Podcasts about Nuclear power

Jake Jurewicz is the Co-founder and CEO of Blue Energy, a nuclear power plant developer. Blue Energy starts with proven, light water reactors and builds everything around them — prefabricating standardized nuclear plants as massive modules in shipyards and fab yards, then barging them to site. It pairs that with a patented gas-to-nuclear approach that energizes the plant on gas turbines first and converts to nuclear later. The goal is to make nuclear cheap enough and fast enough to build that private lenders will finance it, rather than the taxpayers and ratepayers who've carried almost every plant built so far. The company recently announced a collaboration with GE Vernova on a 2.5-gigawatt gas-plus-nuclear project in Texas, built around GE Vernova Hitachi's BWRX-300 reactor, with backing from VXI Capital, At One Ventures, and Engine Ventures. The why now is straightforward: AI data centers are pulling on the grid harder than anything in a generation, firm clean power is scarce, and the cost and speed of building nuclear have been the thing holding it back. Jake's bet is that the fix lives in how you build and finance the plant, rather than in the reactor itself. Episode recorded on June 10, 2026 (Published July 21, 2026)  In this episode, we cover: (0:00) Overview of Blue Energy (2:20) Why construction, not reactor tech, is the focus (5:32) Two innovations: modular construction and gas-to-nuclear (6:56) Why proven light water reactors beat new designs (9:39) Building nuclear like LNG terminals (11:57) The history of shipyard-built nuclear power (14:17) Lessons from Venture Global's LNG buildout (16:44) Why megamodules cut construction costs (20:43) What Blue Energy builds versus buys (22:14) Why civil construction, not the reactor, drives cost (25:14) Navigating NRC approval for gas-to-nuclear (28:21) Why customers still want nuclear after gas (32:56) The first project: Victoria, Texas (36:00) Financial innovation to unlock private capital (39:19) Blue Energy's biggest execution risks (43:32) Where nuclear heads next (46:59) Commercial criticality beyond the chain reaction (48:20) Nuclear's role in energy security and geopolitics Enjoyed this episode? Please leave us a review! Share feedback or suggest future topics and guests at info@mcj.vc.Connect with MCJ:Cody Simms on LinkedInVisit mcj.vcSubscribe to the MCJ Newsletter*Editing and post-production work for this episode was provided by The Podcast Consultant

A race started by President Trump is leading to the rapid construction of new, experimental nuclear reactors. If they work, they could power data centers for artificial intelligence. But critics worry that the breakneck pace is compromising safety and public trust. NPR correspondent Geoff Brumfiel talks about the potential risks and benefits, and whether this may lead to a new nuclear age.Read more of Geoff's coverage of the U.S.'s new nuclear reactors here.If you like this episode, check out our episode about what happens inside a top-secret U.S. nuclear facility?Interested in more science and tech news? Email us your question at shortwave@npr.org.Support public media with NPR+ and enjoy perks for over 25 podcasts like this one. It includes perks like bonus episodes, early access, archive access, curated playlists and sponsor-free listening. Learn more at plus.npr.org. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for sponsorship and to manage your podcast sponsorship preferences.NPR Privacy Policy

Send us Fan MailMelissa is an activist and environmentalist who is a fierce environmental activist.  I had the pleasure of speaking with her here about data centers and nuclear power, etc.It was a pleasure and an honor to be in conversation with an intelligent, innovative, caring, and concerned human beingSong: FreestyleFood & Water WatchSupport the showInstagram

This week, we're sharing an interview with M.V. Ramana about Nuclear energy, it's proposal as a clean option for power generation to counter the fossil fuel industry-exacerbated climate crisis, it's ties to weapons development and other topics. Nuclear is Not the Solution: The Folly of Atomic Power in the Age of Climate Change from Verso, 2024 Faculty page with writings linked: https://sppga.ubc.ca/profile/m-v-ramana/ AI and the Techno-Fascist Nightmare panel hosted by Counterpunch and Haymarket Books featuring Ramana Next week, we'll be sharing a chat with two local activists affiliated with Appalachians Against Uranium and their research on weapons production expansion underway in eastern Tennessee. . … . .. Featured Track: TFSR by The Willows Whisper

It's Friday, July 17. Here are today's top stories around Central Indiana. Want to go deeper on the stories you hear on WFYI News Now? Visit wfyi.org and follow us on social media to get local news every day. WFYI News Now is hosted by Barb Anguiano and produced by Zach Bundy. Subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.

Tom Maher discusses how AI spending is creating opportunities beyond mega-cap tech, benefiting engineering, construction, data center, and power infrastructure companies. He also highlights Ralph Lauren (RL) and YETI Holdings (YETI) as attractive growth opportunities driven by strong brands and market positioning.======== Schwab Network ========Empowering every investor and trader, every market day. Subscribe to the Market Minute newsletter - https://schwabnetwork.com/subscribeDownload the iOS app - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/schwab-network/id1460719185Download the Amazon Fire Tv App - https://www.amazon.com/TD-Ameritrade-Network/dp/B07KRD76C7Watch on Sling - https://watch.sling.com/1/asset/191928615bd8d47686f94682aefaa007/watchWatch on Vizio - https://www.vizio.com/en/watchfreeplus-exploreWatch on DistroTV - https://www.distro.tv/live/schwab-network/Follow us on X – https://twitter.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/schwab-network/ About Schwab Network - https://schwabnetwork.com/about

Derek Matthews discusses the growing strain AI and advanced manufacturing place on the U.S. power grid and why new infrastructure is needed. He explains how self-sufficient innovation hubs can generate their own energy, support local communities, and help meet rising demand while advancing national security goals.======== Schwab Network ========Empowering every investor and trader, every market day.Subscribe to the Market Minute newsletter - https://schwabnetwork.com/subscribeDownload the iOS app - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/schwab-network/id1460719185Download the Amazon Fire Tv App - https://www.amazon.com/TD-Ameritrade-Network/dp/B07KRD76C7Watch on Sling - https://watch.sling.com/1/asset/191928615bd8d47686f94682aefaa007/watchWatch on Vizio - https://www.vizio.com/en/watchfreeplus-exploreWatch on DistroTV - https://www.distro.tv/live/schwab-network/Follow us on X – https://twitter.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/schwab-network/About Schwab Network - https://schwabnetwork.com/about

On Wednesday's Drivetime with DeRusha... 3pm Hour: Jason talks about new data from the State on the new Paid Family/Medical Leave program. Is it working? Do we need to adjust it? Then he's joined by Tracy Perlman to talk about 4th of July festivities including family mini-golf. Plus, what happens when an artist cancels a show at Grand Casino Arena? 4pm Hour: west metro drivers are readjusting to a major shift in the 394 construction - how's road construction impacting your life? Then he talks with Prof. James Coleman from the U of M about nuclear power getting reconsidered in Minnesota. 5pm Hour: Jason talks about the first Minnesotan to be considered for Sainthood by the Vatican - who should be a MN Saint? (wrong answers only, please!) Then it's time to vent your spleen on ENOUGH!!!

Astronomy Daily — S05E135 — Wednesday, July 8, 2026 1. World's First Commercial Nuclear-Powered Satellite Reaches Orbit SpaceX's Transporter-17 rideshare mission carried City Labs' BOHR CubeSat to orbit on July 7, the first commercially built satellite to fly a nuclear-powered payload — a tritium betavoltaic cell that generates electricity continuously, day or night, regardless of sunlight. Key points •      Launched July 7, 2026 at 3:12am EDT from Vandenberg Space Force Base aboard a Falcon 9, part of the 81-payload Transporter-17 rideshare mission. •      BOHR (Betavoltaic Orbital High-Reliability) CubeSat built by City Labs, a Miami/Florida-based company. •      Uses a 'NanoTritium' betavoltaic device — converts beta particles from the radioactive decay of tritium directly into electricity via a semiconductor. •      Power output is tiny (micro-to-milliwatt range) but continuous — unaffected by eclipse periods or solar panel orientation. •      Tritium's 12.3-year half-life means the power source stays effective for two decades before decaying to harmless helium-3. •      FAA authorised the launch after finding public radiation exposure would stay below one millirem under conservative assumptions. 2. New Zealand's Fuel-Free Thruster Passes First Orbital Test Auckland-based Zenno Astronautics has successfully tested its 'Supertorquer' — an attitude-control thruster that uses superconducting magnets to push against Earth's own magnetic field, generating thrust with no propellant at all. Key points •      Zenno Astronautics is a spin-off from the University of Auckland, New Zealand. •      The system, called 'Supertorquer', completed its first in-orbit test in early July 2026. •      Superconducting magnets, powered by solar panels, interact with Earth's magnetic field to generate torque and maintain a satellite's orientation — no propellant is consumed. •      Until recently this kind of superconducting hardware was too large and complex to fit aboard a small satellite; miniaturisation has now made it practical. •      Because it needs no fuel, the technology could in principle keep a satellite maneuvering indefinitely, as long as it has sunlight for power. •      Zenno co-founder/company messaging: 'We are essentially looking to remove all reliance on Earth's resources so that we can build a sustainable industry in space.' 3. Tianwen-2 Arrives at Quasi-Moon Kamo'oalewa — And Upends the 'Piece of the Moon' Theory China's Tianwen-2 sample-return spacecraft has arrived at near-Earth asteroid Kamo'oalewa after a 400-day, 1-billion-kilometre journey, beaming back the first close-up image — just as new JWST data throws serious doubt on the leading theory of where this strange little world came from. Key points •      Tianwen-2 launched May 29, 2025, and reached Kamo'oalewa on July 6, 2026, arriving at a station-keeping distance of about 20 km. •      China National Space Administration (CNSA) publicly announced the arrival July 6, releasing the first close-up image via Xinhua. •      Kamo'oalewa (asteroid 2016 HO3) is one of only seven known 'quasi-satellites' of Earth — it orbits the Sun but stays in a stable dance alongside our planet, and has done so for roughly 100 years, with about 300 more to go. •      The image reveals a small, asymmetrical rock roughly 20-30 metres across. •      Long-standing hypothesis (since 2021): Kamo'oalewa is a fragment blasted off the Moon's far side by the impact that created the Giordano Bruno crater, 1-10 million years ago — based on its reflectance spectrum resembling space-weathered lunar soil. •      New twist: a July 1 JWST preprint (Sharkey et al.) models Kamo'oalewa's albedo (reflectivity) at around 0.59 — far higher than the Moon's ~0.12 — which is incompatible with a lunar origin and points instead toward a rare E-type silicate asteroid. 4. Jeremy Hansen Steps Back From Active Astronaut Duty Jeremy Hansen, the Canadian Space Agency astronaut who became the first Canadian to fly around the Moon aboard Artemis II in April, announced July 6 that he's stepping back from full-time astronaut service this September. Key points •      Hansen flew as mission specialist on Artemis II in April 2026, alongside NASA astronauts Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, and Christina Koch — the first crewed lunar mission in over 50 years. •      He becomes the first Canadian to travel beyond low Earth orbit / around the Moon. •      Announced via social media and a Canadian Space Agency statement on July 6, 2026. •      Transition takes effect this September, after 32 years of military service and 17 years as a CSA astronaut. •      He will continue serving as a reservist with the Royal Canadian Air Force and says he remains committed to Canada's space program in a new capacity. •      Joined CSA in the 2009 astronaut recruitment campaign after a career as a Royal Canadian Air Force fighter pilot. 5. Aurora Alert: G1 Geomagnetic Storm Possible July 9 Space weather forecasters are watching a combination of a fast coronal mass ejection and an Earth-facing coronal hole that could combine to produce a minor (G1-class) geomagnetic storm on July 9 — with aurora potentially visible across the northern United States, Canada, and parts of northern Europe. Key points •      A fast CME launched from the Sun on July 5 has a modelled arrival time around 6 UTC on July 9. •      Separately, a coronal hole — a region of open magnetic field letting fast solar wind escape — is rotating into an Earth-facing position and its high-speed stream is expected to arrive around the same time. •      Combined, NOAA/space weather forecasters say these two effects could produce G1 (minor) geomagnetic storm conditions. •      Possible aurora visibility zones: Seattle, Edinburgh, and the northern tier of the United States and Canada. •      Context: last week's monster sunspot active regions have now rotated to the Sun's far side after putting on a dramatic show of flares and prominences as they departed. •      Solar activity has otherwise dropped to low levels — mostly common C-class flares — with active region AR4482 now the main feature on the Earth-facing side of the Sun. 6. Chinese Researchers Model the Best Way to 'Nuke' a Killer Asteroid A new peer-reviewed study models two different ways a nuclear device could be used to deflect a threatening asteroid — a straightforward surface impact detonation, or a 'pre-excavation' approach that digs a crater first before delivering a deeper, more effective blast — and finds the right choice depends heavily on how much warning time we have. Key points •      Published July 7, 2026 in the journal Space: Science & Technology. •      Compares two nuclear deflection modes: (1) 'impact detonation' — a simple, shallow-crater surface blast, and (2) 'pre-excavation detonation' — using a penetrator device to dig a deeper crater first, then detonating a warhead to achieve 'deep detonation' inside the asteroid. •      Researchers modelled launch vehicle energy, impactor spacecraft velocity, and the resulting change in the asteroid's velocity for both modes. •      Both modes were tested against a 'virtual threat asteroid database' assuming warning times ranging from one year to twenty years. •      Headline finding: given enough warning time, the deeper 'pre-excavation' detonation is markedly more efficient at deflecting an asteroid than a simple surface blast — but a straightforward impact detonation may still be the only option when warning time is short. •      Context: no known asteroid currently poses an imminent threat to Earth — Apophis, once considered a risk for its 2029 and 2068 close approaches, has been ruled out as a hazard for the foreseeable future.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/astronomy-daily-the-latest-space-news--5648921/support.Sponsor Details:Ensure your online privacy by using NordVPN. To get our special listener deal and save a lot of money, visit www.bitesz.com/nordvpn. You'll be glad you did!Become a supporter of Astronomy Daily by joining our Supporters Club. Commercial free episodes daily are only a click way... Click HereThis episode includes AI-generated content.

The Other Side of the Story with Tom Harris and Todd Royal – Change is in the wind, and nuclear power is coming roaring back, not just in the US but also in Canada and across much of the world. Tom interviews his co-host, energy policy expert Todd Royal, about the new nuclear renaissance that is unfolding. This episode delivers an uplifting message everyone needs to hear just in...

This week, our guest is Mike Law, former president and CEO of the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO). Mike now leads MGL Advisory Services Ltd. and advises several companies, including Energy Alberta, where he is head of power system integration. Energy Alberta is proposing a nuclear generating station in northern Alberta's Peace River region. The podcast touches on a long list of Canadian electricity policy initiatives, including the federal government's Nuclear Energy Strategy (June 22) and the Electricity Strategy (May 14). Other policies that are impacting investment and growth forecasts include the Alberta-Canada MOU, the Clean Electricity Regulations (CER), and – specific to Alberta – the new Data Centre Regulation and the Restructured Energy Market (REM). Topics covered include Canada's need for new electricity generation to meet growing demand, including from AI data centres; how the CER is creating uncertainty for investment in new natural gas generation; and how Alberta's REM adds another layer of uncertainty. The discussion also covers Canada's new nuclear strategy and the plan to build 10 new reactors, including how it compares with the U.S. push toward a similar target. Finally, Mike outlines Energy Alberta's large-scale Peace River nuclear project, including timelines, regulatory requirements, costs, and stakeholder engagement. Content referenced in this podcast:  Nuclear Energy Strategy for Canada (June 29, 2026) Powering Canada Strong: A National Strategy for an Electrified Canadian Economy (May 14, 2026) Energy Futures: BC Hydro Turns Back to Natural Gas to Help Fill Electricity Gap (June 1, 2026) Alberta Data Centre Regulation (June 9, 2026) CBC: Power plant proposed for area northeast of Edmonton inches closer to becoming reality (June 24, 2026) Please review our disclaimer at: https://www.arcenergyinstitute.com/disclaimer/Check us out on social media:X (Twitter): @arcenergyinstLinkedIn: @ARC Energy Research InstituteSubscribe to ARC Energy Ideas PodcastApple PodcastsAmazon MusicSpotify

Ever since the Homestead Act of 1862, the U.S. government has worked to help everyday Americans own a piece of their nation. One important innovation was the 30-year fixed rate mortgage, a uniquely American loan that helped supercharge homeownership in the U.S. after World War II. But not every effort by the government to increase homeownership has paid off. Now as younger homebuyers face an affordability crisis, can the U.S. government keep that American dream alive This episode is part of The Wall Street Journal's USA250: The Story of the World's Greatest Economy, a collection of articles, videos and podcasts aiming to offer a deeper understanding of how America has evolved. Listen to previous installments of our USA250 podcast: Nuclear Power's Reboot The Struggle To Keep America's Workers SafeAn Economy Built on Speculation America's Road to a DIY Retirement And check out our special series: Can Anything Kick-Start the U.S. Housing Market? With Homeownership Out of Reach, Some Are Choosing to Rent Forever What's in the New Bipartisan Housing Bill That Congress Just Passed The Housing Market Slumped This Spring. Where Does It Go From Here? The Fight for Affordable Housing Mamdani Won on Housing. Will Democrats Follow His Lead? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, the show is joined by Chris Wright, the Secretary of Energy, who shares his unique perspective on the challenges and opportunities in the energy sector. As the world grapples with the complexities of energy production and consumption, Chris Wright's insights offer a fascinating glimpse into the inner workings of the US energy policy. The conversation delves into the recent conflict with Iran and the impact on global energy markets. Chris Wright explains how the US administration took proactive steps to mitigate the effects of the conflict, including releasing oil from strategic reserves and coordinating with international partners. He also discusses the importance of nuclear energy and the administration's efforts to revive the nuclear industry, with a goal of having three next-generation small modular reactors critical by July 4th. Chris Wright's passion for nuclear energy is evident, and he highlights its potential to provide a constant and reliable source of energy. He also addresses criticisms of nuclear power, pointing out that it can deliver high process heat, which is essential for manufacturing, the largest user of energy worldwide. The conversation also touches on the limitations of renewable energy sources like wind and solar, which require significant land, materials, and subsidies to produce a modest amount of energy. The conversation also touches on the importance of nuclear energy in the energy mix, with Chris Wright emphasizing that the US needs a growing, low-cost, secure, reliable, and affordable energy system to drive economic growth and improve people's lives. If you're interested in learning more about the complexities of energy policy and the future of nuclear energy, tune in to this episode to hear Chris Wright's insightful perspective.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This week's episode is a real doozy, folks. We're talking about the Colorado governor's decision to keep a coal plant open, and the ensuing battle between the federal government, the state, and the utilities. But it's not just about the coal plant - it's about the structure of the Republican Central Committee, the Department of Energy's loan to Westinghouse, and the Supreme Court's decision on gun rights. It's a wild ride, and we're just getting started.The speaker dives into the details of the Colorado coal plant, explaining how the governor's decision is not just about politics, but about the facts on the ground. We're talking about a plant that was scheduled to close years ago, but was kept open by the Trump administration. The speaker also touches on the Department of Energy's loan to Westinghouse, and how it's a game-changer in the nuclear energy industry. But what's really interesting is the speaker's take on the loan - is it corporate welfare, or is it a smart move to take on China?The episode also covers the Supreme Court's decision on gun rights, and how it affects the Second Amendment. The speaker breaks down the decision, explaining how it's a major victory for gun owners, and how it sets a precedent for future cases. But what's really striking is the speaker's commentary on the decision - it's not just about guns, it's about the power of the people, and the importance of individual rights.If you're interested in learning more about these topics, and hearing the speaker's unique perspective, be sure to listen to the full episode. With expert analysis and insightful commentary, this episode is a must-listen for anyone looking to stay informed on the latest news and trends.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Rod and Greg Show Daily Rundown - Wednesday, June 24, 20264:20pm: Thomas Catenacci of the Washington Free Beacon joins Rod and Greg to discuss his piece on the Trump Administration's $17.5 billion investment to fund 10 new nuclear power reactors across the United States.4:38 pm: Jay Rogers, Founder and President of Alpha Strategies and a contributor to The Hill, joins the show for a conversation about his recent piece on why America deserves answers about the actions of Dr. Anthony Fauci.5:05 pm: M.D. Kittle, Senior Elections Correspondent for The Federalist, joins Rod and Greg for a conversation about his piece on how RINO's in the U.S. Senate are too busy scolding Trump about Iran to pass the SAVE Act, and we'll get his thoughts on Trump's meeting with Senate Republicans today.6:05 pm: Jason Isaac, CEO of the American Energy Institute, joins the show for a conversation about President Trump's call for the Department of Justice to investigate the possibility of gas price gouging.6:38 pm: Antonio Graceffo, Economist and National Security Analyst, joins the program to discuss his piece for the Gateway Pundit about the Liberal corruption inside the USAID program and how American taxpayer dollars were used against our own interests.

The federal government wants Canada to get back into nuclear energy, pushing to increase nuclear power use and to build and export more Canadian-made nuclear reactors. For the first time in over three decades, a large nuclear reactor is being built in Canada. But The Globe's investigative reporter and data journalist Matt McClearn says there's a reason these projects fell out of favour. There are famous, very deadly examples of nuclear accidents like Chernobyl and Fukushima, and these projects can be incredibly costly and time-consuming to construct. Questions? Comments? Ideas? Email us at thedecibel@globeandmail.com Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

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.

The summer heat is here and so is a heavier load on our country's electrical grid. The U.S. Northeast, Northwest, and areas of Texas and California face an elevated risk of blackouts from extreme weather and overextended power grids. Combine the normal load increase with a sharp rise in expansion of AI data centers, digital infrastructure, and industrial electrification. Proponents of nuclear power say it supplies cleaner and more reliable energy than other sources, especially during extreme weather events. FOX's Tonya J. Powers speaks with John Kotek, Senior Vice President, Policy and Public Affairs, from the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), who says during extreme weather events nuclear can provide clean, reliable power, and explains how 'microreactors' are an important element of a nuclear future. Click Here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ To Follow 'The FOX News Rundown: Evening Edition' Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The summer heat is here and so is a heavier load on our country's electrical grid. The U.S. Northeast, Northwest, and areas of Texas and California face an elevated risk of blackouts from extreme weather and overextended power grids. Combine the normal load increase with a sharp rise in expansion of AI data centers, digital infrastructure, and industrial electrification. Proponents of nuclear power say it supplies cleaner and more reliable energy than other sources, especially during extreme weather events. FOX's Tonya J. Powers speaks with John Kotek, Senior Vice President, Policy and Public Affairs, from the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), who says during extreme weather events nuclear can provide clean, reliable power, and explains how 'microreactors' are an important element of a nuclear future. Click Here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ To Follow 'The FOX News Rundown: Evening Edition' Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Fabian Alefeld interviews Omar Mireles, Director of Manufacture and Materials at Space Nuclear Power Corporation (Space Nukes), about his career spanning NASA, Oak Ridge, and Los Alamos and how additive manufacturing (AM) reshaped space hardware development. Omar describes early exposure to SLS prototyping, graduate work in nuclear materials and propulsion, building nuclear materials labs at NASA Marshall, and later leading AM efforts for liquid rocket engines and refractory metals.  He explains how AM accelerates iteration, enables complex geometries, part consolidation, and weight reduction, and where traditional methods still dominate depending on production rate. The conversation covers refractory metal challenges (supply chain, oxygen sensitivity, post-processing, inspection) and nuclear reactor basics, generations, and regulatory barriers to AM adoption. Omar outlines Space Nukes' goal of delivering safe, affordable, reliable power anywhere in the solar system, noting heat rejection as a key space constraint, Krusty's 2018 test heritage, potential AM roles in heat exchangers, and an aggressive ~2-year flight timeline depending on regulation and mission. 02:26 Omar Early Motivation 03:08 NASA Co-ops and First AM 07:59 Stirling Radiation Research 20:07 Refractory Metals AM Lab 21:31 Los Alamos to Space Nukes 25:14 Did AM Change Space Race 31:46 Where AM Flies Today 37:41 Rocket Engines Print vs Traditional 41:15 Refractory Alloys Challenges 46:39 Where Refractories Make Sense 47:05 Will Refractory AM Grow 49:39 NASA Metal AM Handbook Origins 56:37 How Nuclear Reactors Work 01:13:02 Additive Manufacturing in Nuclear 01:18:31 What Space Nukes Builds 01:19:36 Why Space Nuclear Power Matters 01:25:20 Why Space Needs Nukes 01:37:47 Krusty Test Proof 01:41:18 Heat Rejection Challenge 01:49:25 Timeline and First Missions 

The summer heat is here and so is a heavier load on our country's electrical grid. The U.S. Northeast, Northwest, and areas of Texas and California face an elevated risk of blackouts from extreme weather and overextended power grids. Combine the normal load increase with a sharp rise in expansion of AI data centers, digital infrastructure, and industrial electrification. Proponents of nuclear power say it supplies cleaner and more reliable energy than other sources, especially during extreme weather events. FOX's Tonya J. Powers speaks with John Kotek, Senior Vice President, Policy and Public Affairs, from the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), who says during extreme weather events nuclear can provide clean, reliable power, and explains how 'microreactors' are an important element of a nuclear future. Click Here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ To Follow 'The FOX News Rundown: Evening Edition' Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

For the latest and most important news of the day | https://www.thecanadianpressnews.ca To watch daily news videos, follow us on YouTube | https://www.youtube.com/@CdnPress The Canadian Press on X (formerly Twitter) | https://twitter.com/CdnPressNews The Canadian Press on LinkedIn | https://linkedin.com/showcase/98791543

The U.S. military has a strong and growing interest in using small and micro nuclear reactors as a means of reducing logistics challenges and improving operational resilience. They like nuclear reactors for their ability to operate independently of the grid for years without needing any new fuel. Almost as important is their ability to be designed to retain byproducts and reduce heat signatures for improved stealth. Dr. Jeff Waksman Is the U.S. Army’s go-to guy for pioneering nuclear energy projects. Though no military-related project can be completed by a single person, program success often rests on the effective leadership provided by a singularly skilled leader who combines organization, inspiration and deep knowledge of how to get things done in a purposely hierarchical system. Before his current role for the Army, Waksman led Project Pele – the military’s first micro-reactor project in 50+ years – for the Department of Defense’s Strategic Capabilities Office. He did well enough at that assignment to have been selected to lead a more expansive program to finally deliver nuclear fission capabilities to bases and units that need clean, reliable power that comes with a low logistics burden. Fission’s characteristics are nothing new and the military’s interest dates to the earliest days of nuclear energy. The political, environmental and strategic situation has changed enough in the 50 years since the Army’s Nuclear Power development program was effectively cancelled to stimulate new efforts to address the economic and technical challenges that were never solved during the 1960s and 70s. Waksman’s current role has the mouthful title of Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (PDASA) for Installations, Energy and Environment (IE&E). Though only one of his responsibilities, he is the Army’s point person for a subsequent reactor development program called Project Janus. Dr. Waksman joined me on Atomic Show #347 to discuss the lessons taught by Project Pele and to provide insights on how those lessons are being incorporated into subsequent programs, both civilian and military. We covered a variety of topics, including: Reasons why he was picked to lead Project Pele Direction provided to the Department of Defense’s Strategic Capabilities Office regarding program outcomes Focus on building systems that work in the real world instead of just more models Challenges of fitting inside tightly constrained boundaries (C-17 transport plane) Limiting components – not surprisingly, it was the heat exchanger that transferred reactor heat from the coolant gas to the power conversion system Importance of balance of plant compared to reactor Streamlining Department of Energy approval process Economic value of competition Economic trade-offs with the potential to make TRISO a more economic fuel than other options Project Pele’s influence on Reactor Pilot Program Project Janus goals and status Stretch goal timeline that includes the first operating reactor supplying a military base by the end of 2028 Expansion of the project beyond the Army to the Air Force and possibly the Navy Unquantified description of the possible magnitude of military reactor program Desire for military reactor program to stimulate a larger commercial reactor market I learned a lot from the show. Dr. Waksman shares valuable experience, including ways to avoid some of the bruises that came with leading the first-of-a-kind project for a modern transportable nuclear reactor and the U.S.’s first nuclear project development project in decades. I hope this show will influence those who follow so that they can make their own mistakes instead of repeating those that have already been made and documented.

US envoys in Switzerland for Iran talks as the Lebanon ceasefire faces another test; farmers groups on alert amid concerns of the impact of H5 bird flu on local species; and in football, the Netherlands beat Sweden to top Group F in the World Cup.

Japan's Future in Energy and Artificial Intelligence. Guest: Lance Gatling. Japan is working toward a goal of 40–50% renewable energy and 20% nuclear power by the mid-2030s. Lance Gatling notes that Japan remains a critical link in the semiconductor chain essential for the global AI boom. While circumspect about AI's authority, Japanese companies dominate the hardware manufacturing processes necessary for semiconductor production. 141920

Erik Deatherage speaks with Listening to America host Clay Jenkinson about the opening of the Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library, Roosevelt's legacy, and the challenges of interpreting American history in a changing cultural and political landscape.

James Krellenstein returns to take apart one of the most persistent myths in energy discourse: the idea that there was a golden age when nuclear power was cheaper than coal. The plants people point to, Oyster Creek, Dresden, Point Beach, Quad Cities, were cheap to the utilities that bought them, but they were not cheap to build. General Electric and Westinghouse sold them as fixed-price turnkey projects at a deliberate loss, eating roughly 1 billion in 1960s dollars, more than 10 billion adjusted for inflation, across about a dozen plants. This loss leader strategy paid off. Between 1962 and 1976 the US nuclear fleet doubled its capacity roughly every 2 years, a stretch of sustained growth that rivals anything in American industrial history and still constitutes the largest nuclear fleet on earth in 2026.The conversation traces how turnkey era prices distorted every nuclear cost comparison that followed, why the utilities themselves pushed to abandon turnkey contracts, and how regulatory change, slowing load growth, and across-the-board cost inflation turned the boom into a wave of cancellations. Krellenstein closes on the fundamental question for the present moment: if we want to set off another ordering cycle, someone has to absorb first-of-a-kind risk with a balance sheet large enough to guarantee a firm fixed price, and it is not obvious who that is. Back then GE and Westinghouse could swallow the losses because they were two of the largest industrial conglomerates on earth and commercial reactors were a single-digit percentage of their business. No comparable actor today has shown any willingness to take that risk on, which explains both how the world's largest nuclear fleet got built and why nobody has been willing to repeat the trick since.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

Make Australia monocultural, axe SBS, paywall the ABC, dump Snowy Hydro 2.0 and introduce nuclear power - Pauline Hanson’s first address to the National Press Club was certainly eventful. Read more: ‘Don’t come near me’: Pauline Hanson clashes with journalist over daughter’s employment Commentary by Geoff Chambers: How ‘Svengali’ James Ashby unleashed Trump-style machine to fuel One Nation’s surge Linfox succession battle escalates as son Peter Fox ousted from top role History as Messi bags first World Cup hat-trickSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Nuclear energy can lower one cost that has seen rapid inflation in recent years: electricity bills. But nuclear power plants aren't cheap to build. In one state, legislators wade into a debate over whether taxpayers or utility companies should shoulder the burden. Also in this episode: Kevin Warsh faces war-driven inflation ahead of his first FOMC meeting as Fed chair, MAHA movement drives up cotton demand, and advertisers leverage the World Cup to reach Latino consumers.Every story has an economic angle. Want some in your inbox? Subscribe to our daily or weekly newsletter.Marketplace is more than a radio show. Check out our original reporting and financial literacy content at marketplace.org — and consider making an investment in our future.

Nuclear energy can lower one cost that has seen rapid inflation in recent years: electricity bills. But nuclear power plants aren't cheap to build. In one state, legislators wade into a debate over whether taxpayers or utility companies should shoulder the burden. Also in this episode: Kevin Warsh faces war-driven inflation ahead of his first FOMC meeting as Fed chair, MAHA movement drives up cotton demand, and advertisers leverage the World Cup to reach Latino consumers.Every story has an economic angle. Want some in your inbox? Subscribe to our daily or weekly newsletter.Marketplace is more than a radio show. Check out our original reporting and financial literacy content at marketplace.org — and consider making an investment in our future.

A breakthrough has been reached in ending the war between the United States and Iran. According to the U.S., Iran and Pakistan, there is a ceasefire agreement. Donald Trump says the U.S. naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz is ending, while Pakistan's Prime Minister says fighting will end on all fronts. Crucially, nothing has been signed yet. We have the latest details.Also: The streets of Aughagower, Ireland were decked out in maple leafs and Canadian flags today. Prime Minister Mark Carney made a personal pitstop during his official tour of the country - returning to the town his ancestors once called home. And: The Ontario government says demand for electricity will increase by as much as 75 per cent over the next 25 years. To meet that demand, there's a plan to build the world's largest nuclear power plant in Port Hope. But that plan is angering some in the town, which has a troubled history with nuclear energy. Plus: UFC matches on the White House Lawn, CUSMA negotiations, and more.

We're going to start today's show talking about our nuclear policy. That's because at a forum in Singapore Defense Minister Chris Penk said it could be "helpful" to have a conversation about Nuclear Free New Zealand. He made the comments in reference to Australia's agreement to acquire three nuclear powered Virginia Class submarines from the United States. Speaking on Morning Report today Prime Minister Christopher Luxon comprehensively ruled out any such conversation. Labour leader Chris Hipkins also dismissed the idea. But is it actually a conversation we should be having? Liam Hehir thinks so. The lawyer and former active National Party member joins Jesse to discuss.

Labour is labelling the Government's overhaul of council voting rights a distraction. A Bill amendment will strip voting rights from unelected members —including iwi and youth representatives— on council committees. It comes after the Far North District Council moved to expand its Māori liaison committee. Labour's Ginny Andersen told Heather du Plessis-Allan the issue is not a priority for New Zealanders. She says people are far more worried about paying their bills and being able to cope everyday. National's Mark Mitchell disagrees, saying that stance shows how out of touch Labour really is. He told du Plessis-Allan that most Kiwis are pretty proud of our democracy, and he doesn't think they want unelected people going onto committees and making decisions. Mitchell says it's always prudent to have unelected people with special skillsets and backgrounds advising, but not voting, and he thinks most Kiwis would agree. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of the Crazy Wisdom Podcast, host Stewart Alsop sits down with returning guest Ekue Kpodar for their third conversation together, covering a wide range of topics at the intersection of technology, geopolitics, and the evolving information age. They dig into Ekue's unconventional setup of running local AI models across roughly 15 computers, the growing case for open source models over closed ones from companies like OpenAI and Anthropic, and how Chinese open source models may be positioned to outcompete Western alternatives on a global scale. The conversation also touches on vibe coding and the democratization of software development, the strategic use of small models for IoT and enterprise applications, the role of Israel and China as dominant players in the information age, and how smaller nations and even individuals may wield outsized power as AI continues to collapse the cost of knowledge work. You can find Ekue Kpodar on X @ekpodar and LinkedIn.Timestamps00:00 Stewart welcomes Ekue for their third episode, diving into vibe coding and AI-driven development changes.05:00 Ekue explains using Claude on Chrome to auto-reply on Skool, burning tokens through screenshots, and Playwright as a more efficient alternative.10:00 Stewart describes his Claude-dependent planning and coding agent system breaking after a model update, prompting him to build his own chatbot.15:00 Small models discussed as critical for IoT, defense, and privacy-focused enterprises building internal APIs instead of routing traffic to OpenAI.20:00 Open source versus closed source debated, with Chinese models gaining global traction while US foundational labs remain expensive and restrictive.25:00 SaaS apocalypse explored as AI commoditizes knowledge work, with Linux and Terraform cited as proof open source still generates wealth.30:00 OpenAI's sci-fi terminator fears explained as the reason they stayed closed source, ultimately handing China a strategic open source advantage.35:00 China's economic dumping strategy applied to AI, potentially displacing US model dominance globally the same way manufacturing was disrupted.40:00 Israel's signals intelligence dominance discussed alongside asymmetric warfare, drones defeating tanks, and information control replacing military muscle.45:00 Global information age rankings debated, Israel leading, US and China tied, France and Poland emerging as sovereign tech players.50:00 Qatar, NVIDIA, and Iran cited as proof that rare resources and technology matter more than population size in the 21st century power landscape.Key Insights1. Running local AI models on a network of affordable computers can be more cost-effective than relying entirely on third-party APIs. By using compressed or smaller open source models locally, developers can handle repetitive or lower-stakes tasks without burning through expensive tokens from providers like Anthropic or OpenAI.2. Small AI models are becoming increasingly important for IoT, defense applications, and companies that do not want to send sensitive data to external providers. Organizations can download open source models, run them on internal servers, and build proprietary APIs around them, creating something like an intranet of specialized small models.3. The value created by AI tools is being redistributed away from traditional SaaS companies toward foundational model providers and individual builders. People are canceling subscriptions to software they once paid hundreds per month for, because AI now allows a single person to build comparable tools themselves.4. Open source technology does not eliminate the ability to profit. Linux and Terraform are both open source yet made their creators wealthy. People will still pay for installation, setup, troubleshooting, and customization even when the underlying software is free.5. China is applying its longstanding manufacturing dumping strategy to artificial intelligence by releasing cheap open source models globally, which threatens to erode US dominance in AI the same way Chinese manufacturing undercut other countries for decades.6. In the information age, the size of a country or institution matters far less than its access to rare resources or advanced technology. Qatar, Israel, and NVIDIA each demonstrate that small populations or headcounts can wield enormous global negotiating power through concentrated technological or resource advantages.7. Asymmetric warfare is redefining military power, with inexpensive drones defeating tanks that cost millions to build. This shifts the advantage toward nations that excel at signals intelligence and information management rather than those with the largest conventional military forces.

Todd Royal, Author, BP Capital Advisors, stops by the Energy News Beat PodcastTodd Royal is an author, a true Nuclear expert, and a great friend of the Energy News Beat Podcast. I had an absolute blast visiting with Todd, and we covered a lot of great topics. Being in the rapital raising business for nuclear is an outstanding part of our Energy Dominance requirements. We need modular nuclear, mines, and critical minerals.Todd is an outstanding energy resource and industry leader. I recommend connecting with him https://www.linkedin.com/in/172466/1. Nuclear Power as the Solution to Energy DemandThe hosts emphasize nuclear energy as the most viable solution to meet growing electricity demands, particularly for AI data centers. They highlight nuclear's exceptional capacity factor (95%+), reliability, and ability to run continuously—far superior to renewables. The discussion includes the reopening of Three Mile Island and the potential to restart 20 of the 94 U.S. reactors.2. AI Data Centers and Power RequirementsA significant focus on the massive electricity demands of AI data centers and the challenges they create. The conversation explores the tension between needing this infrastructure and concerns about farmland usage, grid strain, and rising electricity costs. They discuss potential solutions like revenue-sharing models similar to oil royalties.3. Climate Policy and “Climate Orthodoxy”The speakers critique what they call “climate orthodoxy”—the ideological push for renewables and net-zero policies that they argue have harmed economies. They discuss how Democratic-led states have higher electricity costs (38% higher) and how climate policies have destroyed economies in Europe, California, and other regions.4. Renewables vs. Nuclear EconomicsA detailed comparison of levelized costs of electricity (LCOE) and total cost of electricity, arguing that renewables require expensive backup systems and storage. They propose that $10 trillion spent on wind and solar could have built 2,000 nuclear reactors instead, providing clean, reliable baseload power.5. Energy Security and GeopoliticsDiscussion of global energy security, including LNG exports, the Strait of Hormuz, and Europe's energy crisis. They argue that energy dominance and security should start at home through reliable domestic power generation.6. Regulatory and Political BarriersThe hosts contend that the real obstacles to nuclear expansion aren't technical or financial, but political—including the NRC's historical anti-nuclear stance, environmental regulations, and permitting delays that make projects expensive and slow.7. Climate Science SkepticismThey challenge mainstream climate narratives, citing scientists like Roger Pielke Jr. and Judith Curry, and reference the UN's recent acknowledgment that climate change may not be as catastrophic as previously claimed. They discuss data manipulation allegations and the RCP 8.5 climate model controversy.8. Economic Impact of Energy PolicyThe conversation ties energy costs to broader economic issues like inflation, housing shortages, and manufacturing costs. They argue that cheap, abundant nuclear power could reduce inflation and boost economic growth.9. Data Center Backlash and OppositionDiscussion of organized opposition to data centers funded by billionaires and NGOs, which has halted $152 billion in economic activity. They explore the need for better communication and compromise between tech companies and local communities.10. Policy SolutionsRecommendations include passing the SAVE Act, implementing revenue-sharing agreements for data centers, building power plants dedicated to data centers, and reforming carbon markets and subsidies.The podcast presents a pro-nuclear, skeptical-of-renewables perspective on energy policy and its economic implications.Thank you, Todd, for your great industry leadership.We have some great interviews lined up next week.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/

As America's energy infrastructure undergoes a massive evolution, one critical trade is quietly keeping it all efficient: mechanical insulation. On today's episode of the America's Work Force Union Podcast, host Ed "Flash" Ferenc welcomes back Pete Ielmini, Executive Director of the Mechanical Insulators Labor Management Cooperative Trust (LMCT), for his monthly update. Pete reveals the latest behind-the-scenes push on Capitol Hill and details why the future of American energy security relies on skilled union labor. Key Topics Covered in This Episode: Bipartisan Momentum on Capitol Hill: An inside look at Senate Bill 4312 (S.4312), the Federal Mechanical Insulation Act of 2026. Sponsored by Senators Catherine Cortez Masto and Steve Daines, this bill aims to mandate insulation upgrades across 350,000 federal buildings to save taxpayer dollars. The Power of Thermal Imaging: How the LMCT is utilizing live thermal camera demonstrations at trade shows to make energy waste instantly visible to architects, engineers, and facility managers. The Data Center Cooling Demand: Why modern data centers—which require constant cooling between 55 to 60 degrees—are creating a massive pipeline of work for mechanical insulators. The Nuclear Energy Revival: Pete makes a direct case for nuclear power as the cleanest, most efficient solution to America's energy deficit, highlighting Microsoft's reactivation of Three Mile Island and the rise of small modular reactors. Learn More: To find out more about the legislation and the economic impact of mechanical insulation, visit mechanicalinsulatorslmct.com.

Today we talk with Dr. Brian Moench, president of Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment about data centers, air pollution, nuclear power, Great Salt Lake, and more.

Lorenzo Fiori discusses Italy's renewed interest in nuclear power and electric vehicle production in Naples. He also recommends the Molise region for its unique food and red Biferno wine. (6/16)1903 LA

Stay informed on current events, visit www.NaturalNews.com  - Strait of Hormuz Closure and Escalation (0:11) - Impact on Global Supply Chains (1:35) - Motor Oil Shortage and Market Reactions (4:03) - Polyethylene Shortage and Broader Supply Chain Issues (7:09) - Rising Prices and Economic Impact (9:42) - EV Sales and Market Shifts (11:47) - Preparedness and Self-Reliance Strategies (14:42) - Technological Advancements and Future Prospects (27:58) - Globalist Agenda and AI Concerns (39:11) - Economic and Environmental Implications (1:12:44) - Globalist Agenda and AI Power (1:12:58) - China's Energy Strategy and Globalist Manipulation (1:14:38) - Nuclear Power and Orbital Data Centers (1:16:01) - Free Energy Technologies and Government Suppression (1:17:39) - AI and Human Control (1:19:27) - Plasma Intelligence and UFO Disclosure (1:33:38) - Government Plans and Plasma Beings (1:43:23) - Spiritual Traditions and Plasma Fields (1:43:38) - Plasma Beings and Human Evolution (1:48:51) - Future of Human Civilization (1:49:35) Watch more independent videos at http://www.brighteon.com/channel/hrreport  ▶️ Support our mission by shopping at the Health Ranger Store - https://www.healthrangerstore.com ▶️ Check out exclusive deals and special offers at https://rangerdeals.com ▶️ Sign up for our newsletter to stay informed: https://www.naturalnews.com/Readerregistration.html Watch more exclusive videos here:

Blockades, 11-month deployments, the Vietnam War, shipbuilding plans, and some love for our friends from The Philippines…a full plate for a Midrats Free for All.SummaryThis episode covers the recent return of the USS Gerald Ford after a 326-day deployment, the significance of naval operations, shipbuilding plans, and geopolitical considerations in the Indo-Pacific region. The hosts analyze naval readiness, technological advancements, and strategic challenges facing the US Navy.Show LinksFORD Carrier Strike Group receives Presidential Unit Citation.USS Mahan (DDG-72) returns from deploymentUSS Midway (CV-41) off Vietnam 1973Easter Offensive of 1972Hong Kong's Mary SooExecutive Orders:141921426514269Latest Shipbuilding PlanDecades-long requirement for a nuclear powered escortMobilize: How to Reboot the American Industrial Base and Stop World War III,by Shyam Sankar and Madeline HartEpisode 393: Building the right carrier; heavy, medium, or light with Tal ManvelBalikatan 2026China, the unwanted guestChapters00:00: Introduction and Overview of the USS Gerald Ford's Deployment10:01: Lessons Learned from the USS Gerald Ford's Deployment14:24: Historical Context of Carrier Deployments22:29: Life on Deployment: Experiences and Morale30:27: Current Naval Operations and Future Considerations33:02: The Ongoing Naval Operations in the Persian Gulf38:55: Challenges in Aircraft Carrier Deployment44:47: The Future of Shipbuilding and Naval Assets50:54: The Role of Nuclear Power in Modern Naval Warfare56:52: International Naval Cooperation and Exercises

In the final installment of this three-part conversation, Adam Schwarze lays out his policy vision with the same directness he brought to the battlefield. From making nuclear energy his Senate legacy to dismantling deficit spending and bureaucratic rot, Adam doesn't speak in talking points — he speaks from experience. The conversation also gets into opposition research, the corruption baked into federal elections, the U.S.-Israel relationship, term limits, and why the VA system may need a complete rethink. Raw, informed, and unfiltered. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

U.S. allies like Saudi Arabia pursue nuclear power, raising proliferation concerns. Peter Huessy argues that Chinastrategically facilitates proliferation to create global instability while draining American military resources and testing international diplomatic authority. (4/16)1930

The U.S. pioneered early nuclear technologies—not only for war, but also for peacetime, in the form of abundant nuclear energy. After a surge in new reactor construction, the 1979 partial meltdown at Three Mile Island precipitated the end of nuclear energy's expansion in America. But recent calls for reliable, clean energy to fuel AI data centers have shifted attitudes and increased investment and innovation in the industry. Will the AI race be enough to reboot nuclear energy in the U.S.? This episode is part of The Wall Street Journal's USA250: The Story of the World's Greatest Economy, a collection of articles, videos and podcasts aiming to offer a deeper understanding of how America has evolved. Listen to previous installments of our USA250 podcast: The Struggle To Keep America's Workers Safe An Economy Built on Speculation America's Road to a DIY Retirement Further Reading: Why Fusion Is Considered Energy's Elusive Holy Grail America's First Commercial Nuclear-Power Projects in a Decade Just Broke Ground ‘Three New York Cities' Worth of Power: AI Is Stressing the Grid Inside the Audacious Plan to Reopen Three Mile Island's Nuclear Plant Five Things to Know About AI's Thirst for Energy ‘It's Time for Nuclear' to Meet Growing U.S. Power Needs, Trump Declares Nuclear Power Is Making a Comeback Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Nuclear energy was a taboo for decades, but it's coming back, it'll power AI data centers for Google and Microsoft. What does new nuclear technology look like, and why do the nuclear optimists believe this new tech is superior? Meltdowns, reactors that can fit in your backyard, and one podcaster's heroic attempt to describe nuclear fission. Rachel Slaybaugh Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow (check out her book Atomic Dreams) Adam Stein Search Engine's episodes on data centers: Colossus 1 & Colossus 2 Support the show! To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

8/16: Scott Harold discusses Japan's $10 billion lending initiative to counter Chinese influence in Asia. He also explores Japan's efforts to diversify energy sources, including nuclear power and importing American LNG.1654

May 5, 2026; 6pm; Donald Trump is struggling to contain the fallout from the war he started in Iran, with reports undercutting his claims about Iran's nuclear timeline. MS NOW's Ari Melber reports and is joined by Mike Barnicle, Molly Jong-Fast, Andrew Weissmann and Fab Five Freddy. To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Sponsor Link:To check out our special NordVPN deal with big savings and 4 extra months free, visit nordvpn.com/spacenutsNuclear Space Policies, SETI from the Moon, and the Hubble Tension In this riveting episode of Space Nuts, hosts Andrew Dunkley and Professor Fred Watson delve into a range of fascinating topics that are shaping the future of space exploration. From the Pentagon's new nuclear energy policy for space missions to the exciting potential of searching for extraterrestrial intelligence from the far side of the Moon, this episode is packed with insights that will leave you pondering the cosmos.Episode Highlights:- Nuclear Energy in Space: Andrew and Fred Watson discuss the recent directive from the Pentagon to NASA for the development of nuclear power stations in space, exploring the implications for lunar and orbital power supply systems. They examine the benefits and challenges of using nuclear energy in space, addressing public concerns and the potential for collaboration among government agencies.- SETI from the Far Side of the Moon: The hosts explore the advantages of conducting the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) from the Moon's far side, where Earthly radio noise is absent. They discuss the capabilities of China's Chang'e 4 mission and its low-frequency radio spectrometer, which is attempting to detect technosignatures that could indicate the presence of alien life.- The Hubble Tension Debate: Andrew and Fred Watson unpack the ongoing debate surrounding the Hubble constant, highlighting the discrepancies between measurements obtained through different methods. They discuss new research that aims to refine our understanding of the universe's expansion rate and its implications for our grasp of dark matter and dark energy.For more Space Nuts, including our continuously updating newsfeed and to listen to all our episodes, visit our website. Follow us on social media at SpaceNutsPod on Facebook, Instagram, and more. We love engaging with our community, so be sure to drop us a message or comment on your favourite platform.If you'd like to help support Space Nuts and join our growing family of insiders for commercial-free episodes and more, visit spacenutspodcast.com/about.Stay curious, keep looking up, and join us next time for more stellar insights and cosmic wonders. Until then, clear skies and happy stargazing.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/space-nuts-astronomy-insights-cosmic-discoveries--2631155/support.

There's been renewed interest in nuclear power in recent years, thanks in part to demand from tech companies in search of reliable energy to power their AI data centers. The startup Kairos Power has jumped on this opportunity. Its nuclear reactors are cooled by molten salt. They also use golf-ball sized nuclear fuel, instead of uranium rods cooled by water used by traditional reactors. Mike Laufer, co-founder and CEO of Kairos, says their reactors a bit like an upside down gumball machine.The company just started construction on its first power plant, located in eastern Tennessee, called Hermes 2. It will supply energy to the utility in the area, the Tennessee Valley Authority, and specifically to Google to power its data centers. Marketplace's Stephanie Hughes spoke with Laufer to learn more.

There's been renewed interest in nuclear power in recent years, thanks in part to demand from tech companies in search of reliable energy to power their AI data centers. The startup Kairos Power has jumped on this opportunity. Its nuclear reactors are cooled by molten salt. They also use golf-ball sized nuclear fuel, instead of uranium rods cooled by water used by traditional reactors. Mike Laufer, co-founder and CEO of Kairos, says their reactors a bit like an upside down gumball machine.The company just started construction on its first power plant, located in eastern Tennessee, called Hermes 2. It will supply energy to the utility in the area, the Tennessee Valley Authority, and specifically to Google to power its data centers. Marketplace's Stephanie Hughes spoke with Laufer to learn more.