Podcasts about generation iv

Steam is used for a wide variety of critical processes across many industrial sectors. For example, pulp and paper facilities use steam to power paper machines, dry paper and wood products, and provide heat for chemical recovery processes. Steam is used by metal and mining companies, as well as in the food and beverage industry, petroleum refining, pharmaceutical manufacturing, textile production, and many other industrial processes. “About 20% of global carbon emissions come from the industrial heat sector, and virtually all of that industrial heat today is produced by burning hydrocarbons—coal and natural gas—and emitting carbon into the atmosphere,” Clay Sell, CEO of X-energy, said as a guest on The POWER Podcast. “With our technology, we have the opportunity to replace hydrocarbons and use nuclear-generated carbon-free steam to dramatically decarbonize these so-called hard-to-decarbonize sectors.” X-energy is a nuclear reactor and fuel design engineering company. It is developing Generation-IV high-temperature gas-cooled nuclear reactors and what's known as TRISO-X fuel to power them. The company's Xe-100 small modular reactor (SMR) is an 80-MWe reactor that can be scaled into a four-pack (320-MWe power plant) that can grow even larger as needed. “The most significant advantages that we have over large-scale traditional nuclear power plants is the evolution of our technology, our safety case, and the smaller, more simplified designs that can be built with much less time and much less money,” Sell said. “We're a high-temperature gas-cooled reactor using a TRISO fuel form—that's ceramic, encapsulated fuel in a round pebble that flows through the reactor like gumballs through a gumball machine.” The Xe-100 design's intrinsic safety makes it especially unique. “This is a plant that cannot melt down under any scenario that one could imagine affecting the plant. So, that extraordinary safety case allows us to operate on a very small footprint,” said Sell. The simplified design has fewer subsystems and components, less concrete, less steel, and less equipment than traditional nuclear power plants. As noted previously, X-energy's SMR is capable of producing high-quality steam, which is especially attractive for use in industrial processes. As such, Dow Inc., one of the world's leading materials science companies, has agreed to deploy the first Xe-100 unit at its Union Carbide Corp. Seadrift Operations, a sprawling chemical materials manufacturing site in Seadrift, Calhoun County, Texas. “Our first project is going to be deployed in a public-private partnership with the U.S. government and Dow Inc., the large chemical manufacturer, at a site southwest of Houston, Texas, that will come online around the end of this decade,” Sell reported. Currently, X-energy is in the final stages of its design effort. Once complete, the next step will be to submit a construction permit application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). If all goes according to plan, the application should be approved by the NRC in early 2027, which would allow construction to start around that time. “We anticipate construction on the plant to be about a three- to three-and-a-half-year process, which will then bring it online in the early 2030s,” Sell explained. Beyond that, X-energy has an agreement to supply Amazon with 5 GW of new SMR projects (64 units) by 2039, starting with an initial four-unit 320-MWe Xe-100 plant with regional utility Energy Northwest in central Washington. Sell believes the deal positions X-energy to quickly apply lessons learned from its first-of-a-kind project with Dow, replicate and repeat the effort to achieve scale, and reach a favorable nth-of-a-kind cost structure faster than anyone else in the SMR market today. Said Sell, “When we imagine a future of a decarbonized economy with reliable power supporting dramatic growth at a reasonable cost, I believe X-energy is going to be a central technology to that future.”

$Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found Click On Picture To See Larger PictureChina's real estate stocks are crashing and they are below 2008 levels. Gavin Newsom panics, oil companies are leaving and he wants to stockpile oil.Yellen says don't worry its going to be a soft landing. The opposite is going to happen. The data is fake, the recession/depression is real. The [DS] is ready to push [KH] into the debate arena, they have trained just enough to get by and the fake news will pump it up to make it sound like she did a great job. The [DS] meanwhile is now preparing the cyber attack and the white supremist threat narrative. Trump sends another election message, countermeasures are in place.   (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); Economy https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/1833482254628114572 Gov. Gavin Newsom Wants Mandate For Oil Companies To Create Stockpile Of Gasoline  Chevron had been headquartered in California for over 140 years, giving it strong roots in this state. However, the toxic policies of California's lawmakers and regulators have killed those roots. The fossil fuel giant will relocate to Texas. Sacramento sees gasoline firms and petroleum refineries as cash cows that will always agree to be milked despite being made into a climate villain and accused of corporate greed. So, to resolve the state's serious energy challenges, California Gov. Gavin Newsom called for a special session Saturday after the Assembly rebuffed his efforts to pass an energy package before a critical deadline passed. Newsom's plan mandates that the state's oil companies create gasoline stockpiles. California Governor Gavin Newsom plans to propose legislation requiring oil companies in the most-populous US state to amass stockpiles of gasoline and other fuels to prevent supply shortages and price spikes during refinery outages.   Newsom's proposals will likely do nothing more than drive the closure of even more refineries and firms that support the fossil fuel industry. That may be his objective, but unless a lot more of those Generation IV nuclear reactors start appearing or lithium battery fires stop erupting, it is going to be increasingly difficult to sustain the California lifestyle that Democrats from this state tout. The petroleum industry has pushed back, saying the mandate would hurt consumers. The Western States Petroleum Association said the bill would punish refiners into withholding supplies and hurting consumers. Source: zerohedge.com Yellen Says US Economy Remains Solid, Predicts No ‘Meaningful Layoffs' Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen predicts that the U.S. economy will likely remain solid amid several weaker-than-expected jobs reports and after the stock market posted its worst week in months. “We're seeing less frenzy in terms of hiring and job openings, but we're not seeing meaningful layoffs,” Yellen said during an event on Sept. 7, CNBC reported. “I'm attentive to downside risk now on the employment side, but what I think we're seeing, and hope we will continue to see, is a good, solid economy.” The secretary said that the decline in job growth was caused by a slowdown after a “hiring frenzy” following the COVID-19 pandemic, adding that the overall economy is “deep into a recovery” and “operating at full employment.” Source: theepochtimes.com https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/1833189670982656021   its second-lowest level since the 2008 Financial Crisis. This means most of the labor market data has surprised downward by a wide margin. Recent misses include non-farm payroll numbers,

Nuclear energy holds great potential to contribute to power sector decarbonisation. It is a carbon-free and extremely energy dense resource that produces no air pollution. However, it comes with significant drawbacks: not only is nuclear energy very expensive, but the byproduct is radioactive material that can be extremely toxic and is long-lasting, leading to safety fears. In this episode, James and Daisy discuss the benefits and challenges of nuclear energy, one of the most contentious topics within the environmental movement. What exactly is nuclear energy? What role should nuclear power play in the transition to cleaner energy? And how do the risks of nuclear energy compare to the risks posed by climate change? SOME RECOMMENDATIONS:Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth – a book by James Lovelock that puts forward the idea that life on earth functions as a single organism. Our World in Data (2020): What are the safest and cleanest sources of energy? Fossil fuels are the dirtiest and most dangerous, while nuclear and modern renewable energy sources are vastly safer and cleaner. This article is also a useful resource to explore global data on nuclear energy production: Nuclear Energy. OTHER ADVOCATES, FACTS, AND RESOURCES:IEA: Nuclear power accounts for about 10% of electricity generation globally, rising to almost 20% in advanced economies.Terrestrial Energy is a Canadian nuclear technology company working on Generation IV nuclear technology.Verv is an AI-based smart home product that sits next to your electricity or smart meter and analyses your home energy data at its source. In 2018, a Government-backed trial in Hackney used Verv's renewable energy trading platform to enable customers with renewable energy supplies and battery storage to sell surplus power directly to neighbours.The Guardian (2024): The cost of completing Hinkley Point C (a nuclear plant in Somerset) will be between £31bn and £34bn, although if completion is delayed to 2031 costs would rise to £35bn.Thank you for listening! Please follow us on social media to join the conversation: LinkedIn | Instagram | TikTokMusic: “Just Because Some Bad Wind Blows” by Nick Nuttall, Reptiphon Records. Available at https://nicknuttallmusic.bandcamp.com/album/just-because-some-bad-wind-blows-3Producer: Podshop StudiosHuge thanks to Siobhán Foster, a vital member of the team offering design advice, critical review and organisation that we depend upon.Stay tuned for more insightful discussions on navigating the transition away from fossil fuels to a sustainable future.

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

In the latest episode of Boom! It's on the Blockchain we have a special guest joining us, Arpan Mondal from FTDAO who discusses an on-chain vote for his DAO - Will nuclear power be a key future low-carbon energy source for the world? In this podcast will provide an overview of FTDAO, and a demonstration of how an on-chain DAO vote works, and discusses Nuclear Power as a key energy source going forward in the world. Nuclear power currently accounts for 10% of the world's electrical energy generation, and it does not produce greenhouse gas emissions during electricity generation, making it attractive for addressing climate change concerns. The role of nuclear power in the future energy landscape is a subject of ongoing debate and depends on various factors, including technological advancements, public perception, regulatory frameworks, and global energy policies. In order to understand, nuclear power has a high energy density, meaning a small amount of nuclear fuel can produce a large amount of energy, contributing to energy security. Nuclear power plants can provide continuous, reliable "base load" power, which is essential for maintaining a stable electricity supply. Ongoing research into advanced reactor designs, such as Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) and Generation IV reactors, aims to address some of the challenges associated with traditional nuclear power, including safety, cost, and waste management. Public perception of nuclear power varies, and concerns about safety, nuclear accidents, and radioactive waste disposal can influence the future development of nuclear energy. Especially with accidents such as Chernobyl and Fukushima have raised significant safety concerns, contributing to public apprehension about nuclear power. The question to the DAO, is are you For or Against Nuclear Power as a key energy source in the developing world? FTDAO website - https://fundtokens.io/ FTDAO On-chain Voting Software - https://rb.gy/3jphil FTDAO White Paper - https://t.ly/0P9Da FTDAO on BscScan - https://rb.gy/3oidgg Subscribe to Boom! It's on the Blockchain - https://boomitsontheblockchain.com/ #nuclearpower #nuclear #nuclearenergy #energy #nuclearpowerplant #nuclearreactor #chernobyl #nuclearbomb #atomicenergy #radiation #nuclearphysics #radioactive #atomic #powergeneration #ftdao #azbit #dao #decentralizedautonomousorganization #rogerver #fundtoken #fundgovernancetoken #governancetoken #utilitytoken #Ethereum #ConsenSys #Quorum #HyperledgerFabric #web3 #web3d #boomitsontheblockchain #arpanmondal #alastaircaithness #bitcoin #crypto #cryptocurrency #ethereum #btc #money #trading #investing #cryptocurrencies #stocks #eth #entrepreneur #forex

The world's first fourth-generation nuclear power plant has started commercial operation in eastern China.

Building a nuclear power plant is a difficult job. It takes years of planning and sometimes more than a decade to complete. The risk of schedule delays is great, especially on first-of-a-kind projects, and the financial implications of such setbacks can ruin a company. Yet, the Tennessee Valley Authority's (TVA's) president and CEO, Jeff Lyash, suggested the risk is worth taking, that is, if lessons learned from one project can be parlayed into success in future projects. That's why TVA is studying the addition of a small modular reactor (SMR) at its Clinch River site. Lyash envisions using that first unit as a template to eventually make Clinch River a four-unit site, and then replicating that design in at least four other locations within TVA's service territory. “I've said very vocally, I [want] nothing to do with building one reactor, unless I can build 20—and 20 is the low estimate—and so, this is what Clinch River is about,” Lyash said as a guest on The POWER Podcast. While TVA continues to support and examine all of the various SMR designs being proposed, and it is also following the development of Generation IV advanced nuclear technology, it has selected GE-Hitachi's (GEH's) BWRX-300 design for its Clinch River site. “We picked the BWRX-300 technology because the X stands for the 10th generation. We know this fuel works. We know this technology works,” Lyash said. Lyash noted that there are 50 years' worth of experience behind the GEH design. He said engineers have applied modularization processes and advanced manufacturing techniques to advance the design, but the technology behind it all is well-established. “This allows us to focus on what I think the risk is that's yet to be proven, and that is, can we finish a first-of-a-kind on schedule and on budget, and can we demonstrate the movement to nth-of-a-kind rapidly, and can we turn that into a fleet?” Lyash said. “We intend Clinch River to be a four-unit site,” Lyash explained. “There's an optimum way to build four units. It includes a lot of overlap—supply chain, labor, etc. That's what we want to develop, but we're going to ‘unlap' the first unit so that we can learn all those lessons, identify all those risks, and make units two and three and four look significantly better and different, so that when we build site two, three, and four, we've got that,” he said. TVA is a wholly owned U.S. government corporation created by Congress in 1933. It is the largest public power company in the country, providing electricity for 153 local power companies serving 10 million people in Tennessee and parts of six surrounding states, as well as directly to 58 large industrial customers and federal installations. Because of TVA's unique position as an entity of the federal government, Lyash believes it should be a leader for the power industry. “Because of TVA's special role, we're really doing it to support the nation, because what we'd really love to happen is fast followers,” he said. In other words, he hopes once TVA proves that an SMR can be constructed on time and on budget, other power companies will jump on the new nuclear construction bandwagon. Still, nuclear is not the only new generation TVA is pursuing. It also has plans to add at least 10,000 MW of new solar, as well as battery and pumped-hydro energy storage, and even some natural gas–fired generation to help bridge the gap as it phases out its coal generation by 2035. “We at TVA are very outcome focused, so we spend a lot of time talking about: ‘At the end of this trail, where is it we want to arrive at?' ” Lyash said. “It's about affordable energy that's reliable and resilient, and low-carbon.” To reach the desired outcome, Lyash said it would take renewables, nuclear, storage, demand-side management, and energy efficiency all in the right mix.

What makes dating so difficult in today's dating environment? How do cultural norms and societal views impact your love life? Tune in to this episode on the Veritas 21 Podcast as Hannah, Ryan (Co-Host), and your host Levi unpack the challenges in dating about challenges with baggage. Please like, share, and follow. If you have not added the Veritas 21 Podcast to your social media accounts please do so. Some awesome content will be coming soon! Want to become a guest? Contact us today! Email: theveritaspodcast2021@gmail.com Facebook: The Veritas 21 Podcast (Group) YouTube: TheVeritas21Podcast TikTok/Instagram: @theveritas21podcast

In this episode of My Nuclear Life, host Shelly Lesher interviews Dr. Leslie Dewan. Leslie earned her PhD in Nuclear Engineering from MIT and is a cofounder of Transatomic Power, one of the first startup companies attempting to bring a Generation IV reactor to market. Leslie's understanding of nuclear energy has allowed her new company, Criticality Capital, to invest money in the sectors that need it most. Shelly and Leslie discuss how we can improve in the way we harness nuclear energy, and what Leslie sees as the path forward. Visit us at: mynuclearlife.com Patreon: www.patreon.com/mynuclearlife

Die Atomkraftwerke der sogenannten Generation IV wollen Uran nachhaltiger nutzen und Atomstrom so günstiger machen, und sie sollen sogar mit Atommüll betrieben werden können. Gemeinsam mit dem Öko-Institut zeigen wir die Vor- und Nachteile dieser Technik auf.Der Artikel zum Nachlesen: https://detektor.fm/wissen/mission-energiewende-akw-der-generation-iv

Die Atomkraftwerke der sogenannten Generation IV wollen Uran nachhaltiger nutzen und Atomstrom so günstiger machen, und sie sollen sogar mit Atommüll betrieben werden können. Gemeinsam mit dem Öko-Institut zeigen wir die Vor- und Nachteile dieser Technik auf. >> Artikel zum Nachlesen: https://detektor.fm/wissen/mission-energiewende-akw-der-generation-iv

Die Atomkraftwerke der sogenannten Generation IV wollen Uran nachhaltiger nutzen und Atomstrom so günstiger machen, und sie sollen sogar mit Atommüll betrieben werden können. Gemeinsam mit dem Öko-Institut zeigen wir die Vor- und Nachteile dieser Technik auf.Der Artikel zum Nachlesen: https://detektor.fm/wissen/mission-energiewende-akw-der-generation-iv

Oliver Martel (o__martel) of Small State Big Takes (@smallstatetakes) and 1 Man 1 Game (@1Man1GamePod) and Dan a.k.a. "Habs" (@haberschmack) join the program to draft the best lineups that Generation IV has to offer. Follow us @TheEliteTwoPod on Twitter!

Predigt von Annegret Lange Müller, Pastor im Jesus Centrum Kassel am Sonntag, 27. September 2020. An diesem Sontag geht es weiter mit Teil IV von Pastorin Annegret in der Reihe "NextGen - die nächste Generation". Generationen voller Leidenschaft und Feuer! "Gelobt sei Gott, der Vater unseres Herrn Jesus Christus, der uns mit allem geistlichen Segen in der himmlischen Welt durch Jesus Christus gesegnet hat." (Epheser 1,3) Was brauchen unsere Kinder heute? Was brauchen sie, um in dieser Zeit voller Power und Freude ihren Alltag zu meistern? Diese Predigt gibt Antworten auf die Herausforderungen des Lebens!

1) History of Swedish nuclear policies and cooperation between science and industry 2) Accelerator Driven Systems 3) The role of communication and teaching in the success of nuclear 4) Generation IV reactors and their future

Hensley Carrasco (45s and 40s) joins us to relive Generation II with Generation IV graphics and updates as we explore HeartGold and SoulSilver. Follow the podcast, Jake (@CrossingStateLines) and Steve (@smallstatetakes) on Twitter!

Nuclear power. Both loved and feared by many. Could it be the ultimate solution in our fight against poverty? Mark Schneider, world-renowned expert on nuclear energy, makes the case for how nuclear could save humanity. Mark Schneider is a nuclear futurist and a leading expert in emerging Gen IV Nuclear (www.genIVnuclear.com). He has a Bachelors Degree in Nuclear Engineering Technology and has spent 20 years working with advanced, small-scale nuclear reactors within the US Naval Nuclear Power Program.

Nuclear power. Both loved and feared by many. Could it be the ultimate solution in our fight against poverty? Mark Schneider, world-renowned expert on nuclear energy, makes the case for how nuclear could save humanity. Mark Schneider is a nuclear futurist and a leading expert in emerging Gen IV Nuclear (www.genIVnuclear.com). He has a Bachelors Degree in Nuclear Engineering Technology and has spent 20 years working with advanced, small-scale nuclear reactors within the US Naval Nuclear Power Program.

Ken B. of the JKLOL Podcast joins us to break down the first wave of Generation IV games, Diamond, Pearl and Platinum. Follow the podcast, Jake (Crossing State Lines) and Steve (Small State Big Takes) on Twitter!

Im vergangenen April überraschte Borussia Dortmund viele Fans und Experten mit der Verpflichtung von Michael Skibbe und Otto Addo für die eigene Nachwuchsabteilung. Michael Skibbe werde Trainer der U19 sowie Cheftrainer aller Jugend-Mannschaften, Otto Addo solle in einer neu geschaffenen Funktion als „Talente-Trainer“ in der Schnittstelle zwischen Junioren und Profis den Dienst beim BVB aufnehmen hieß es damals in einer Pressemitteilung des BVB. Grund genug für uns, uns diesen Personalien einmal näher zu widmen. Die Expertise stammt wieder einmal von den Jungs von "BVBJugend".

In this episode, we discuss... How Three Mile Island and the oil embargo influenced Shane to pursue nuclear engineering How Shane helped support university test reactors through his role at the Office of Nuclear Energy How tritium influenced the history behind the Office of New Production Reactors national security program Creating a roadmap for Generation IV reactor development and deployment How contracting to end users can help mobilize new nuclear The driving issues behind construction and deployment of new nuclear technologies How the Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear (GAIN) program united research and design efforts

Going Fission Speaks to Dr. Massey de los Reyes, Senior Advisor - Radiation Protection at the Environment Protection Association of South Australia and the current chair of South Australian Branch of the Australian Nuclear Association (www.nuclearaustralia.org.au/sa-ana/).  Massey has been a scientific researcher for Generation IV reactor technology and was directly involved with the South Australian Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission. The 'Voters Message to the Minister' soundbite is available at the following link.  There is a list of current State and Federal energy and environment ministers in the soundbites description, though you are welcome to forward it to any contesting minister: https://soundcloud.com/user-214473340/a-voters-message-to-the-minister Going Fission's Twitter handle is @fissiongoing. Timestamps 0:00 - Intro Theme. 1:00 - Introduction. 1:35 - How did you get into your field? 3:11 - What's harder, nuclear research or explaining it to the layperson? 5:58 - Equipment outside of Australia. 7:29 - Massey's Thesis. 10:27 - Supramolecular templating. 11:52 - The synergy between this research and SYNROC. 14:05 - Radiation stress testing. 16:01 - The Joint Research Centre (JRC) and the Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics (SINAP) 18:23 - Nuclear effects on reactors. 19.17 - A discription of Generation IV Reactors. 21.48 - A discussion of Thorium. 23.15 - Fertile and Fissile material. 26:30 - Thorium, the gateway drug to being pro-nuclear. 27:57 - Liquid vs. Solid fuel. 30:38 - A Chinese HTGR... 31:16 - Wasteform Material Solutions - SYNROC. 32:58 - The SYMO Facilty. 34:53 - Dr. Masseys work at the EPA. 37:36 - Radioactive Sources. 39:08 - Radiation in everyday lives. 44:59 - The birth of the South Australian branch on the Australian Nuclear Association. 46:38 - Dr. Massey's involvement with the SANFCRC. 50:46 - The Consultation and Response Agency (CARA). 54:53 - Massey's Bub. 57:21 - A message to the younger listeners. 1:00.34 - Where does the SAANA meet? 1:01:23 - Guest recommendations. 1:04:01 - Farewell. 1:04:09 - Additional Information. 1:04:49 - Outro

We’re living in a post Stardust Blast world and hopefully awaiting a new wave of Generation IV on this episode of GoCast!For full show notes and resources, visit our website - www.gocastpodcast.com!Hand Warming Power Bank - https://amzn.to/2B0MXZ2Support us - www.patreon.com/gocastpodcastemail us - mail@gocastpodcast.com visit our website - www.gocastpodcast.comfollow us on twitter - @gocastpodcastSupport the show (https://www.patreon.com/gocastpodcast)

Beldum Community day is over and Generation IV is upon us as November is shaping up to be really interesting on this episode of GoCast! For full show notes and resources, visit our website - www.gocastpodcast.com! email us - mail@gocastpodcast.com visit our website - www.gocastpodcast.com follow us on twitter - @gocastpodcastSupport the show (https://www.patreon.com/gocastpodcast)

Generation IV is right around the corner with a jam-packed update and we learned more about Meltan this week as we’re preparing for Beldum Community Day on this episode of GoCast! For full show notes and resources, visit our website - www.gocastpodcast.com! email us - mail@gocastpodcast.com visit our website - www.gocastpodcast.com follow us on twitter - @gocastpodcastSupport the show (https://www.patreon.com/gocastpodcast)

In this episode we discuss... Kam’s background in engineering and his personal journey in the nuclear industry A behind the scenes look at how Kam started X-Energy Kam’s work at X-Energy developing Generation IV high-temperature gas-cooled nuclear reactor and fuel designs Nuclear challenges and how Kam works to overcome them with methods including fixed cost and fixed timeline Flaws with the application system and its steep cost for nuclear companies Kam’s vision for the nuclear deployment schedule The environmental and human benefits of nuclear energy including supplying clean water through desalination and other treatment

Hydrogen Production in Generation IV Reactors

Generation IV is pretty straight-forward with its pronunciations, so how does eSeamus mangle the Pokemon between Turtwig (#377) and Arceus (#493)? Find out in this installment!Read more →