he sees the biggest opportunities.The full interview follows, but here are 7 things that stood out to me.1. Namibia's growth could accelerate dramaticallyNamibia has averaged around 4.5% annual growth since independence in 1990. But Brown thinks the next decade could look very different. The reason is oil.Offshore discoveries by majors such as Shell plc and TotalEnergies could transform the country's fiscal position. Brown estimates that production of 450,000 barrels per day by 2030 could increase government revenues by roughly 60%, which is quite frankly an astonishing number.Namibia today has a population of roughly 3 million people. It is rich in uranium, diamonds, copper, gold and fisheries. Add large-scale oil production and the country starts to look strategically very important.2. The banks are surprisingly attractiveOne thing I had not appreciated before speaking to Brown was how profitable Namibian banks are. According to him, the major listed banks are producing returns on equity of roughly 20-30%, while trading on earnings multiples of only four to five times.The problem is that these banks are listed only on the Namibian Stock Exchange, meaning overseas investors generally need a local broker to access them.The main players include Standard Bank Namibia, First National Bank Namibia and Capricorn GroupBrown is particularly positive on Standard Bank Namibia because of its positioning for both the uranium and oil industries. Chinese involvement in Namibian uranium mining has also strengthened relationships and financing channels there.3. But there is also a way to buy Namibian government debtThis was another thing I did not know. There is an exchange traded Namibian government bond index called STXNAM, tradable in Johannesburg.Namibian government debt currently yields around 12%, while inflation is around 3%, according to Brown.That obviously comes with frontier-market risk, but Namibia's debt position is arguably stronger than many developed countries. Roughly 80% of the debt is domestically owned, largely by pension funds and banks.Unlike other countries I could mention, Namibia has not yet completely financialised itself into oblivion. Ahem.If you live in a third world country such as the UK, I urge you to own gold or silver. The pound will be further devalued, as will the euro and dollar. The bullion dealer I use and recommend is The Pure Gold Company. They deliver to the UK, the US, Canada and Europe. More here.4. Uranium remains one of the biggest long-term themesNamibia is already the world's third-largest uranium producer - a lot of that uranium is at the margin. China has a role to play in this. Chinese investors came into Namibian uranium aggressively after Fukushima , when uranium prices were deeply depressed and western capital had largely disappeared.With uranium prices having recovered, those investments are working. We discussed various companies operating in Namibia including Paladin and Deep Yellow, the problem is that many of them are multi-jurisdictional, so you don't get the pure country play. ASX-listed Bannerman Energy (ASX:BMN) is the closest to being a near-pure Namibia uranium play.5. Oil exposure is harder than you thinkAs with uranium, the oil frustration is that the obvious opportunities are often buried inside giant conglomerates.Brown mentioned Sintana Energy (SEI.V), Hosken Consolidated Investments (HCI), which holds a near-50% stake in London-based, privately owned Impact Oil & Gas, which owns significant exploration rights in the Venus discovery offshore Namibia, and Reconnaissance Energy Africa (RECO.V). ReconAfrica is a speculative onshore exploration story and Brown was careful to stress that it remains high risk.6. Copper may ultimately become the biggest storyOne company we discussed at length was Koryx Copper (KRY.V), which is now a development story rather than a speculative discovery punt.The project benefits from simple geology and open-pit potential, good access to roads and ports, nearby power and water infrastructure and significant associated goldBrown repeatedly emphasised on management quality, and I actually met the boss too while I was out there - Heye Dawn - an impressive man. Junior mining is littered with “lifestyle companies”. This is not one of those situations, though it remains speculative mining investment and is vulnerable to falling copper prices, being quite low grade. But I am quite bullish about copper, as you know.7. The currency question is fascinatingNamibia's currency is pegged to the South African rand. The rand is not exactly the Swiss franc.But Brown made an interesting point: without the peg, Namibia's currency would probably be wildly volatile because of the country's dependence on commodity exports. So the peg may actually make Namibia more investable, not less.Longer term, if oil revenues become large enough, Namibia could gain greater flexibility, perhaps moving towards some form of trade-weighted currency basket more heavily linked to the US dollar.That is speculative for now, albeit interesting.Anyway, enough from me.The full interview with Rowland Brown follows. For those who want to go deeper into the weeds on Namibia, uranium, copper, oil, banks and frontier-market investing, I recommend you listen. Brown knows his onions. And you can contact Rowland via Cirrus Capital.One thing becomes very clear very quickly. Namibia may still be a small frontier market, but it no longer feels peripheral.Thank you for being a subscriber to The Flying Frisby.Until next time,Dominic This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

Documentary filmmaker Ivy Meeropol (“Bully. Coward. Victim.: The Story of Roy Cohn”, “After The Bite”) returns for her 3rd visit to the podcast. Her latest film “Ask E. Jean” which recently had a very successful festival run and is currently in theaters. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgyI8GStcao Ivy Meeropol is the Director and Producer of “Ask E. Jean”, a feature documentary film about the advice columnist and journalist E. Jean Carroll who sued Donald Trump for rape and defamation and won. In 2023, she completed “After The Bite” (HBO), a feature documentary about the explosion of great white sharks and seals on Cape Cod. She premiered her HBO documentary “Bully. Cward. Victim.: The Story of Roy Cohn” at the 2019 New York Film Festival and in 2020 the film was nominated for an Emmy for Outstanding Historical Documentary. She was the Senior Story Producer on the CNNFilms documentary “The End: Inside the Last Days of the Obama White House” , which premiered at the National Archives in Washington, DC. She directed and produced the feature “Indian Point”, about an aging nuclear power plant close to New York City, which was honored with the Frontline Award for Journalism in a Documentary Film and aired on NHK during the anniversary of Fukushima in Japan. Ivy created and directed the 6-part nonfiction series “The Hill” (Sundance Channel), about Congressman Robert Wexler (D-FL) and his young staff (nominated for best series by the International Documentary Association). She produced the feature documentary “Museum Town”, which premiered at SxSW, and has produced and directed for the Emmy Award winning climate change series “Years of Living Dangerously” (National Geographic) and for “Death Row Stories” (CNN). Ivy's debut film, “Heir to an Execution” (HBO), explored the legacy of her grandparents Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. It premiered at Sundance and was shortlisted for an Academy Award. She is a member of the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts & Sciences and serves on the Professional Advisory Board of The Jacob Burns Film Center.

Almost exactly one year after Season 6's Expo 2025 deep dive with Sachiko Yoshimura, the Krewe closes the loop with two people who were actually there. Lea Disimone & Bridget McCarthy served as Youth Ambassadors at the US Pavilion during Expo 2025 Osaka, and they share what the program was really like from the inside, from a day in the life to the lasting impact it left on them. Two New Orleans connections, one world's fair, and a conversation worth the wait. ------ About the Krewe ------ The Krewe of Japan Podcast is a weekly episodic podcast sponsored by the Japan Society of New Orleans. Check them out every Friday afternoon around noon CST on Apple, Google, Spotify, Amazon, Stitcher, or wherever you get your podcasts.  Want to share your experiences with the Krewe? Or perhaps you have ideas for episodes, feedback, comments, or questions? Let the Krewe know by e-mail at kreweofjapanpodcast@gmail.com or on social media (Twitter: @kreweofjapan, Instagram: @kreweofjapanpodcast, Facebook: Krewe of Japan Podcast Page, TikTok: @kreweofjapanpodcast, LinkedIn: Krewe of Japan LinkedIn Page, Blue Sky Social: @kreweofjapan.bsky.social, Threads: @kreweofjapanpodcast & the Krewe of Japan Youtube Channel). Until next time, enjoy! ------ Support the Krewe! Offer Links for Affiliates ------ Use the referral links below & our promo code from the episode! Support your favorite NFL Team AND podcast! Shop NFLShop to gear up for football season! Zencastr Offer Link - Use my special link to save 30% off your 1st month of any Zencastr paid plan!  ------ Past KOJ Episodes ------ Expo 2025: Japan on the World Stage ft. Sachiko Yoshimura [S6E2] Hanging Out In Hyogo ft. Rob Dyer of The Real Japan [S5E14] Checking Out Miyagi ft. Ryotaro Sakurai (Guest Host, William Woods) [S5E5] Explore Matsue ft. Nicholas McCullough [S4E19] Travel Hiroshima ft. Joy Jarman-Walsh [S4E4] Travel Aomori ft. Kay Allen & Megan DeVille [S3E17] Hungry For Travel ft. Shinichi of TabiEats [S3E15] Henro SZN: Shikoku & the 88 Temple Pilgrimage ft. Todd Wassel [S3E12] ------ JSNO Upcoming Events ------ JSNO Event Calendar Join JSNO Today!

BEST OF: With the exception of military records or a few popular cases, UFO research often gets drawn into an America-centric sphere. Because of this, or other reasons too, the phenomenon is received internationally with heavy reliance on US news and reports. But according to the US Department of Defense in 2023, Japan is a leading hotspot for UFOs as well. In June 2024, the Japanese government launched an 80-person nonpartisan group, including former defense ministers, to study UAP. Japan has three major UFO cases, named after regional areas - Kofu, Kochi, and Hokkaido - but also has mysterious stories like the Utsuro-Bune and the abundance of objects spotted over the Daiichi power plant after the 2011 disaster. Japan also has a Roswell, and a Sedona, in regard to UFO popularity and vortexes. The town is called Iinomachi in Fukushima Prefecture, just outside Fukushima city. Objects and lights have been seen here since at least the 1970s. Just north of the town in the dense forest is the IINO UFO MUSEUM, home to documents, replicas, and books on the subject. Outside is a flying saucer bus stop. Above the museum is Mount Senganmori, which features magnetic anomalies and little alien carvings along its trail. Few know that the Roswell research center and museum, founded in 1991, was not the first of its kind; Kinichi Arai, a Japanese man, formerly in the military, who died in 2002, began the first of its kind museum and research facility in 1979.*The is the FREE archive, which includes advertisements. If you want an ad-free experience, you can subscribe below underneath the show description.

Alina Voss from NX Atomics stops by the Energy News Beat PodcastThe title “The Math Ain't Mathing: Why America Needs Nuclear Now” was derived from a comment Alina made on the podcast. I was very impressed, and as we talked, she made some great points. I am going to follow up with her company and introduce them to some folks.We need to have more nuclear reactors online tomorrow, and we need real solutions.1. Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) and NX AtomicsThe core focus of the conversation centers on NX Atomics' development of small modular nuclear reactors. Key points include:NX Atomics aims to produce the cheapest SMRs on the market (targeting $20 per megawatt hour vs. $90 for traditional Gen 3 reactors)They're targeting a prototype by 2030 and first-of-a-kind deployment in the early 2030sThe company employs German nuclear engineers with 10-15 years of research backgroundThey're using innovative 3D metal printing technology to manufacture reactor components more efficiently and affordably2. Data Centers and Energy DemandA significant discussion about the explosive growth of data centers and their energy requirements:Data centers are increasingly competing with farmland for space in the MidwestTexas ERCOT has 220 gigawatts of applications for new data center power, but only 54 gigawatts of peak capacityData centers are using eminent domain to acquire land, displacing long-time residentsSMRs and data centers are positioned as complementary solutions (”go together like PB&J”)3. Nuclear Energy's Public Perception and MarketingAlina discusses the challenge of rebranding nuclear energy:Older generations associate nuclear with bombs and warGen X often thinks of disasters (Three Mile Island, Fukushima, Chernobyl)Younger generations, especially men, are more pro-nuclearLiving near a nuclear plant exposes you to less radiation than eating a banana annuallyNuclear plants have high approval ratings among nearby residents4. Energy Policy and SubsidiesCritical examination of current U.S. energy policies:Wind and solar have been artificially inflated by subsidies and can't compete on their own meritsWind turbines last only 8 years; solar panels last ~15 years and 95% end up in landfillsThe farm bill subsidizes ethanol, which is counterproductive (takes more energy to produce than it yields)Ethanol damages vehicles and reduces fuel efficiency by ~4 miles per gallonThe need to reform subsidies to support more sustainable, long-term energy solutions5. Global Energy Competition and ChinaDiscussion of geopolitical energy dynamics:China is rapidly expanding nuclear capacity (50+ reactors with 20+ more planned)The U.S. has 94 reactors and is falling behindIP theft and supply chain vulnerabilities are critical concernsEnergy independence and dominance are central to future global competitivenessSecretary Chris Wright's pro-nuclear stance is seen as crucial for U.S. energy policy6. Transmission Infrastructure and Grid ChallengesThe underlying infrastructure problem:Aging transmission infrastructure is a bottleneck for moving power from generation to demandThis is a bigger issue than just generation capacitySMRs offer distributed generation that can bypass some transmission challenges7. Regenerative Agriculture and Land UseBrief but important discussion about sustainable farming:Current agricultural policies favor monoculture corn production with heavy chemical inputsRegenerative agriculture and sustainable land management are better for both economics and healthThe tension between subsidizing farmland for food vs. for energy productionWe are seeing that Data Centers, AI, Wind, Solar, and Agriculture are more closely aligned than you can imagine. Land and water grabs are ongoing in the U.S., and they are second only to the political corruption we are seeing in our systems.We covered the Levelized Cost of Energy and the importance of its design. I loved the fact that they are 3D printing and getting the system designed faster rather than laterCheck out their website: https://www.nxatomics.com/Connect with Alina on her LinkedIn here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/alinavoss/It would be fun to get Alina and Grace Vanderhei (Stankie), who was on the podcast as a former Miss America and a nuclear engineer, together to discuss the future of nuclear.This week, I reached out to John Rich to get him on the podcast. While it is a long shot, we need all of the air cover we can get to protect our farmers, farmland, and people's homes from the Wild West of Data centers being overrun by eminent domain on people's homes and farms.We need more future leaders and companies like Alina and NX Atomics.Check out the Energy News Beat SubStack https://theenergynewsbeat.substack.com/A shout-out to Steve Reese and the Reese Energy Consulting group for sponsoring the Podcast https://reeseenergyconsulting.com/.Data2 if you have any business systems, can you trust A? Well, they have the patent on validation. . https://data2.zoholandingpage.com/energyAnd we have WellDatabase rolling in as a new sponsor. https://welldatabase.com/

durée : 00:30:00 - Au rythme du vivant - par : Aurélie Luneau - Comment la vie sauvage résiste-t-elle à la radioactivité à Fukushima ? L'éthologue Matthieu Lihoreau partage ses recherches sur les abeilles et les frelons dans cet environnement contaminé, révélant des altérations de leurs capacités cognitives. - réalisation : Charlotte Roux, Célestine Babinet, Annelise Signoret, Olivier Martinaud Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

Julien Villeret dirige l'innovation du groupe EDF, on s'est retrouvés un jour de pluie, ce qui tombait plutôt bien pour parler d'énergie. Julien est l'un de ces rares interlocuteurs capables de parler du mix énergétique français sans perdre la nuance ni tomber dans le discours institutionnel. Il connaît le sujet de l'intérieur, et il n'a pas peur d'aller là où ça grince.Dans cet épisode, nous parlons de nucléaire, bien sûr, mais aussi de ce qu'on ne comprend pas sur l'électricité en général. J'ai questionné Julien sur les déchets nucléaires (leur volume réel vous va surprendre), sur les compétences qu'on a perdues en arrêtant de construire des centrales, sur pourquoi une voiture électrique en Allemagne, c'est techniquement une voiture au charbon, et sur l'hydrogène, qu'on nous vend comme la grande révolution alors que la réalité est beaucoup plus complexe.On parle aussi de fusion nucléaire, de SMR, de la panne en Espagne, du compteur Linky, de l'IA et de sa consommation d'énergie, et des SAF, ces carburants d'aviation qui permettent de voler à neutralité carbone dès aujourd'hui.Ce qui m'a frappé dans cet échange, c'est la posture. Julien ne survend pas, il ne minimise pas. Il essaie juste de remettre des faits là où il y a trop souvent des fantasmes.CITATIONS MARQUANTES1. "Si on n'a plus d'énergie, on n'a plus de plastique. Et si on n'a plus de plastique, on n'a plus d'hôpitaux." (Julien Villeret, ~0:03:44)2. "Tous les déchets nucléaires produits par le parc français depuis les années 60, c'est en gros deux piscines olympiques en volume." (Julien Villeret, ~0:17:25)3. "Une centrale nucléaire, ça ne peut pas exploser. C'est un fantasme." (Julien Villeret, ~0:36:26)4. "Les plus grandes batteries du monde aujourd'hui, ce sont des barrages." (Julien Villeret, ~0:11:15)5. "On a arrêté de construire des centrales pour des raisons idéologiques. Les gens qui savaient faire sont partis à la retraite." (Julien Villeret, ~0:26:25)IDÉES MARQUANTES1. L'énergie est consubstantielle à la civilisation, pas optionnelle Timestamp : ~0:02:51 L'énergie n'est pas un confort ou un luxe, c'est le socle de tout : la santé, la nourriture, la fabrication industrielle, la vie moderne dans son entier. Le rejet d'une écologie radicale par les populations vient en partie de là : on leur demande de renoncer à quelque chose qui est aussi fondamental que l'air qu'ils respirent. Pourquoi c'est important : tant qu'on ne pose pas ce cadre, on ne peut pas avoir un débat énergétique honnête.2. L'électricité propre ou sale dépend de comment elle est produite, pas de comment elle est consommée Timestamp : ~0:07:00 Une voiture électrique en France est l'une des plus propres au monde. La même voiture en Allemagne fonctionne au charbon. Ce n'est pas l'usage qui définit l'empreinte carbone, c'est la chaîne de production entière. Pourquoi c'est important : ça remet en question beaucoup de discours simplistes sur la mobilité électrique et force à penser en systèmes.3. Les barrages hydrauliques sont les plus grandes batteries du monde Timestamp : ~0:10:18 L'eau stockée dans un barrage, c'est de l'électricité en réserve. On ouvre ou on ferme selon le besoin. C'est une batterie géante, naturelle, disponible immédiatement. La France l'utilise pour réguler son réseau depuis des décennies. Pourquoi c'est important : cette réalité physique remet en question l'idée que le stockage d'électricité est un problème sans solution.4. Les compétences nucléaires se perdent quand on arrête de construire Timestamp : ~0:26:08 La France a arrêté de construire des centrales pour des raisons politiques. Résultat : les ingénieurs et soudeurs spécialisés ont vieilli et pris leur retraite, et les jeunes ne se sont pas formés sur des métiers qu'on disait sans avenir. Aujourd'hui, EDF recrute 10 000 personnes par an pour rattraper le retard. Pourquoi c'est important : les décisions politiques sur l'énergie ont des conséquences industrielles qui prennent des décennies à corriger.5. Penser l'énergie en statique est une erreur de raisonnement Timestamp : ~0:47:53 Il y a 15 ans, on prédisait que les data centers représenteraient 10% de la consommation mondiale d'électricité. Aujourd'hui on est à 2,2%. Pourquoi ? Parce que les technologies deviennent plus efficaces au fur et à mesure. Tirer la droite et extrapoler lineairement est une erreur systématique dans tous les grands débats énergétiques. Pourquoi c'est important : c'est le même réflexe qu'on applique aujourd'hui à l'IA, et probablement avec les mêmes erreurs de projection.6. La fusion nucléaire : entre le Graal et la promesse impossible Timestamp : ~1:01:58 La fusion produirait une énergie presque illimitée, décarbonée, peu coûteuse et quasi sans déchets. C'est la centrale nucléaire idéale sur le papier. Sauf qu'on ne sait pas encore si on arrivera à la construire, et que les horizons varient de 2035 (optimistes) à 2070 (scientifiques). Les premières centrales en production : probablement 2080-2100. Pourquoi c'est important : ça relativise les discours apocalyptiques sur l'énergie et rappelle qu'on a des décennies pour construire, pas juste quelques années.7. L'hydrogène vert : trop cher, trop dangereux pour la mobilité légère Timestamp : ~1:07:41 EDF ne croit pas à l'hydrogène pour les voitures particulières. Trop cher à produire, trop dangereux à stocker sous pression, infrastructure à construire from scratch. En revanche, pour les bus et les camions approvisionnés depuis une station centralisée, ça peut faire du sens. Les avions, eux, se tournent vers les SAF (Sustainable Aviation Fuels), qui sont opérationnels dès aujourd'hui. Pourquoi c'est important : l'hydrogène est massivement sur-promu dans le débat public, et la réalité industrielle est beaucoup plus about de niche use cases que de révolution générale. QUESTIONS POSÉES DANS L'INTERVIEWQu'est-ce que les gens ne comprennent pas sur l'énergie, et ce serait bien qu'ils comprennent ?Est-ce que le rejet de l'écologie radicale vient du fait qu'on demande aux gens d'arrêter quelque chose de consubstantiel à leur vie ?Comment chez EDF observez-vous l'évolution de la consommation d'énergie, notamment la tension entre développement des usages et efficacité énergétique ?Quelle est l'intermittence réelle des éoliennes et des panneaux solaires, en chiffres concrets ?Qu'est-ce que le compteur Linky exactement, et pourquoi a-t-il généré autant de fantasmes ?Où en est-on de l'innovation sur les déchets nucléaires, et peut-on les recycler ?La France a-t-elle perdu des compétences nucléaires en arrêtant de construire ? Lesquelles ?Est-ce que les SMR (Small Modular Reactors) peuvent accélérer le déploiement du nucléaire ?Est-ce que l'IA et la blockchain vont créer une pénurie d'électricité, ou est-ce une projection trop statique ?Pourquoi l'hydrogène ne fonctionnera probablement pas pour la mobilité légère, et où peut-il avoir du sens ?RÉFÉRENCES CITÉESSites / DonnéesOur World in Data (mentionné comme "The World in Data") : site recommandé par Julien pour visualiser l'évolution du bien-être mondial sur 100-300 ans. (~1:16:20)Agence mondiale de l'énergie (AIE) : citée sur les prévisions de consommation électrique liée à l'IA. (~0:49:30)Institutions / OrganismesANDRA (Agence nationale pour la gestion des déchets radioactifs) : gestion des déchets nucléaires en France. (~0:17:25)Autorité de Sûreté Nucléaire (ASN) : régulation et surveillance du parc nucléaire français. (~0:17:25)ITER : projet international de fusion nucléaire basé en France. (~1:03:30)Enedis : opérateur du réseau de distribution électrique, gestionnaire du compteur Linky (distinct d'EDF). (~0:14:44)RTE : réseau de transport d'électricité française. (~0:44:12)ANSI / ANSSI : agence nationale de sécurité des systèmes d'information, mentionnée pour la cybersécurité des infrastructures. (~0:46:45)Projets / TechnologiesCIGEO : projet d'enfouissement des déchets nucléaires dans des couches géologiques profondes, mené par l'ANDRA. (~0:18:30)Flamanville 3 : prochain réacteur nucléaire français, sur le point d'être raccordé au réseau. (~0:21:03)Hinkley Point C : réacteur en construction au Royaume-Uni par EDF. (~0:28:18)Sizewell : projet de réacteur au Royaume-Uni. (~0:28:18)New World (projet EDF) : SMR développé par EDF. (~0:42:17)SAF / e-fuel (Sustainable Aviation Fuels) : carburant d'aviation bas carbone, obligation réglementaire croissante en Europe. (~1:12:32)ÉvénementsAccident de Fukushima : analysé en détail comme tsunami avant d'être un accident nucléaire, utilisé comme base d'apprentissage mondial. (~0:19:00)Panne électrique en Espagne et Portugal : analysée comme "orage parfait" lié à la nature analogique de l'électricité. (~0:51:33)Record d'exportation d'électricité EDF : 90 TWh exportés, record historique. (~0:48:11)Découverte scientifiqueHydrogène blanc : gisement potentiellement record découvert en France, hydrogène naturel présent dans le sol. (~1:06:40)TIMESTAMPS CLÉS (YouTube)00:00 Introduction : et si on se réjouissait à nouveau du futur ? 01:55 Présentation de Julien Villeret, directeur de l'innovation EDF02:05 L'énergie, c'est quoi au fond ? Ce que les gens ne comprennent pas L'énergie est consubstantielle à la civilisation depuis toujours. Sans électricité aujourd'hui, on perd tout : la santé, la nourriture, la fabrication industrielle. C'est le cadre que pose Julien avant d'aborder quoi que ce soit.04:18 Pourquoi l'écologie radicale ne passe pas dans l'opinion publique Le rejet du discours radical vient d'une réalité simple : on ne peut pas demander aux gens d'arrêter quelque chose d'aussi fondamental que l'énergie. La vraie question n'est pas d'arrêter, c'est comment produire et consommer différemment.06:29 Le pic du charbon et la réalité du mix énergétique mondial On continue de brûler beaucoup de charbon pour produire de l'électricité, notamment en Allemagne et en Pologne. Ce qui explique directement le sujet suivant.06:51 Voiture électrique en Allemagne = voiture au charbon ? Si l'électricité est produite au charbon, une voiture électrique n'est pas vertueuse. La chaîne complète de production compte, pas seulement le mode de transport. La France à 98% sans CO2 est une exception mondiale.08:37 Peut-on imaginer 100% d'énergie renouvelable ? Techniquement oui, économiquement non. Le problème de l'intermittence (les renouvelables produisent environ 25-30% du temps) et du coût du stockage rendrait la facture 10 à 20 fois plus élevée qu'aujourd'hui.10:18 Les barrages : les plus grandes batteries du monde L'eau stockée dans un barrage, c'est de l'électricité en réserve. Un lac, c'est une batterie géante naturelle. Les barrages hydroélectriques sont aussi des outils de régulation du réseau, activés ou coupés selon les besoins du moment.13:30 L'intermittence des renouvelables en chiffres concrets Éoliennes et panneaux solaires produisent à pleine puissance environ 25 à 30% du temps. Le pic de production solaire est autour de midi, soit rarement au moment des pics de consommation (matin, soir).14:34 Le compteur Linky : derrière les fantasmes, la réalité Linky ne surveille personne. Il envoie l'index de consommation une fois par jour, pendant 10 secondes, via les fils électriques, sans aucune émission d'ondes. Le détail au quart d'heure est opt-in. Ce sont surtout des fraudeurs que Linky a gênés.17:05 Les déchets nucléaires : vraiment deux piscines olympiques depuis les années 60 Tout le parc nucléaire français depuis le début des années 60 a produit environ 4 000 m3 de déchets à longue vie, soit deux piscines olympiques. Ils sont stockés à La Hague dans de l'eau (meilleur protecteur contre les radiations), avec un projet d'enfouissement géologique profond (CIGEO).21:47 Peut-on recycler les déchets nucléaires ? Oui, une partie du combustible usé est retraitée et réinjectée dans les centrales. Des recherches sont en cours pour fermer complètement le cycle : des réacteurs qui réutilisent en permanence le même combustible sans presque générer de déchets. Horizon : 2050-2070.22:53 Dépendances géopolitiques : uranium, gaz, pétrole, panneaux solaires Le pétrole et le gaz viennent du Moyen-Orient, de Russie et des États-Unis. Les panneaux solaires viennent quasi-exclusivement de Chine. L'uranium, lui, est présent dans de nombreux pays, n'est pas cher, et est stocké sur plusieurs années par sécurité.26:08 Les compétences nucléaires perdues et les 10 000 recrutements par an En arrêtant de construire des centrales pour des raisons politiques, la France a perdu des savoir-faire spécifiques : béton nucléaire, générateurs de vapeur, soudure qualifiée. EDF recrute maintenant 10 000 personnes par an pour reconstruire ces compétences. Un soudeur nucléaire gagne entre 3 000 et 4 000 euros par mois.32:04 Où seront construits les 6 nouveaux réacteurs français ? Sur les terrains déjà acquis à côté des centrales existantes (ex : Penly). Les riverains d'une centrale sont généralement très favorables : emplois, taxes locales, vie locale développée. Une centrale qui ne tourne pas, c'est un million d'euros de pertes par jour.36:21 Une centrale peut-elle exploser ? Les accidents nucléaires démystifiés Non, les centrales françaises ne peuvent pas exploser. Fukushima était d'abord un tsunami, pas un accident nucléaire au sens strict. Depuis, toutes les centrales françaises ont été équipées de générateurs diesel en hauteur et de récupérateurs (les "cendriers") pour le cas où le coeur fondrait.41:42 Les SMR (Small Modular Reactors) : l'avenir du nucléaire ou juste une promesse ? Aucun SMR n'est encore construit à ce jour. L'idée : des petits réacteurs plus rapides à déployer, moins coûteux, qui peuvent remplacer une centrale charbon en plug and play. Les Américains y croient surtout pour décarboner leur vieux parc charbon.45:13 Cybersécurité des centrales : isolées d'internet par principe physique Les systèmes qui font fonctionner les centrales nucléaires ne sont pas connectés à internet. C'est une barrière physique, pas logicielle. EDF mobilise plusieurs centaines de personnes à temps plein sur la cybersécurité.46:45 IA et consommation d'énergie : une vraie menace ou un raisonnement trop statique ? Il y a 15 ans, on prédisait que les data centers allaient représenter 10% de la consommation mondiale d'électricité. On en est à 2,2%. Les projections en ligne droite tombent toujours à côté parce qu'elles ignorent les gains d'efficacité technologique. En France, la marge est très large : EDF a exporté un record historique de 90 TWh l'année dernière.51:33 La panne en Espagne-Portugal : l'analogique contre le numérique L'électricité est analogique : production doit en permanence égaler consommation. Un écart provoque l'effondrement. En Espagne, une suite de problèmes improbables arrivés en même temps (un "orage parfait") a déstabilisé le réseau. La France s'est déconnectée pour éviter d'être entraînée dans la chute.56:41 Géothermie : pourquoi elle n'a pas décollé en France La géothermie dépend des choix de subvention publique. L'Allemagne l'a financée, la France non. En France, l'électricité est peu chère et faiblement carbonée, donc l'incentive est quasi nul. Installer de la géothermie en retrofit exige de tout creuser. La géothermie profonde pose en plus des risques sismiques.1:01:58 Fusion nucléaire : le Graal énergétique, entre 2035 et 2070 La fusion produirait une énergie quasi-illimitée, décarbonée, peu coûteuse et presque sans déchets. Les scientifiques parlent de premiers prototypes vers 2060-2070, les start-ups d'une dizaine d'années plus tôt. On a récemment réussi pour la première fois à produire plus d'énergie qu'on n'en consomme dans une réaction de fusion. Même si ça arrive, les premières centrales en production seront probablement vers 2080-2100.1:06:40 Hydrogène : blanc, vert, gris. Ce que chacun veut dire vraiment L'hydrogène gris (produit industriellement) est très polluant. Le vert (via électrolyse) est très cher. Le blanc (naturel, dans le sol) est encore expérimental. EDF ne croit pas à l'hydrogène pour les voitures particulières : trop dangereux, trop cher, réseau à construire from scratch. Pour les bus et camions sur station centralisée, ça peut avoir du sens.1:11:23 Aviation à hydrogène et SAF : ce qu'on peut espérer vraiment Airbus a repoussé son projet d'avion hydrogène à 2050. L'aviation mise aujourd'hui sur les SAF (Sustainable Aviation Fuels) : des carburants produits à partir de CO2 capté dans l'air, déjà présents dans les réservoirs des avions Air France. C'est l'horizon réaliste, avant peut-être un avion électrique pour les courtes distances (Paris-Berlin, lignes régionales), d'ici 2030.1:15:50 Pourquoi il y a quand même des raisons d'espérer Julien conclut sur une conviction : en regardant sur le temps long, le monde va mieux. The World in Data le montre sur 200 ans. Dans l'énergie, on est passé des voitures à particules des années 50 à l'électricité bas carbone d'aujourd'hui, en 60-70 ans. Et on surestime toujours les transformations à court terme tout en les sous-estimant à long terme.1:19:44 Clap de fin : ouvrir la porte à la nuanceHébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Julien Villeret dirige l'innovation du groupe EDF, on s'est retrouvés un jour de pluie, ce qui tombait plutôt bien pour parler d'énergie. Julien est l'un de ces rares interlocuteurs capables de parler du mix énergétique français sans perdre la nuance ni tomber dans le discours institutionnel. Il connaît le sujet de l'intérieur, et il n'a pas peur d'aller là où ça grince.Dans cet épisode, nous parlons de nucléaire, bien sûr, mais aussi de ce qu'on ne comprend pas sur l'électricité en général. J'ai questionné Julien sur les déchets nucléaires (leur volume réel vous va surprendre), sur les compétences qu'on a perdues en arrêtant de construire des centrales, sur pourquoi une voiture électrique en Allemagne, c'est techniquement une voiture au charbon, et sur l'hydrogène, qu'on nous vend comme la grande révolution alors que la réalité est beaucoup plus complexe.On parle aussi de fusion nucléaire, de SMR, de la panne en Espagne, du compteur Linky, de l'IA et de sa consommation d'énergie, et des SAF, ces carburants d'aviation qui permettent de voler à neutralité carbone dès aujourd'hui.Ce qui m'a frappé dans cet échange, c'est la posture. Julien ne survend pas, il ne minimise pas. Il essaie juste de remettre des faits là où il y a trop souvent des fantasmes.CITATIONS MARQUANTES1. "Si on n'a plus d'énergie, on n'a plus de plastique. Et si on n'a plus de plastique, on n'a plus d'hôpitaux." (Julien Villeret, ~0:03:44)2. "Tous les déchets nucléaires produits par le parc français depuis les années 60, c'est en gros deux piscines olympiques en volume." (Julien Villeret, ~0:17:25)3. "Une centrale nucléaire, ça ne peut pas exploser. C'est un fantasme." (Julien Villeret, ~0:36:26)4. "Les plus grandes batteries du monde aujourd'hui, ce sont des barrages." (Julien Villeret, ~0:11:15)5. "On a arrêté de construire des centrales pour des raisons idéologiques. Les gens qui savaient faire sont partis à la retraite." (Julien Villeret, ~0:26:25)IDÉES MARQUANTES1. L'énergie est consubstantielle à la civilisation, pas optionnelle Timestamp : ~0:02:51 L'énergie n'est pas un confort ou un luxe, c'est le socle de tout : la santé, la nourriture, la fabrication industrielle, la vie moderne dans son entier. Le rejet d'une écologie radicale par les populations vient en partie de là : on leur demande de renoncer à quelque chose qui est aussi fondamental que l'air qu'ils respirent. Pourquoi c'est important : tant qu'on ne pose pas ce cadre, on ne peut pas avoir un débat énergétique honnête.2. L'électricité propre ou sale dépend de comment elle est produite, pas de comment elle est consommée Timestamp : ~0:07:00 Une voiture électrique en France est l'une des plus propres au monde. La même voiture en Allemagne fonctionne au charbon. Ce n'est pas l'usage qui définit l'empreinte carbone, c'est la chaîne de production entière. Pourquoi c'est important : ça remet en question beaucoup de discours simplistes sur la mobilité électrique et force à penser en systèmes.3. Les barrages hydrauliques sont les plus grandes batteries du monde Timestamp : ~0:10:18 L'eau stockée dans un barrage, c'est de l'électricité en réserve. On ouvre ou on ferme selon le besoin. C'est une batterie géante, naturelle, disponible immédiatement. La France l'utilise pour réguler son réseau depuis des décennies. Pourquoi c'est important : cette réalité physique remet en question l'idée que le stockage d'électricité est un problème sans solution.4. Les compétences nucléaires se perdent quand on arrête de construire Timestamp : ~0:26:08 La France a arrêté de construire des centrales pour des raisons politiques. Résultat : les ingénieurs et soudeurs spécialisés ont vieilli et pris leur retraite, et les jeunes ne se sont pas formés sur des métiers qu'on disait sans avenir. Aujourd'hui, EDF recrute 10 000 personnes par an pour rattraper le retard. Pourquoi c'est important : les décisions politiques sur l'énergie ont des conséquences industrielles qui prennent des décennies à corriger.5. Penser l'énergie en statique est une erreur de raisonnement Timestamp : ~0:47:53 Il y a 15 ans, on prédisait que les data centers représenteraient 10% de la consommation mondiale d'électricité. Aujourd'hui on est à 2,2%. Pourquoi ? Parce que les technologies deviennent plus efficaces au fur et à mesure. Tirer la droite et extrapoler lineairement est une erreur systématique dans tous les grands débats énergétiques. Pourquoi c'est important : c'est le même réflexe qu'on applique aujourd'hui à l'IA, et probablement avec les mêmes erreurs de projection.6. La fusion nucléaire : entre le Graal et la promesse impossible Timestamp : ~1:01:58 La fusion produirait une énergie presque illimitée, décarbonée, peu coûteuse et quasi sans déchets. C'est la centrale nucléaire idéale sur le papier. Sauf qu'on ne sait pas encore si on arrivera à la construire, et que les horizons varient de 2035 (optimistes) à 2070 (scientifiques). Les premières centrales en production : probablement 2080-2100. Pourquoi c'est important : ça relativise les discours apocalyptiques sur l'énergie et rappelle qu'on a des décennies pour construire, pas juste quelques années.7. L'hydrogène vert : trop cher, trop dangereux pour la mobilité légère Timestamp : ~1:07:41 EDF ne croit pas à l'hydrogène pour les voitures particulières. Trop cher à produire, trop dangereux à stocker sous pression, infrastructure à construire from scratch. En revanche, pour les bus et les camions approvisionnés depuis une station centralisée, ça peut faire du sens. Les avions, eux, se tournent vers les SAF (Sustainable Aviation Fuels), qui sont opérationnels dès aujourd'hui. Pourquoi c'est important : l'hydrogène est massivement sur-promu dans le débat public, et la réalité industrielle est beaucoup plus about de niche use cases que de révolution générale. QUESTIONS POSÉES DANS L'INTERVIEWQu'est-ce que les gens ne comprennent pas sur l'énergie, et ce serait bien qu'ils comprennent ?Est-ce que le rejet de l'écologie radicale vient du fait qu'on demande aux gens d'arrêter quelque chose de consubstantiel à leur vie ?Comment chez EDF observez-vous l'évolution de la consommation d'énergie, notamment la tension entre développement des usages et efficacité énergétique ?Quelle est l'intermittence réelle des éoliennes et des panneaux solaires, en chiffres concrets ?Qu'est-ce que le compteur Linky exactement, et pourquoi a-t-il généré autant de fantasmes ?Où en est-on de l'innovation sur les déchets nucléaires, et peut-on les recycler ?La France a-t-elle perdu des compétences nucléaires en arrêtant de construire ? Lesquelles ?Est-ce que les SMR (Small Modular Reactors) peuvent accélérer le déploiement du nucléaire ?Est-ce que l'IA et la blockchain vont créer une pénurie d'électricité, ou est-ce une projection trop statique ?Pourquoi l'hydrogène ne fonctionnera probablement pas pour la mobilité légère, et où peut-il avoir du sens ?RÉFÉRENCES CITÉESSites / DonnéesOur World in Data (mentionné comme "The World in Data") : site recommandé par Julien pour visualiser l'évolution du bien-être mondial sur 100-300 ans. (~1:16:20)Agence mondiale de l'énergie (AIE) : citée sur les prévisions de consommation électrique liée à l'IA. (~0:49:30)Institutions / OrganismesANDRA (Agence nationale pour la gestion des déchets radioactifs) : gestion des déchets nucléaires en France. (~0:17:25)Autorité de Sûreté Nucléaire (ASN) : régulation et surveillance du parc nucléaire français. (~0:17:25)ITER : projet international de fusion nucléaire basé en France. (~1:03:30)Enedis : opérateur du réseau de distribution électrique, gestionnaire du compteur Linky (distinct d'EDF). (~0:14:44)RTE : réseau de transport d'électricité française. (~0:44:12)ANSI / ANSSI : agence nationale de sécurité des systèmes d'information, mentionnée pour la cybersécurité des infrastructures. (~0:46:45)Projets / TechnologiesCIGEO : projet d'enfouissement des déchets nucléaires dans des couches géologiques profondes, mené par l'ANDRA. (~0:18:30)Flamanville 3 : prochain réacteur nucléaire français, sur le point d'être raccordé au réseau. (~0:21:03)Hinkley Point C : réacteur en construction au Royaume-Uni par EDF. (~0:28:18)Sizewell : projet de réacteur au Royaume-Uni. (~0:28:18)New World (projet EDF) : SMR développé par EDF. (~0:42:17)SAF / e-fuel (Sustainable Aviation Fuels) : carburant d'aviation bas carbone, obligation réglementaire croissante en Europe. (~1:12:32)ÉvénementsAccident de Fukushima : analysé en détail comme tsunami avant d'être un accident nucléaire, utilisé comme base d'apprentissage mondial. (~0:19:00)Panne électrique en Espagne et Portugal : analysée comme "orage parfait" lié à la nature analogique de l'électricité. (~0:51:33)Record d'exportation d'électricité EDF : 90 TWh exportés, record historique. (~0:48:11)Découverte scientifiqueHydrogène blanc : gisement potentiellement record découvert en France, hydrogène naturel présent dans le sol. (~1:06:40)TIMESTAMPS CLÉS (YouTube)00:00 Introduction : et si on se réjouissait à nouveau du futur ? 01:55 Présentation de Julien Villeret, directeur de l'innovation EDF02:05 L'énergie, c'est quoi au fond ? Ce que les gens ne comprennent pas L'énergie est consubstantielle à la civilisation depuis toujours. Sans électricité aujourd'hui, on perd tout : la santé, la nourriture, la fabrication industrielle. C'est le cadre que pose Julien avant d'aborder quoi que ce soit.04:18 Pourquoi l'écologie radicale ne passe pas dans l'opinion publique Le rejet du discours radical vient d'une réalité simple : on ne peut pas demander aux gens d'arrêter quelque chose d'aussi fondamental que l'énergie. La vraie question n'est pas d'arrêter, c'est comment produire et consommer différemment.06:29 Le pic du charbon et la réalité du mix énergétique mondial On continue de brûler beaucoup de charbon pour produire de l'électricité, notamment en Allemagne et en Pologne. Ce qui explique directement le sujet suivant.06:51 Voiture électrique en Allemagne = voiture au charbon ? Si l'électricité est produite au charbon, une voiture électrique n'est pas vertueuse. La chaîne complète de production compte, pas seulement le mode de transport. La France à 98% sans CO2 est une exception mondiale.08:37 Peut-on imaginer 100% d'énergie renouvelable ? Techniquement oui, économiquement non. Le problème de l'intermittence (les renouvelables produisent environ 25-30% du temps) et du coût du stockage rendrait la facture 10 à 20 fois plus élevée qu'aujourd'hui.10:18 Les barrages : les plus grandes batteries du monde L'eau stockée dans un barrage, c'est de l'électricité en réserve. Un lac, c'est une batterie géante naturelle. Les barrages hydroélectriques sont aussi des outils de régulation du réseau, activés ou coupés selon les besoins du moment.13:30 L'intermittence des renouvelables en chiffres concrets Éoliennes et panneaux solaires produisent à pleine puissance environ 25 à 30% du temps. Le pic de production solaire est autour de midi, soit rarement au moment des pics de consommation (matin, soir).14:34 Le compteur Linky : derrière les fantasmes, la réalité Linky ne surveille personne. Il envoie l'index de consommation une fois par jour, pendant 10 secondes, via les fils électriques, sans aucune émission d'ondes. Le détail au quart d'heure est opt-in. Ce sont surtout des fraudeurs que Linky a gênés.17:05 Les déchets nucléaires : vraiment deux piscines olympiques depuis les années 60 Tout le parc nucléaire français depuis le début des années 60 a produit environ 4 000 m3 de déchets à longue vie, soit deux piscines olympiques. Ils sont stockés à La Hague dans de l'eau (meilleur protecteur contre les radiations), avec un projet d'enfouissement géologique profond (CIGEO).21:47 Peut-on recycler les déchets nucléaires ? Oui, une partie du combustible usé est retraitée et réinjectée dans les centrales. Des recherches sont en cours pour fermer complètement le cycle : des réacteurs qui réutilisent en permanence le même combustible sans presque générer de déchets. Horizon : 2050-2070.22:53 Dépendances géopolitiques : uranium, gaz, pétrole, panneaux solaires Le pétrole et le gaz viennent du Moyen-Orient, de Russie et des États-Unis. Les panneaux solaires viennent quasi-exclusivement de Chine. L'uranium, lui, est présent dans de nombreux pays, n'est pas cher, et est stocké sur plusieurs années par sécurité.26:08 Les compétences nucléaires perdues et les 10 000 recrutements par an En arrêtant de construire des centrales pour des raisons politiques, la France a perdu des savoir-faire spécifiques : béton nucléaire, générateurs de vapeur, soudure qualifiée. EDF recrute maintenant 10 000 personnes par an pour reconstruire ces compétences. Un soudeur nucléaire gagne entre 3 000 et 4 000 euros par mois.32:04 Où seront construits les 6 nouveaux réacteurs français ? Sur les terrains déjà acquis à côté des centrales existantes (ex : Penly). Les riverains d'une centrale sont généralement très favorables : emplois, taxes locales, vie locale développée. Une centrale qui ne tourne pas, c'est un million d'euros de pertes par jour.36:21 Une centrale peut-elle exploser ? Les accidents nucléaires démystifiés Non, les centrales françaises ne peuvent pas exploser. Fukushima était d'abord un tsunami, pas un accident nucléaire au sens strict. Depuis, toutes les centrales françaises ont été équipées de générateurs diesel en hauteur et de récupérateurs (les "cendriers") pour le cas où le coeur fondrait.41:42 Les SMR (Small Modular Reactors) : l'avenir du nucléaire ou juste une promesse ? Aucun SMR n'est encore construit à ce jour. L'idée : des petits réacteurs plus rapides à déployer, moins coûteux, qui peuvent remplacer une centrale charbon en plug and play. Les Américains y croient surtout pour décarboner leur vieux parc charbon.45:13 Cybersécurité des centrales : isolées d'internet par principe physique Les systèmes qui font fonctionner les centrales nucléaires ne sont pas connectés à internet. C'est une barrière physique, pas logicielle. EDF mobilise plusieurs centaines de personnes à temps plein sur la cybersécurité.46:45 IA et consommation d'énergie : une vraie menace ou un raisonnement trop statique ? Il y a 15 ans, on prédisait que les data centers allaient représenter 10% de la consommation mondiale d'électricité. On en est à 2,2%. Les projections en ligne droite tombent toujours à côté parce qu'elles ignorent les gains d'efficacité technologique. En France, la marge est très large : EDF a exporté un record historique de 90 TWh l'année dernière.51:33 La panne en Espagne-Portugal : l'analogique contre le numérique L'électricité est analogique : production doit en permanence égaler consommation. Un écart provoque l'effondrement. En Espagne, une suite de problèmes improbables arrivés en même temps (un "orage parfait") a déstabilisé le réseau. La France s'est déconnectée pour éviter d'être entraînée dans la chute.56:41 Géothermie : pourquoi elle n'a pas décollé en France La géothermie dépend des choix de subvention publique. L'Allemagne l'a financée, la France non. En France, l'électricité est peu chère et faiblement carbonée, donc l'incentive est quasi nul. Installer de la géothermie en retrofit exige de tout creuser. La géothermie profonde pose en plus des risques sismiques.1:01:58 Fusion nucléaire : le Graal énergétique, entre 2035 et 2070 La fusion produirait une énergie quasi-illimitée, décarbonée, peu coûteuse et presque sans déchets. Les scientifiques parlent de premiers prototypes vers 2060-2070, les start-ups d'une dizaine d'années plus tôt. On a récemment réussi pour la première fois à produire plus d'énergie qu'on n'en consomme dans une réaction de fusion. Même si ça arrive, les premières centrales en production seront probablement vers 2080-2100.1:06:40 Hydrogène : blanc, vert, gris. Ce que chacun veut dire vraiment L'hydrogène gris (produit industriellement) est très polluant. Le vert (via électrolyse) est très cher. Le blanc (naturel, dans le sol) est encore expérimental. EDF ne croit pas à l'hydrogène pour les voitures particulières : trop dangereux, trop cher, réseau à construire from scratch. Pour les bus et camions sur station centralisée, ça peut avoir du sens.1:11:23 Aviation à hydrogène et SAF : ce qu'on peut espérer vraiment Airbus a repoussé son projet d'avion hydrogène à 2050. L'aviation mise aujourd'hui sur les SAF (Sustainable Aviation Fuels) : des carburants produits à partir de CO2 capté dans l'air, déjà présents dans les réservoirs des avions Air France. C'est l'horizon réaliste, avant peut-être un avion électrique pour les courtes distances (Paris-Berlin, lignes régionales), d'ici 2030.1:15:50 Pourquoi il y a quand même des raisons d'espérer Julien conclut sur une conviction : en regardant sur le temps long, le monde va mieux. The World in Data le montre sur 200 ans. Dans l'énergie, on est passé des voitures à particules des années 50 à l'électricité bas carbone d'aujourd'hui, en 60-70 ans. Et on surestime toujours les transformations à court terme tout en les sous-estimant à long terme.1:19:44 Clap de fin : ouvrir la porte à la nuance Suggestion d'autres épisodes à écouter : #391 L'indépendance énergétique est-elle sous nos pieds? Avec Pierre Brossolet (https://audmns.com/fcRUEpN) #187 Energy Observer: envisager le futur de l'énergie avec Louis Noel Viviès (https://audmns.com/vJdRdXI) Vlan #131 Transition énergétique: ce qu'un adulte devrait savoir avec Matthieu Auzanneau (https://audmns.com/SPHszOf)Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

In this episode of Beyond the Indus, Dr. Anil Kakodkar, former chairman of India's Atomic Energy Commission and one of the principal architects of India's civilian nuclear program, joins us to discuss the history and future of India's three-stage nuclear program in the wake of this year's landmark breakthrough at Kalpakkam. We discuss the strategic logic behind Homi Bhabha's 1950s vision for a thorium-based path to energy independence, the science and engineering challenges of fast breeder reactor technology, India's decades of nuclear isolation, the safety record of nuclear power and how public perceptions have been shaped by Chernobyl and Fukushima, and the role of nuclear energy as a complement to renewables in the global push for net zero. Dr. Kakodkar also makes the case that India's thorium fuel cycle represents a proliferation-resistant model for meeting the world's long-term energy needs.

Grant Isaac, President and COO of Cameco, joins Decouple to explain why uranium behaves unlike any other commodity. With essentially zero fundamental in-year demand, a spot market that reports prices rather than discovering them, and a long-term contracting structure that ties producers directly to the utilities using the fuel, uranium operates by rules that confound anyone who approaches it through the lens of oil, gas, or base metals. Grant walks through Cameco's history as an integrated nuclear fuel company spanning mining, milling, conversion, and now fuel fabrication and reactor services through its Westinghouse partnership, explaining why that vertical integration reflects genuine customer intimacy rather than financial engineering.The conversation covers the full sweep of uranium market cycles from the post-Atoms for Peace inventory buildup through the post-Fukushima bear market, Cameco's decision to curtail 70% of its production rather than sell into a floor, and what is structurally different about the current cycle. The historic secondary supply buffer that held prices down for 30 years is gone, Kazakhstan has learned the lesson that producing more into a weak market destroys national asset value, and geopolitical fragmentation is bifurcating what was once a seamlessly globalized commodity into distinct western and non-western supply chains. Grant argues that the long-term price signal, steady rather than saw-toothing, reflects a more durable demand base than any previous cycle.Listen to Decouple on:• Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6PNr3ml8nEQotWWavE9kQz• Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/decouple/id1516526694?uo=4• Overcast: https://overcast.fm/itunes1516526694/decouple• Pocket Casts: https://pca.st/ehbfrn44• RSS: https://anchor.fm/s/23775178/podcast/rssWebsite: https://www.decouple.media

On April 14, President Trump signed an executive order telling the Department of War and NASA to put a nuclear power plant in low Earth orbit by 2028 and one on the lunar surface by 2030. Lt Gen (Ret.) Steven L. Kwast unpacks why that is not the start of weaponized space, but the catch up move America cannot afford to skip. Kwast walks through the case calmly and clearly. We already have a nuclear navy steaming the oceans safely for decades, so why not a nuclear powered space force? He tackles the Fukushima fear directly, explains how Elon Musk style cheap launch lets us send spent uranium rods into the sun, and shows how robotic mechanics, AI, and laser comms make astronauts unnecessary for reactor operations. Then he zooms out. China and Russia are already racing for space nuclear power. Whoever gets there first gets the high ground of energy, communications, and resources. Distributed mobile reactors in orbit work like the internet or a blockchain ledger, every node has to be killed to kill the network. The homework: read up, vote smart, and stop letting lobbyists scare your members of Congress into standing still.

This show has been flagged as Clean by the host. -------------------- 01 Introduction This is a follow up to my 8 part series on nuclear power. In this episode I will answer questions posed by listeners in the comments to the series. I would like to start by thanking these people for taking the time to submit interesting questions. -------------------- Costs of Small Versus Large Reactors 02 brian-in-ohio asked two questions The first was for a cost comparison between large and small reactors. The second was for nuclear plant safety compared to conventional power plants. 03 Answer I think that any answer to the second question is going to be perceived by some people as politically controversial, so it's probably not a good topic for HPR to address. 04 The first question though about cost of small versus large reactors is an interesting one, although not one that is easy to give an answer to. I will restrict the answer to just grid scale electric power production and ignore use cases such as industrial process heat or power for remote mines and communities. 05 This question comes down to economies of scale versus economies of replication. Economies of scale centre around increased efficiencies of use of materials and labour when making something bigger. For example, the amount of steel used by a pipe increases linearly with its diameter, but the amount of fluid that it transports increases with the square. 06 Economies of replication come from increasing efficiencies which result from serial production. As you repeat the same design over and over again, you learn how to do things better and make fewer mistakes. 07 The exact same principles apply to shipbuilding. Indeed, a lot of the inspiration for Small Modular Reactors comes from the shipbuilding industry. If you build a series of identical ships, then each subsequent ship will cost less and be built faster. There are of course diminishing returns to this process, so the improvements are less with each additional unit and after a sufficient number of units the cost and time reductions level off. 08 However, this doesn't discount the benefits of economies of scale. What it does mean is that there are two ways of approaching the problem, and which way works in any given scenario depends on such conditions as how big the local electricity market is how fast the demand for electricity is growing, the ownership and financing structure of the electricity market, and the geography of the area, which may pose limits on the number of sites. 09 According to the finance people who have crunched the numbers, there are two sizes of reactor which make the most sense in the above context. These are 300 MW and 1000 MW. However, take those as very rough numbers rather than immutable laws of nature and other sizes may work as well. 10 The key point is that there are cases to be made for both small and large reactors, with the large reactor being several times the size of the small one. 11 An additional factor is that building only one reactor does not reap the benefits of efficiency of replication. You need to build a series of them on the same site. So if you are building a power plant, you don't build a power plant that has just one reactor unless you are in a small market which can only use that much power. Instead, you should build between 4 and 6 reactors in sequence next to one another. 12 If you are supply a large population with a growing demand for electricity, then 4 or 6 large 1000 MW reactors gains both economies of scale and economies of replication. If you are supplying a smaller population with slow growth in demand for electricity, then 4 or 6 300 MW reactors at least gets you economies of replication. 13 There is what could be viewed as an interesting example in terms of the above taking place just east of Toronto. There they are building four 300 MW SMRs on a site next to an existing nuclear power plant. 14 Here are the cost estimates from the Government of Ontario. All costs are in Canadian dollars. Unit 1 is $6.1 billion, plus $1.6 billion in costs which are shared by all four unit.s Unit 2 is $4.9 billion. Unit 3 is $4.2 billion. Unit 4 is $4.1 billion. 15 As you can see, building a series of reactors sequentially on the same site results in declining overall costs. They are very confident in these costs as they used data from a series of major nuclear power plant refurbishment projects in Ontario which have been coming in on time and on budget. 16 Construction began last year and the plant is expected to have a 65 year operating life. 17 However, the province of Ontario also has plans for expansion of electrical generation by about 15,000 MW by 2050 in order to meet net zero targets. 18 Given the heavy concentration of population in the Toronto region, and the very high cost and difficulty of building long distance transmission lines, and the limited number of sites which could host new power generation facilities of any sort, I suspect it is quite likely that subsequent reactors will be large 1,000 MW ones rather than SMRs. 19 The Wesleyville site (which is further east of Toronto) is tentatively scheduled for a 10,000 MW nuclear power plant. That would seem to make ten 1,000 MW reactors more likely than 34 300 MW reactors. 20 I don't have a comparable set of numbers for building large reactors to give an exact apples to apples comparison of costs. Different countries use different accounting and financing systems, and finance makes a huge difference to overall costs for nuclear power as operating costs are a relatively small share of the total. 21 Now to look at another side of this equation, the provinces of Saskatchewan and New Brunswick wish to replace their coal fired power plants with nuclear power plants. The populations of these provinces are too small to absorb a large new power plant into their grids, and studies assuming large reactors have foundered on this issue. 22 New Brunswick already have a nuclear power plant, but it was build in the days when reactors were much smaller. Both provinces however are very interested in small reactors, even individual ones, in order to replace the coal fired plants that are of similar size. 23 I think this covers the cost versus size issue. The more I look into it, the more it becomes apparent that there is no simple one size fits all answer but rather there are a series of trade-offs which must be taken in light of local circumstances. -------------------- MOX Fuel in the USA 24 The next question comes from mnw who asked about the use of MOX fuel in the USA. 25 mnw asked I am enjoying and look forward to the rest of the series. Do you think the US will ever wake up and start recycling its spent fuel? It seems like such a huge waste just to try and keep a small amount of fuel away from"the bad guys" or whatever they are imagining. Answer 26 My answer to this is as follows. I think I've addressed this in the original series, although not directly with respect to the US so I can provide some more detail on that aspect of it. 27 First though I will review what plutonium-uranium mixed oxide (MOX) fuel is. As mentioned in previous episodes, military grade plutonium is not the same as the plutonium which comes out of commercial power reactors. Just as military grade uranium requires nearly pure U-235 isotope, military grade plutonium requires nearly pure Pu-239 isotope. 28 What comes out of a commercial power reactor as spent fuel is not usable for weapons purposes as the proportion of Pu-239 is much too low. However, plutonium recovered from spent fuel can be used as fuel for nuclear reactors in place of uranium 235 when mixed with uranium 238 either left over from enrichment or extracted from spent fuel. This is what is known as MOX fuel. 29 To look at the US history of this however, here's the sequence of events. The US banned fuel reprocessing in 1976. However, this ban was repealed in 1981. 30 In 2005, the US began building a mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel plant at Savannah River in the state of South Carolina. However, this plant was not intended as a normal commercial operation and it was not intended to recycle commercial nuclear power plant fuel. It was instead intended to convert surplus military grade plutonium into commercial fuel in order to get rid of it as part of an arms control program. 31 The program was suspended in 2018. There were apparently many complex political issues involved in these on-again off-again decisions and I won't pretend to have the time or interest to explore all the details nor do I think most listeners would be interested in hearing abou them. 32 As of March 2026, the US are looking at reviving part of the Savannah River plant to produce limited amounts of fuel for testing of advanced reactors. The issue driving this is the shortage of uranium enriched to just below 20%. This fuel is used in certain types of small SMR. 33 The main commercial supplier of this material was a plant in Russia, but "certain events in Europe in recent years" shall we say, have resulted in that supply no longer being available to commercial operations in the US. MOX fuel based on surplus weapons grade plutonium is intended as a short term quick fix for that problem. 34 Another driving force is legal requirements following from domestic commitments for the US government to dispose of certain stockpiles of weapons grade plutonium from certain sites in the US where it is "temporarily" stored, and the solution to that is seen as burning it up in power reactors. 35 So the history is the US banned fuel reprocessing. Then a few years later they un-banned it. Then the US government started building a MOX plant which was intended to get rid of surplus weapons grade material by burning it up in power reactors. Then they decided they didn't want to do that. Then they decided they may want to make MOX fuel after all to replace supplies of special grades of fuel for experimental or prototype reactors. 36 What is missing from the above history is any actual interest from the US commercial nuclear industry in MOX fuel. The reason for this is, as mentioned in the previous episodes, uranium is so cheap and abundant that fuel made from fresh uranium is cheaper than MOX fuel. 37 Some countries such as France wish to recycle spent fuel to reduce their dependence upon imports. Recall that France's drive to build nuclear power plants was in response to the 1970s era energy crisis when oil imports from the Middle East were suddenly cut off. However, the US are not concerned about this issue and so do not make it national security policy as France did. 38 As a result, US commercial demand is for cheaper fuel made from fresh uranium rather than for MOX fuel. Until such time as fresh uranium greatly increases in price there is little economic incentive for the use of MOX fuel in the US. 39 However, there is another aspect to this. If you recall in previous episodes I described molten salt reactors which used dissolved uranium fuel. These reactors inherently reprocess fuel as part of their normal operation. They just do it as part of maintaining the molten salt chemistry at the correct values rather than doing it as a separate process. 40 If these types of reactors become widely used then they would be achieving the same thing as creating MOX fuel, but without an explicit separate step. 41 As a final footnote to the above, the US has almost exclusively use enriched uranium light water reactors. As mentioned in previous episodes, there are ways of recycling spent fuel from light water reactors which do not involve chemically reprocessing it to make MOX fuel. 42 Experiments have been done involving South Korea, China, and Canada which take spent fuel from light water reactors and repackage it to fit it into natural uranium heavy water reactors. What is used up or "spent" fuel for a light water reactor is high grade fuel to a natural uranium reactor. However, the US has, for whatever reason, never built commercial natural uranium reactors such as are used in a number of other countries around the world. 43 If they were to do so, then nuclear fuel could be used twice, once in a light water reactor, and again in a natural uranium reactor, all without having to turn it into MOX fuel in a separate reprocessing step. However, this particular alternative would likely face the same issue in the sense that fresh fuel would still be cheaper than reusing spent fuel. -------------------- A Variety of Questions from Clinton 44 Next we have a variety of questions from Clinton. Clinton asked I would like some commentary in the current situation, why has hinkley gone off the rails, the new american approach, the odd things done after fukushima, the new radiation rules in the states. 45 Question 1 why has hinkley gone off the rails, 46 Answer The question refers to cost overruns at the Hinkley Point nuclear power project in the UK. The UK government looked into this issue in a more general sense in 2025. They published a report on it titled Nuclear Regulatory Review 2025 Enabling nuclear delivery through regulatory reform John Fingleton There is a link to the report in the show notes. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/692080f75c394e481336ab89/nuclear-regulatory-review-2025.pdf 47 As the report is 162 pages long, I won't try to cover it all in this answer. I will however give a few simple examples. The report focuses on civilian nuclear power and the defence nuclear industry as well. However it also draws examples from outside the nuclear industry to show that the problem is not limited to nuclear. It shows that the same problems exist in the offshore wind industry, and in the HS2 High Speed Rail project. 48 In the view of the authors of the report, the essence of the problem seems to be a lack of any degree of proportionality in terms of mitigating negative effects from any project. Big nuclear projects make the headlines because they are inherently big projects, but as I have just mentioned, they affect things like wind power development and rail transport as well. 49 I will pick one example from Hinkley Point specifically. This is "Case Study: Hinkley Point C Fish Protection" A summary of this is that they spent £700 million of additional money on the cooling water intakes to protect an estimated 0.083 salmon per year, along with 0.028 sea trout, 6 river lamprey, 18 Allis shad, and somewhere between 100 and 528 twaite shad. The report points out that there are ways to protect far more fish for far less money by spending it in other areas, and gives some examples. Again, this problem is not limited to nuclear power, and they give similar examples connected with offshore wind development and HS2 High Speed Rail. 50 I would like to emphasize that I am not expressing an opinion on whether or not any of these decisions were good or bad ones or whether the money was well spent. I am just summarizing the report's explanation of why large projects of all sorts initiated and approved by the UK parliament were not turning out as initially expected. I will leave it up to people in the UK to decide whether or not they are satisfied with the current situation. 51 Question 2 the new american approach, 52 Answer The US have apparently announced changes to their regulatory system. I don't know enough about the subject to really judge the practical effects of regulation within the US. However, I have read and listened to many interviews of people from both the industry and the regulatory side of things who are from outside the US but are familiar with it. They generally contrast two different approaches to regulation. On the one hand there is the US approach, which they see as being more of a box ticking exercise than an in depth safety review. This makes it very hard to get a design other than a traditional PWR or BWR approved in the US. 53 It has the advantage from the regulator side of things though in that it reduces the amount of work required as it primarily requires just following a set of defined procedures. These people then contrast that approach with the one used in the UK and in Canada, both of which they see as being very similar to one another. In those two countries, regulators work with industry to review designs from basic principles rather than just seeing if it meets a pre-defined list of criteria. This is a results oriented system rather than a process oriented system as used in the US. 54 As a result of this, designers of new nuclear reactors are going to the UK and Canada first to go through preliminary review there, and only going to the US later. What designers are looking for is feedback on their design as they go along in order to align the design with what safety regulators see as being required from their standpoint. They want to go into a review process before the design is finalized so they can get guidance on how they should approach things rather than trying to add safety as additional features on top of a finished design. 55 It would take someone with deep familiarity with nuclear regulation systems to understand the practical effects of recent changes in US regulatory systems, but it is quite possible that people within the regulatory structure in the US have been taking the above on board and trying to adapt to current circumstances. However, I can only speculate on that. This is about the best answer that I can give. 56 Question 3 the odd things done after fukushima, 57 Answer This covers a lot of topics, some of which are probably political and so are not suited to HPR. I will try to list a few events however. As a brief summary if the Fukushima events go however, a historic scale earthquake and tsunami in Japan in 2011 caused huge loss of life and widespread damage. About 20,000 people were killed by the earthquake and tsunami. Three nuclear reactors based on 1960s era GE BWR designs were seriously damaged by hydrogen explosions caused by loss of power to backup generators when they were flooded by the tsunami. However, there were no radiation related deaths or cases of radiation sickness. 58 Following events in Japan was a general review of designs around the world, with various improvements made in some areas, particularly backup generators and hydrogen management. It seems to be conventional wisdom that the Fukushima event caused a number of countries to decide to phase out nuclear power. 59 However, when I tried to make a list of such countries for this episode I found things were not as is often heard. The countries which decided to get rid of nuclear power had largely started down that road at least a decade before then and generally for reasons unrelated to any specific events outside of their own country. In other cases they reversed that decision or are in the process of doing so. Japan itself has restarted many of their nuclear power plants and plant to replace decommissioned nuclear power plants with new ones, although many of the older and smaller ones were considered not economically worth upgrading at this point in their life to restart them. 60 The one possible exception to this may be Taiwan which decided to phase out nuclear power in 2016. However, I don't know enough about Taiwanese politics to state with any confidence that their decision in 2016 was based on anything related to events in Japan, or whether in fact they were a byproduct of other political changes within Taiwan and the shut down of nuclear plants happened to be carried along with those. Currently Taiwan get their electricity primarily from natural gas and coal. 61 Meanwhile across mainland Asia from Turkey to China, large numbers of nuclear power plants were built or are under construction. Taken together on a global scale, did anything really change after Fukushima, or did the countries which had already decided to close down their nuclear power plants simply continue to do so, and those countries who decided they wanted more of them continue to build them? That's a good question for which I don't think anyone has the perspective to answer at this point. 62 Another side of this which is hard to disentangle from it though is the increased use of natural gas for electric power generation which was happening at around the same time. Increased use of fracking in a number of countries, plus increased supplies from Russia and LNG from the Middle East and other places resulted in falls in natural gas prices in many places. Since combined cycle natural gas turbines form the main competitor to nuclear power, anything which improves the economics of natural gas will act to reduce demand for nuclear power. This makes it hard to decide to what degree the reduction in the number of reactors being built was due to the political effects of the earthquake and tsunami and to what degree it was due to cheaper natural gas through fracking and other means. I'll leave that question at that. 63 Question 4 the new radiation rules in the states. 64 Answer I'm not deeply familiar with US radiation rules, but I will attempt to answer the question. Apparently there are wide variety of different things being addressed, only some of which have any relevance to the nuclear power industry. One of these is an epidemiological study on the current exposure limits for workers in the nuclear industry. This study will take place over about 5 years. In the end it may not result in any changes. This is for a number of reasons. 65 One is that US exposure thresholds for workers are currently aligned with international standards. It would be difficult for the US industry to operate on a different basis than the rest of the world when supply chains are global and kit is designed to meet currently recognized standards. Another is that apparently the nuclear industry are not, so far as I can discern, asking for any changes to limits. They instead are looking for changes to how some of the details are being applied, such as for example the criteria for deciding when respirators are required in low risk environments. 66 Some point to recent changes in UK regulations as an example of what they are looking for. I will post a link to the new (November of 2025) UK regulations in the show notes. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nuclear-industry-principles-to-guide-the-application-of-as-low-as-reasonably-practicable-alarp-and-best-available-techniques-bat/ways-of-working-principles-to-guide-the-application-of-alarp-and-bat-in-the-nuclear-industry-accessible-webpage This is about as much detail as I think I can comment on when it comes to this question, as I think it is a subject that requires a fair bit more practical knowledge of than I have in order to give a thorough and balanced answer. -------------------- 67 Question from Antoine Were/are the designs patented? Hi, Whiskeyjack. Nice ep. You said AGR, based on Magnox, was a nuclear reactor type that did not sell well outside the UK. I then started thinking if it were (is) possible to another countries to develop by themselves based on that project, or if it had (has) a commercial restriction for exploration of the technology. I have yet to listen to the following episodes (doing little by little) and may learn better on the choices, but I felt free to present the question by now... Thanks! 68 Answer This is a very good question because it offers the opportunity to talk about a number of interesting things that haven't been touched on yet. Let's cover a bit of background first. 69 A patent is a time limited right to exploit a defined bit of valuable technical knowledge. Patents were involved from the very earliest days of commercial nuclear power, and I will give an example of this later. A key point to keep in mind though is that the nuclear power field moves very slowly and it takes a long time for new knowledge to make it from the lab to commercial application. Patents will often expire before they reach the point where they can be used. 70 Contracts on the other hand are legally enforceable agreements between two parties. A contract may have a time limited life, but that is an arrangement between the parties. A commercial nuclear power plant is a very large and complex bit of kit and not easily copied in detail. It can be far more effective to cover designs under contracts and licenses than to rely on patents. If a country wished to build their own nuclear power plants rather than buying them from someone else, there are a large number of companies who have commercial designs they are willing to license to third parties for them to build themselves. Indeed a number of these companies base their business around licensing of designs or have other reasons for wishing to do so. 71 From a licensee perspective, it could take decades of work and hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars to take a design from first principle to the ready to build state, wheras licensing a design give you a proven design right away. As mentioned in previous episodes, there many types of reactor in the world. The selection of what sort of reactor a country decides to buy often depends more on commercial considerations revolving around licensing terms and conditions than it does with respect to any technical considerations. Here's an example which shows how South Korea decided to license a design, build it for themselves, and then export it to other countries. 72 KunMo Chung - Professor at the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, stated in an interview in 2019 that South Korea wanted to standardize on a single reactor technology in the early 1980s. They had reactors from multiple different vendors, but wanted to license an existing successful design to produce for themselves and for the export market. One of the major factors in deciding to standardize was to allow them to improve operator training by focusing on one design. Professor Chung stated that one of the key factors in selecting a design from ABB-Combustion Engineering was that he personally knew and had a good relationship with the Chief Technical Officer of ABB-Combustion Engineering going back to a time when Professor Chung had been studying and working in the USA. 73 On their side, ABB-Combustion Engineering were having financial problems and they needed a partner to help further develop their new PWR design. Also they stood to gain revenue from this partnership as well. Based on this relationship, the two sides came to a business agreement and South Korea began producing reactors based on this design, while also continuing to develop and improve it further. 74 Here's an example of a case where the developers of a promising technology decided that they had more to gain by not patenting their technology. Instead they decided to freely share their information in order to get other researchers elsewhere to help to advance the technology so that all could benefit from it. 75 In an interview Wacław Gudowski - Prof. Emeritus, Royal Institute of Technology KTH Stockholm stated that the Soviets and later the Russian were the leaders in lead-bismuth cooled reactors. These reactors use lead-bismuth liquid metal alloy as a coolant. In the 1990s the Russian institute working on commercializing this technology were working with Western partners on nuclear technology in general. They considered patenting this technology, but in the end decided to simply publish it openly. 76 Professor Gudowski had even smuggled $60,000 in cash into Russia to finance the patent application in order to get the Russian institute to publish their technology, but the money was not needed. They based this decision on the judgment that it would take 20 years of R&D before the technology was ready for the commercial market, so they wouldn't see a penny on any patents anyway. They were right on this, as it was another 20 years of R&D in Europe, Russia, China, and Korea before lead-bismuth technology was ready for commercial use. 77 It had already seen use in submarine reactors, but the commercial market demanded a more thoroughly developed technology to satisfy commercial needs. By deciding to not patent the technology, the original developers gained from shared R&D rather than chasing the illusary gains from patent licenses on technology that was not ready for the commercial market anyway. 78 I said that patents were involved in nuclear technology from the very earliest days, and I will now turn to that story. When I say the earliest days, I mean probably earlier than you are imaging. I am talking about before WWII. 79 First though I need to give some background information. France and Britain were working on nuclear weapons from the very earliest days of WWII. In Britain's case this was called Tube Alloys. Canada also was conducting nuclear experiments, including building an "atomic pile", but it's not clear if this had any clear practical goals or was done to understand the physics better. 80 If you read the Wikipedia version of history, it states that Tube Alloys was merged into the Manhattan Project. However, participants have stated in interviews that this was not the case, and the Quebec Agreement which supposedly merged them makes no such mention of any merger of the projects, just the setting up of a board to coordinate efforts between the three countries, that is the US, UK, and Canada. In fact the two projects didn't get along that well, and as we shall see below, a big part of that was disputes over patents. ### 81 The following is based on a paper written by Bertrand Goldschmidt, a French nuclear scientist. Two of his colleagues, Hans Halban and Lew Kowarski played a critical role in early nuclear research. Halban in particular was one of the greatest scientific names in nuclear fission. In March of 1939 Halban conducted an experiment showing that neutrons were emitted by the fissioning of uranium. 82 In April Joliot, Halban, Kowarski and Perrin had a pretty good idea of how to use nuclear fission to produce energy and to make an explosive device and decided to file patents on their invention. Each of the four would receive a 5% share of any benefits and the other 80% would go to the research instittute they worked at in Paris. I will now quote from Goldschmidt's paper. 83 The first two patents concerned energy production and were entitled "Device for energy production" and "Method for stabilizing a device for energy production." They roughly defined the principles of the main components of our present power reactors: moderator in heterogeneous or homogeneous arrangements, cooling fluid, control rods, protection shield. The third patent called "Method for perfecting explosive charges" was less brilliant from a foresight point of view though it proposed valid solutions for the trigger, the tamper, and the rapid obtainment of the critical assembly of a possible explosive device. Finally, nearly a year later, after Alfred Nier's experimental confirmation in March 1940 of Niels Bohr's theoretical prediction that uranium 235, the rare isotope of the mixture in natural uranium, was responsible for fission by slow neutrons, the French took out an additional patent on the advantage of using enriched uranium for the chain reaction. End of quote. 84 In May of 1940, the CNRS, the French research institute in Paris, negotiated an agreement with Belgian mining company Union Miniere, who were the world's biggest producer of uranium, at the time a byproduct of radium mining, about a partnership for the world wide exploitation of these patents. However the agreement was not finalized due to the ongoing events in the war. At the beginning of the war, the French government had approved the development of an energy generator - or a nuclear reactor as we would say today, with the intention of creating an engine for submarines. 85 With the fall of France, Halban and Kowarski travelled to the UK with their supply of heavy water where they were received by their UK counterparts, James Chadwick and John Cockroft. The British were already working on an atomic bomb. In the UK the two conducted an experiment showing that it was possible to create nuclear energy using natural uranium and heavy water. In 1941 the British nuclear project was reorganized and given the name Tube Alloys. In 1942 it was decided to move the work on a plutonium bomb to Canada, and Canada would pay for the project. A lab was set up in Montreal and Halban was put in charge of the project. 86 Halban had negotiated this arrangement by offering to arrange to have the French patents for world wide rights outside of France and the French empire transferred to the UK. In return the French team were to be given a key role in the British nuclear project. The author of the paper I am referencing, Bertrand Goldschmidt, was a section leader in Montreal and a colleague of Halban from France. The Montreal group cooperated with the American Manhattan Project and the two shared information and exchanged visits. 87 However, relations between the two began to break down, with a major cause of this being the Americans being unhappy about the French patents and Halban's arrangement to give the British world wide rights to them. The postwar commercial potential for nuclear power was seen to be huge, and this was a major bone of contention. The extensive participation of ICI (Imperial Chemical Industries) engineers in the Tube Alloys project was also objectionable to the Americans. Presumably this had something to do with potential for ICI being involved in future commercialization of the technology. The American Dupont company, a commercial rival of ICI, was also heavily involved in the American atomic bomb project. The eventual result of this was that the US cut off cooperation with the UK-Canada nuclear project. 88 Finally Halban was forced out of the project at the insistence of the Americans, and he was replaced by John Cockroft who moved to Montreal to take charge of the project. The Americans now restore limited cooperation. Kowarski was put in charge of building a heavy water moderated natural uranium reactor at a new site north of Ottawa at Chalk River. This reactor was turned on on the 5th of September, 1945, three days after Japan's surrender. So in what was supposedly a titanic war for survival, key allies were falling out with respect to their ultimate weapon over issues of patents covering post war commercialization. 89 With the end of the war, the nuclear weapons project in Montreal and Chalk River was wound up. Halban, Kowarski, and Goldschmidt returned to France and Cockroft to the UK where they all played senior roles in the nuclear programs of their respective countries. John Cockroft played an important role in the development of the Magnox reactors which Antoine asked about. The Chalk River Site remains as Canada's main nuclear research centre to this day, and Canada was to continue development of heavy water moderated natural uranium reactors. 90 The first commercial nuclear power plant was commissioned in the UK in 1956, roughly 17 years after the original French nuclear patents. At that time, UK patents had a term of 16 years. While I am not a patent lawyer, it would appear that these patents would likely have expired before nuclear power was ever commercialized. So to answer the question about patents, the first patents on nuclear energy date to before WWII started, and the very first two were about nuclear power plants and it was only the third one which covered nuclear weapons. -------------------- 91 Thanks to other listeners. A number of other listeners made comments saying they were really enjoying the series. I would like to thank the following for their kind words of encouragement. They helped make the work required to do this worthwhile. They are brian-in-ohio mnw Clinton Antoine bjb Kevin O'Brien Trey L'andrew Archer72 Jim DeVore If you have commented but I have forgotten your name, or if the show was recorded before I got a chance to read your comment, I would still like to thank you. 92 Conclusion I would like to thank all the listeners for their kind comments and insightful questions. I hope that I have answered these questions to the satisfaction of everyone. I look forward to hearing from all of you in future podcast episodes including those on other topics. -------------------- Proceedings of the 29th annual conference of the Canadian Nuclear Association and 10th annual conference of the Canadian Nuclear Society. V. 1-3 https://inis.iaea.org/records/m2s41-40917 This has a paper by Bertrand Goldschmidt about the work of the French scientists in Canada. -------------------- Provide feedback on this episode.

Mise sous pression par le blocage du détroit d'Ormuz, Taïwan tente de relancer son programme nucléaire. La petite île au large de la Chine importe plus de 95% de son énergie et est en temps normal sous pression, notamment vis-à-vis de son industrie de semi-conducteurs très gourmande en énergie. Pour assurer à Taïwan une meilleure autonomie, le président taïwanais, dont le parti était le fer de lance antinucléaire du pays, annonce vouloir relancer les centrales nucléaires taïwanaises, à peine un an après leur fermeture. De notre correspondant à Taipei, Le petit port de pêche touristique de YeLiu, au nord de Taïwan, est situé à quelques kilomètres seulement de l'une des deux centrales nucléaires concernées par le projet de réouverture. Son dernier réacteur a été mis hors service il y a seulement trois ans, mais ces habitants attablés pour le déjeuner pensent que le remettre en route est la seule solution viable. « Pourquoi est-ce qu'ils veulent relancer le nucléaire ? Parce qu'à Taïwan, on manque d'électricité ! Le charbon, ça pollue. L'éolien n'est pas assez efficace. Le nucléaire, par contre, si c'est bien géré, aucun problème », assure un homme. Pragmatiques, ces Taïwanais pensent moins aux risques d'accidents nucléaires qu'aux opportunités d'emploi dans la région. « Ça fait aussi plus de travail pour notre communauté, il y a plus d'avantages que d'inconvénients », complète-t-il. L'annonce de relance de centrale n'enchante guère les associations opposées au nucléaire Mais à Taïwan, le nucléaire est loin de faire l'unanimité. Pour la secrétaire générale de la plus importante association citoyenne opposé au nucléaire, le traumatisme de l'accident de Fukushima ne doit pas être oublié : « Le séisme de 2011 qui a provoqué l'accident nucléaire de Fukushima a eu beaucoup d'impact sur Taïwan. Taïwan et le Japon sont des régions similaires, avec de nombreux séismes. Il faut continuer à tirer les leçons de cet événement. Quand on a la preuve de nouvelles failles géologiques, on ne devrait pas relancer le nucléaire. » Après l'accident de Fukushima, des centaines de milliers de personnes ont manifesté plusieurs années dans les rues, au prix d'une victoire : celle de l'arrêt total de tous les réacteurs du pays. La dernière centrale a fermé ses portes en mai 2025. Avec cette annonce de relance, le mouvement antinucléaire est prêt à s'opposer une nouvelle fois au gouvernement. « Nous espérons pouvoir cette fois encore gagner, car en réalité, les problèmes d'hier et ceux d'aujourd'hui n'ont pas changé. Taïwan est toujours une région à forte activité sismique. Et les centrales nucléaires de Taïwan sont toujours situées dans des zones urbaines densément peuplées. Nous estimons que les conditions n'ont pas changé. Nos inquiétudes restent les mêmes », poursuit-elle. À lire aussiTaïwan: manifestation de rejet du nucléaire La Chine veut « offrir à Taïwan une garantie fiable pour sa sécurité énergétique » Bien consciente des difficultés de Taïwan pour assurer son autonomie énergétique, la Chine tente elle aussi de s'immiscer dans le débat, via son porte-parole des affaires taiwanaises, quelques semaines après le début de la guerre en Iran. « Après une réunification pacifique, nous pourrions tout à fait compenser les pénuries de Taïwan en électricité, en gaz naturel, en pétrole brut... et offrir à Taïwan une garantie fiable pour sa sécurité énergétique », alimente le porte-parole. Pour ne dépendre ni du détroit d'Ormuz, ni de la Chine, le gouvernement taïwanais espère pouvoir relancer deux de ses centrales nucléaires d'ici 2029. À lire aussiTaiwan : l'île des Orchidées, un paradis radioactif

40 ans après l'explosion du réacteur 4 de la centrale ukrainienne, la prise en charge de l'accident et de ses conséquences continue de faire débat, reportage en Ukraine et retour sur les réactions en Allemagne. Également dans cette émission : La revue sonore des médias européens ; L'Italie offre une prime aux juges qui convaincront les migrants de quitter le pays ; La Moldavie célèbre les Pâques des Bienheureux.  Le 26 avril 1986, le monde sous le choc de Tchernobyl En Ukraine  La plus grande catastrophe nucléaire civile à ce jour, devant celle de Fukushima, est survenue à Tchernobyl, en URSS, le 26 avril 1986. Elle a entraîné l'évacuation de dizaines de milliers de personnes. Il a fallu des années, et l'intervention de plusieurs centaines de milliers de personnes au fil du temps, pour contenir et atténuer les conséquences de l'accident, que ce soit sur le site lui-même et dans la zone d'exclusion, d'un rayon de 30 km autour de la centrale. Habitants, employés de la centrale, liquidateurs et leurs familles ont souvent été relogés autour de la capitale ukrainienne, où la catastrophe entre aujourd'hui en résonnance avec la guerre. Emmanuelle Chaze y a retrouvé des familles qui témoignent et racontent leurs souvenirs. En Allemagne  Cet accident qui a eu des retombées mondiales, qu'elles soient sanitaires, économiques ou politiques, a été tout d'abord dissimulé puis minimisé par les autorités soviétiques. Ce n'est que deux jours après l'explosion que la Suède, constatant des radiations élevées autour de l'une de ses centrales civiles, comprend que des particules radioactives arrivent de l'Est. Le fameux nuage si controversé a touché de très nombreux pays à des degrés divers, dont l'Allemagne, alors divisée entre RFA et RDA ; deux entités qui n'ont pas répondu aux événements de la même façon, Delphine Nerbollier.   Dans les médias européens, par Franceline Beretti Tchernobyl encore : en France, les autorités se sont démarquées de leurs voisins ; quatre jours après le vote en Bulgarie, la presse européenne a tranché sur la personnalité de Roumen Radev ; à Katyn, la Russie réécrit encore l'histoire à sa façon.   En Italie, le monde de la justice est en ébullition depuis 48h : le Sénat italien a approuvé le nouveau décret sécurité du gouvernement ; il stipule que les avocats qui aideront les migrants en situation irrégulière à demander leur rapatriement toucheront une prime payée par l'État. Les précisions de Cécile Debarge. À lire aussiItalie: l'État condamné à dédommager un migrant transféré illégalement en Albanie En Moldavie, les Pâques des « Bienheureux », autrement nommée Pâques des morts, est une tradition dans plusieurs pays slaves, mais elle est particulièrement importante en Moldavie, où elle est d'ailleurs marquée par un jour férié. Une semaine après la Pâque orthodoxe, cette fête du même nom est l'occasion de rendre hommage aux disparus, et ça se passe donc dans les cimetières, où les familles se rassemblent pour partager un repas presque sacré dans la religion orthodoxe, et pour célébrer les souvenirs et la vie des personnes qui ne sont plus. Reportage de notre correspondante en Moldavie, Marine Leduc.

Más secreto que el desastre de 1986, el complejo nuclear de Mayak protagonizó en 1957 una explosión química que liberó enormes cantidades de radiación. El accidente, conocido como Kyshtym, contaminó miles de kilómetros cuadrados y afectó a cientos de miles de personas. Aunque la Unión Soviética lo ocultó durante décadas, es considerado el tercer peor desastre nuclear, solo por detrás de Chernóbil y Fukushima. Y descubre más historias curiosas en el canal National Geographic y en Disney +. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

After the Fukushima disaster shut down Japan's nuclear reactors, the coal industry rushed in to fill the energy gap. As climate advocate Kimiko Hirata watched dozens of new coal plant proposals quietly surface across the country — each one locking in decades of future emissions — she resolved to make them impossible to ignore. She shares how a small, scrappy civil society movement took on a fossil-fuel-dependent economy and got people to say "yes" to a renewable future.Learn more about our flagship conference happening this April at attend.ted.com/podcast Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week Howie is joined by Linda Pentz Gunter, Executive Director of Beyond Nuclear, for a discussion about her just-published book: No to Nuclear: Why Nuclear Power Destroys Lives, Derails Climate Progress and Provokes War.Links Shared During the Stream:Linda Pentz Gunter, No to Nuclear: Why Nuclear Power Destroys Lives, Derails Climate Progress and Provokes War (Pluto Press, 2026), https://www.plutobooks.com/product/no-to-nuclear/Beyond Nuclear, https://beyondnuclear.org/Howie Hawkins, "Fighting Radioactive Wastewater Dumping from New York to Fukushima,” June 21, 2023, https://howiehawkins.us/project/report-back-from-the-global-greens-congress/https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2026/02/putin-tried-to-freeze-ukraine-instead-he-sparked-an-energy-revolution/https://howiehawkins.us/reverse-the-new-nuclear-arms-race/https://clamshellalliance.com/Streamed on 4/18/26Watch the video at: https://youtube.com/live/Os3LtrRBfEgGreen Socialist Notes is a weekly livestream/podcast hosted by 2020 Green Party/Socialist Party presidential nominee, Howie Hawkins.  Started as a weekly campaign livestream in the spring of 2020, the streams have continued post elections and are now under the umbrella of the Green Socialist Organizing Project, which grew out of the 2020 presidential campaign.  Green Socialist Notes seeks to provide both an independent Green Socialist perspective, as well as link listeners up with opportunities to get involved in building a real people-powered movement in their communities.Green Socialist Notes PodcastEvery Saturday at 3:00 PM EDT on Facebook, YouTube, and Twitch.Every Monday at 7:00 AM EDT on most major podcast outlets.Music by Gumbo le FunqueIntro: She Taught UsOutro: #PowerLoveFreedom

What does it take to turn crisis into a leadership framework others can actually use? In this episode, Bill Sherman talks with John Lentini, President of Culture, Strategy, Learning & Development at Crestcom International, about how defining moments can become disciplined thinking, practical models, and a mission that is bigger than one person's story. John's path to thought leadership did not begin in theory. It began in high-stakes moments. He reflects on surviving 9/11, leading through the Fukushima crisis, and learning firsthand that character is not an abstract idea. It is revealed under pressure. More importantly, he argues it can be built with intention. At the center of the conversation is John's six-dial framework for what he calls engineering character, which can be found in his upcoming book Engineering Character: Six Dials to Build Better Leaders releasing March 2027. He explains how discipline, mindset, and resilience help leaders lead themselves first. Then integrity, empathy, and influence help them lead others in ways that build trust. The result is a model designed to make character practical, teachable, and repeatable. This episode also goes deeper than framework talk. Bill and John explore the personal cost of leadership, the difference between good leadership and bad leadership, and the tension leaders feel when corporate expectations collide with personal values. John is candid about where he got it right, where he got it wrong, and why those lessons now shape his work as a speaker, facilitator, and leadership thinker. There is also a powerful thread on authenticity. John shares why he ultimately chose to step outside corporate life and use thought leadership to express ideas more fully and more honestly. For him, this work is not about visibility for its own sake. It is about impact. It is about getting a message into the world that helps people lead with more courage, more empathy, and more character. Listeners will also hear John talk about the writing journey behind his forthcoming book on engineering character, the emotional work of putting real life on the page, and why he chose a hybrid publishing path. No previously published book by John is named in the transcript, but this episode clearly positions his upcoming book as the foundation of his thought leadership platform and future speaking work. If you care about leadership under pressure, values in action, and the challenge of turning lived experience into a message that scales, this conversation delivers. It is honest. It is practical. And it shows how thought leadership is often built not from abstract ideas, but from moments that test who we are. Three Key Takeaways: • Character can be built on purpose. The episode centers on the idea that leadership character is not just innate. It can be developed through intentional habits like discipline, mindset, resilience, integrity, empathy, and influence. • Crisis reveals what leadership really looks like. High-pressure moments expose whether leaders act with preparation, courage, empathy, and trust. The conversation shows how extreme events can shape a lasting leadership philosophy. • Authenticity matters more as leadership grows. A major theme is the tension between corporate expectations and personal values, and how thought leadership can become a way to express ideas more honestly and create broader impact. If John Lentini's episode made you think about how character is tested in moments of crisis, then "Thought Leadership for Crisis Management | Helio Fred Gracia" is the perfect next listen. Where John explores leadership through resilience, integrity, empathy, and trust under pressure, Helio extends that conversation by showing how leaders can prepare for crises before they happen, protect trust when things go wrong, and respond with clarity instead of emotion. Together, the two episodes create a powerful one-two combination on crisis, character, and the disciplined leadership choices that matter most when the stakes are high.

With NASA's Artemis II mission sending humans around the Moon for the first time since the 70s, we're bringing back one of our favorite episodes from 2024. The Krewe sat down with Dr. Kate Kitagawa of JAXA for a fascinating look at Japan's role in the global space race: from SLIM's pinpoint lunar landing to Japan's partnership in the Artemis program and beyond. If the Moon is on your mind right now, this one's for you. ++++++ OG Show Notes ++++++ Prepare for lift off as the Krewe sits down with returning guest Dr. Kate Kitagawa of JAXA to look deep into the past, present, and future of Japan's space program! From pencil rockets & SLIM landers to international collaborative efforts, discover Japan's role in exploring the far reaches of outer space. ------ About the Krewe ------ The Krewe of Japan Podcast is a weekly episodic podcast sponsored by the Japan Society of New Orleans. Check them out every Friday afternoon around noon CST on Apple, Google, Spotify, Amazon, Stitcher, or wherever you get your podcasts.  Want to share your experiences with the Krewe? Or perhaps you have ideas for episodes, feedback, comments, or questions? Let the Krewe know by e-mail at kreweofjapanpodcast@gmail.com or on social media (Twitter: @kreweofjapan, Instagram: @kreweofjapanpodcast, Facebook: Krewe of Japan Podcast Page, TikTok: @kreweofjapanpodcast, LinkedIn: Krewe of Japan LinkedIn Page, Blue Sky Social: @kreweofjapan.bsky.social, Threads: @kreweofjapanpodcast & the Krewe of Japan Youtube Channel). Until next time, enjoy! ------ Support the Krewe! Offer Links for Affiliates ------ Use the referral links below & our promo code from the episode! Support your favorite NFL Team AND podcast! Shop NFLShop to gear up for football season! Zencastr Offer Link - Use my special link to save 30% off your 1st month of any Zencastr paid plan!  ------ Past Episodes with Dr. Kate Kitagawa ------ The Age of Lady Samurai (S01E12) ------ Links about JAXA & Dr. Kate Kitagawa ------ JAXA (English) on Twitter JAXA (Japanese) on Twitter JAXA on Instagram JAXA (English) on Facebook JAXA (Japanese) on Facebook JAXA Website (Japanese) JAXA Website (English) ISAS (English) on Twitter ISAS (Japanese) on Twitter ISAS on Instagram JAXA on YouTube JAXA Space Education Center Website (English) MMX Game Lunarcraft Game SLIM The Pinpoint Moon Landing Game Kate's Book "The Secret Lives of Numbers" Kate's Website ------ JSNO Upcoming Events ------ JSNO Event Calendar Join JSNO Today!