Podcasts about vogtle

The nuclear renaissance of the 2000s turned out to be something of a mirage. Buoyed by rising fossil gas prices, growing climate awareness, and steady load growth, nuclear seemed poised for a breakout moment. But that momentum stalled. Electricity demand flatlined. The fracking boom sent gas prices plummeting. And Fukushima rattled public confidence in nuclear power. Ultimately, only two new reactors, Vogtle units 3 and 4 in Georgia, reached completion over a decade later. So is this latest wave of nuclear hype any different? In this episode, Shayle talks to Chris Colbert, CEO of Elementl Power, which on Wednesday announced a deal with Google to develop three nuclear projects of at least 600-megawatts each. (Energy Impact Partners, where Shayle is a partner, is an investor in Elementl.) Chris, a former executive at NuScale Power, thinks last year may have marked the start of a nuclear revival: the recommissioning of Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island and Michigan's Holtec Palisades; Big Tech deals to support small modular reactor development; and the start of construction on TerraPower's Wyoming reactor, the Western Hemisphere's first advanced nuclear facility. But until new reactors move beyond one-off projects to serial deployment, nuclear won't achieve the cost reductions needed for widespread adoption. Chris and Shayle discuss what it will take to turn this groundswell of activity into widespread deployment, covering topics like: Current tailwinds, like load growth and interest from corporate buyers Why corporate buyers may be better positioned than utilities to take on development risks Elementl's technology-agnostic approach Different nuclear technologies — light water, non-light water, and advanced designs — and Chris's predictions for when they'll reach commercialization Why iteration is essential to driving down costs (and why the Google deal involves three separate projects) How regulatory timelines are speeding up The steps of project development with a corporate buyer Chris's criteria for site selection — and why attracting skilled labor ranks surprisingly high Resources: Latitude Media: Was 2024 really the year of nuclear resurgence? Latitude Media: Is large-scale nuclear poised for a comeback? Catalyst: The cost of nuclear Latitude Media: Trump's DOE is reupping Biden-era funding for small modular nuclear reactors Latitude Media: Utah bets on a new developer to revive its small modular reactor ambitions Credits: Hosted by Shayle Kann. Produced and edited by Daniel Woldorff. Original music and engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive editor. Catalyst is brought to you by Anza, a platform enabling solar and storage developers and buyers to save time, reduce risk, and increase profits in their equipment selection process. Anza gives clients access to pricing, technical, and risk data plus tools that they've never had access to before. Learn more at go.anzarenewables.com/latitude. Catalyst is brought to you by EnergyHub. EnergyHub helps utilities build next-generation virtual power plants that unlock reliable flexibility at every level of the grid. See how EnergyHub helps unlock the power of flexibility at scale, and deliver more value through cross-DER dispatch with their leading Edge DERMS platform, by visiting energyhub.com.

KEEPING THE FAITH WHILE FIGHTING FOR A SOLARTOPIAN GREEN-POWERED EARTH WHILE FINALLY BURYING THE NUKE POWER INDUSTRY We start our GREEP Zoom #221 with DR. NANCY NIPARKO & her exhortation to keep the faith & not lose hope, however difficult the times may be. The FAR OUT documentary film is endorsed by DR. RUTH STRAUSS who also demands the return of Abrego Garcia after he's been disappeared to El Salvador. The name of this terror victim is shouted out by MYLA RESON with the warning that this could happen to any and all of us at the whim of Donald Trump. ON ENERGY: From DOROTHY REIK we hear about SB540 which would open the door to new nukes & to kill the ability of California to control its own energy supplies. The legendary KEVIN KAMPS warns of the gargantuan subsidies proposed to insanely re-start Michigan's Palisades despite the exponential cost overruns already with us, and despite disturbing reports of an epidemic of cancer in a nearby golf club, indicating major radiation releases from the nearby reactor; there are “start dates” for nuclear disasters, he said, but there are no end dates. We're reminded by MIKE HERSH that a major driving force for the “civilian” reactor industry is the on-going production materials for atomic weapons. The radioactive insanity as spread over New Mexico is exposed by MYLA RESON. The horrors of the radioactive fallout from Trinity, the first atomic bomb test, has studied in part by JOE MANGANO of the Radiation & Health Project, who wonders what kind of health survey could be supported by Robert F. Kennedy's federal agency; RFK, Jr's uncle, the late US Senator Ted Kennedy, long ago advocated such a study. Joe tells us of a study involving 16 of the oldest US nukes & found a clear correlation between cancer death rates and early and later plant operations. California's 2018 master plan to phase out the two reactors at Diablo & phase in a renewable energy base is laid wholly at the feed of Gov. Gavin Newsom. Kevin Kamps tells us that at least 10% of the ratepayers in Georgia's Vogtle rate region can't pay their bills to keep their lights on because of the huge charges coming from the two new nukes. We then take the plunge into the stock market and the insider manipulations of Donald Trump's tariffs, whose announcements let his friends and family sell and buy at obscene levels of grift. We also delve into the little-discussed T-Bills/government bonds that have stabilized the US and global economies. The loss of confidence in T-bills could signal a death knell for the American economy as reflected by the global loss of confidence in the US economy and the Dollar. “Women Rising Radio” host LYNN FEINERMAN wonders if we are thus headed into a Depression…or are we already there? The importance of the bond market, says MIKE HERSH, is valued by very powerful moneyed interest whose presence in T-Bill markets can decide the fate of the global economy, especially as the US “credit rating” is being destroyed. The kinds of insider manipulations available to Trump have been worth incalculable grift to friends and family on the Trump Rolodex. Kissinger's “Mad Nixon” theory is raised by TATANKA BRICCA as we see maximum currency manipulation among those who own the bulk of global wealth. TATANKA warns further that the oligarchs want to cauterize our hearts & our souls, which can only be defeated with empathy and compassion. The California Fair Elections Act SB42 would repeal the ban on public financing of election campaigns, neutralizing the power of America's oligarchs. The documentary movie called “the Encampments” about Columbia's University's investments is introduced by DR. NANCY NIPARKO.  

This week, we talk Boiling Water Reactors (BWRs) with James Krellenstein, the CEO of Alva Energy. We dive into the engineering, history, and physics of these reactors, how they differ from other designs, and why the United States may have erred in not choosing the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) instead of the Westinghouse AP-1000 for the Vogtle nuclear power plant.For this episode, we've included a glossary below to help with unfamiliar terms:ABWR: Advanced Boiling Water ReactorATWS: Anticipated Transient Without ScramBORAX experiments: Historical experiments testing reactor limits through deliberate failuresBWR: Boiling Water ReactorCOPS: Containment Overpressure Protection SystemCRDM: Control Rod Drive MechanismESBWR: Economic Simplified Boiling Water ReactorFLEX: Diverse and Flexible Coping Strategies (post-Fukushima enhancements)FOAK: First of a kindIGSCC: Intergranular Stress Corrosion CrackingNOAK: N-nth of a kindNRC: Nuclear Regulatory CommissionNSSS: Nuclear Steam Supply System (N Triple-S)PRA: Probabilistic Risk AssessmentPWR: Pressurized Water ReactorRCIC: Reactor Core Isolation Cooling System RPV: Reactor Pressure VesselSLC: Standby Liquid Control SystemRead more on Substack!

In the last 20 years, the United States has only successfully built one nuclear energy project. So how does startup The Nuclear Company plan to turn the industry on its head? In this episode, we are joined by Joe Klecha, Chief Nuclear Officer of The Nuclear Company, to discuss the startup's ambitious plans to deploy 6 GW of new nuclear power in the next decade. Having played a key role in the development of Southern Company's Vogtle project, Joe reflects on lessons learned and how the nuclear industry will look much different in the future. We cover must-know topics including why nuclear energy is seeing a resurgence in public opinion, how technology will play a key role in lowering costs, why their innovative partnership model is critical to their success, and where the next generation can play a role. Keynotes: -Why the U.S. stopped building new nuclear, and why need to start again -How macro trends like electrification and AI are affecting perceptions of nuclear energy -How digitalization and technology will make nuclear energy more cost-effective -And much more   And follow us on: Newsletter: https://www.energy-terminal.com/newsletter-signup LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/energy-terminal Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/energyterminal/  

We are thrilled to share this COBT episode recorded live from Plant Vogtle featuring John Williams, Senior Vice President of Technical Services and External Affairs at Southern Nuclear, John Kotek, Senior Vice President of Policy Development and Public Affairs at the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), and Bill Flores, Vice Chairman of ERCOT and Veriten Senior Advisor. Brett Rampal and I had the pleasure of traveling to Waynesboro, GA for an exciting tour of Vogtle to see the completed units before sitting down with John Williams, John Kotek and Bill Flores for their perspectives on Vogtle and the broader nuclear energy landscape in the US and globally. Vogtle is the largest generator of clean energy in the US and is jointly owned by Georgia Power, Oglethorpe Power Corporation, the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia and Dalton Utilities. The plant was named after Alvin Vogtle, a past Chairman, President and CEO of Southern Company and World War II veteran. The film “The Great Escape” was based in part on Mr. Vogtle's courageous wartime experiences (additional history linked here). In our conversation, John Williams first shares key background on Units 3 and 4 and how they've improved upon Units 1 and 2 in terms of technological advancements and safety features. We discuss the massive project of constructing Units 3 and 4, which involved a workforce of over 11,000 on-site employees, the economic benefits of nuclear facilities, the costs associated with building and operating nuclear plants, the US and global outlook for constructing additional AP1000 units, and the impact of nuclear energy development in the US, as well as its broader implications for global energy security. We touch on the obstacles faced during the construction of Vogtle 3 and 4 including regulatory challenges, the Fukushima incident in Japan, the bankruptcy of Westinghouse in 2017, and the impact of COVID-19 in 2020. In building the new units, Southern Company also faced the difficulty of finding an experienced workforce and re-creating a nuclear supply chain with Units 3 and 4 being the first new build nuclear plants in the US in 30 years. The scale of the project and site really struck us and John Williams put that into perspective when he pointed out that the concrete used for the expansion could lay a sidewalk from Waynesboro to Seattle and back. We also cover the safety and security of the facility, concerns over losing expertise as nuclear workers move to other industries with no other nuclear plants currently being built in the US, nuclear waste management, the growing appeal of nuclear energy careers to students, and much more. We were highly impressed with the entire experience and are excited to share our findings with you. Mike Bradley wasn't able to join the Vogtle field trip but passed along his market observations. He noted that markets (bonds, commodities and equities) all traded lower on Tuesday. From a broader equity market standpoint, the S&P 500 (-2.2%) and Nasdaq (-3.2%) were both pressured lower on Tuesday due to a substantial pullback in the S&P Technology sector (-4.4%) and shares of NVIDIA (-9.5%). Additional pressure could befall the S&P 500 given that September is historically the “worst” performing month for the S&P 500 by far, with the average September decline (over the last five years) being just over 4%. From a crude oil standpoint, WTI price traded down ~$3.25/bbl (closing at ~$70.25/bbl) on news that Libya was looking to restart ~0.5mmbpd of crude oil exports that had been temporarily curtailed. Goldman Sachs downgraded its long-held bullish copper call (mostly due to signs of slowing Chinese copper demand), which is also one of the main culprits that has been hanging over crude oil markets slowing global oil demand concerns. Given that this week's COBT focus was on Vogtle, he rounded

On the Tuesday, Aug. 13 edition of Georgia Today: Georgia Power issues a safety alert after a fire at Plant Vogtle in East Georgia; parts of Southeast Georgia continue to struggle after Tropical Storm Debby; and after a school bus accident, one Northwest Georgia school delays the start of its football season.

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

Southern Nuclear's Senior Vice President for Vogtle 3 and 4, John Williams, discusses the achievement and "tremendous pride" from everyone involved in completing the first new nuclear units built in the USA for more than 30 years. He says that both AP1000s have been performing well, with Vogtle 3 operating at 98% capacity since being put into service a year ago. And, as well as the direct jobs - 9000 workers were on site at peak construction - he says that people can see the benefits of carbon-free energy being produced and understand how important it is for the future of energy in the US and further afield.The project had many well-documented challenges to overcome - the impact of Fukushima, Westinghouse's Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2017 and the global pandemic - and Williams says there have been many lessons learned which Southern Company is committed to sharing with utilities in the US and other countries as they embark on their own projects.  The first lesson, he says, is the need for resilience, which has been demonstrated by the project partners Georgia Power, Oglethorpe Power, MEAG Power and Dalton Utilities.In the World Nuclear News round-up Claire Maden reports on the passing of the ADVANCE Act in the US, Kazakhstan's plans for a referendum later this year on new nuclear, and the latest uranium-mining developments in Niger.Key links to find out more:World Nuclear NewsCommercial operation marks completion of Vogtle expansionKazakhstan's nuclear energy referendum to be held this yearNiger revokes mining permit for Imouraren projectSouthern Nuclear: Plant VogtleEmail newsletter:Sign up to the World Nuclear News daily or weekly news round-upsContact info:alex.hunt@world-nuclear.orgEpisode credit:  Presenter Alex Hunt. Co-produced and mixed by Pixelkisser Production 

In this episode the Rethink Energy team discusses: South Korean nuclear power's reported cost of just $40 per MWh on the Korea Power Exchange strikes a stark contrast with US newbuild nuclear LCOE of $180 per MWh based on the Vogtle 3&4 construction cost blowout - several explanations have to be brought to bear to explain this vast discrepancy. South Korea's nuclear power ambitions are being ramped up consistently under President Yoon, with billions allotted to R&D around Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) and a pilot project pink hydrogen production scheme being agreed this month.

In this episode, Tim Echols is joined by former Commissioner Wise from Vogtle. Then, Susanne Warrenfeltz and Laura Iyer from Citizens Climate Lobby drop in. Finally, Olivia Amyette and her mom in segment 4.

Noticias Económicas y Financieras Hay una clase de activos emergente que ha crecido desde alrededor de $250B en 2010 a alrededor de $2T en la actualidad, y se prevé que se expandirá en porcentajes de dos dígitos en los próximos años. El mercado de crédito privado consiste en préstamos privados otorgados por fondos a empresas de propiedad privada, con dinero proveniente de fuentes como fondos de pensiones, compañías de seguros, dotaciones y fundaciones. El crédito privado también se basa en gran medida en préstamos directos y relaciones uno a uno en comparación con los préstamos tradicionales, donde el dinero que se presta se financia a través de depósitos bancarios o se sindica entre un grupo de inversores. $DIS Según se informa, Nelson Peltz vendió toda su participación en Walt Disney, ganando alrededor de $1B con la posición, apenas unas semanas después de que el inversionista activista perdiera el concurso de poderes más caro de la historia. La lista de directores propuesta por Disney fue reelegida para la junta en su reunión anual en abril, superando a un par de listas rivales de Trian Fund Management de Peltz y Blackwells Capital. Las acciones de Disney han subido un 12% hasta la fecha, en comparación con el rendimiento del 10% del S&P 500. La Casa Blanca está dando su apoyo a la construcción de reactores nucleares a gran escala, anunciando nuevas medidas destinadas a acelerar su desarrollo. El último reactor nuclear a escala comercial construido en Estados Unidos, el proyecto Vogtle de Southern Co. $SO, superó en más de $16B el presupuesto y tenía siete años de retraso. La administración Biden dijo que la energía nuclear es necesaria para cumplir los objetivos climáticos y de energía limpia, pero una docena de reactores han cerrado desde 2013, perdiendo frente a la energía más barata procedente del gas natural y las fuentes de energía renovables. $GOOG $GOOGL Google ha confirmado a The Verge que los 2.500 documentos internos filtrados con detalles sobre los datos rastreados por el gigante de las búsquedas son auténticos. Los archivos contienen información sobre el algoritmo secreto de Google para clasificar los resultados de búsqueda, que, junto con su testimonio en el caso antimonopolio del Departamento de Justicia, arroja más luz sobre el tipo de datos que el principal motor de búsqueda recopila y utiliza. $CRM Salesforce se desploma por ventas y pronósticos débiles. $TMUS $USM T-Mobile y US Cellular puede generar problemas antimonopolio. Estados Unidos toma medidas enérgicas contra los agentes de aduanas utilizados por Shein y Temu.

A senior official at the Energy Department's Loan Programs Office recently said there's a strong case for building traditional, large-scale nuclear plants, pointing to the completion of Georgia Power's Vogtle plant. That would be a major shift in sentiment for the nuclear energy industry, which has focused on deploying smaller-scale reactors for years. POLITICO's Catherine Morehouse breaks down how the delayed and overbudget Vogtle reactors could actually open the door for new large nuclear plans. Plus, two major biofuels trade groups are asking the Supreme Court to weigh in on the best legal venue to examine small refinery exemptions under the nation's biofuels blending program.   For more news on energy and the environment, subscribe to Power Switch, our free evening newsletter: https://www.politico.com/power-switch And for even deeper coverage and analysis, read our Morning Energy newsletter by subscribing to POLITICO Pro: https://subscriber.politicopro.com/newsletter-archive/morning-energy   Catherine Morehouse is an energy reporter for POLITICO.  Josh Siegel is an energy reporter for POLITICO.  Nirmal Mulaikal is a POLITICO audio host-producer.  Annie Rees is a senior audio producer-host at POLITICO.  Gloria Gonzalez is the deputy energy editor for POLITICO.  Matt Daily is the energy editor for POLITICO.

Adam Stein is the Director of Nuclear Energy Innovation at the Breakthrough Institute, where he focuses on the technology, policy, risk and economics of nuclear energy. The Breakthrough Institute is a global research center that identifies and promotes technological solutions to environmental and human development challenges. Among its many projects, the Breakthrough Institute recently launched Build Nuclear Now, a national campaign to mobilize Americans in targeted states to call for regulatory and legislative change to accelerate the licensing and deployment of new, advanced nuclear reactors in the United States.Adam brings a pro-nuclear perspective to this conversation; and given that, Cody and Adam focus the majority of the discussion on the history of nuclear power in the US and potential paths forward, rather than debating the merits of nuclear (which could of course be a full episode by itself). Adam has a particular interest in advanced nuclear reactors, which represent a broad class of new technologies currently under development and review. This conversation covers these advanced reactors and so much more. Episode recorded on Apr 15, 2024 (Published on May 13, 2024)In this episode, we cover: [02:39]: Launch of 'Build Nuclear Now' to boost public support for nuclear energy[03:45]: Shift in public opinion on nuclear energy post-Three Mile Island incident[05:03]: Contrast between post-WWII and current energy policies focusing on efficiency[09:30]: Decline of nuclear energy due to increased natural gas from fracking[10:48]: Challenges in revitalizing the stagnant US nuclear industry[13:02]: Future projections for nuclear load growth by 2050  [15:14]: Why renewables and storage alone cannot meet future energy demands[19:39]: Additional benefits of nuclear energy[21:33]: The role of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the need for reform[25:00]: Challenges with traditional nuclear reactor approval processes [29:23]: Vogtle reactors and challenges for deploying nuclear plants in the US[32:27]: The potential of advanced nuclear reactors and their smaller, adaptable designs[39:32]: Strategic focus on Appalachia for repurposing coal plants for nuclear projects[42:38]: Recent legislative efforts to modernize nuclear energy regulation and innovation[52:12]: The process and challenges of nuclear fuel management, from enrichment to waste[01:01:12]: National focus on nuclear innovation, highlighting Idaho's MARVEL reactor development[01:05:31]: Role of the Breakthrough Institute in addressing and implementing solutions for nuclear energy barriers Get connected with MCJ: Jason Jacobs X / LinkedInCody Simms X / LinkedInMCJ Podcast / Collective / YouTube*If you liked this episode, please consider giving us a review! You can also reach us via email at content@mcjcollective.com, where we encourage you to share your feedback on episodes and suggestions for future topics or guests.

There's a battle going on between the economy and the ecology. Two types of green. Extremists on both sides say it's one or the other. It can, and should, include both. We don't need to trash the earth and we don't need to return to being hunter-gatherers. The world economy is set to skyrocket with the US leading the way via increased productivity. This takes electric energy. Strong discusses how we can indeed have our cake and eat it too.

ANTI-TRANS ATTACKS; JULIAN ASSANGE; LABOR RISING; CAMPUS UPHEAVALS; SAVING DEMOCRACY IN AZ We open with BRYNN TANNEHILL's powerful report on escalating attacks against trans people throughout the US, but with an astounding victory in Kansas (!).   VINNIE DESTEFANO'S information on Julian Assange includes a way YOU can help by calling your Senators & Representatives to get him FREE!   MYLA RESON, DAVID GURAN and WENDI LEDERMAN chime into the amazing battle to save the right to practice journalism anywhere on Earth.   RUTH STRAUSS talks to us about “Outside Agitators” and Joe Biden.   From Georgia's RAY MCCLENDON we hear the latest on the Trump prosecutions and also on the arrival of the Vogtle nuclear plant already devastating the Peach State economy.   Republican Arizona state Senator KEN BENNETT explains the 4-point program for guaranteeing safe, fair, digitally scanned paper ballots that produce accurate outcomes in public elections.   With legendary election protection pioneer JOHN BRAKEY we conduct an astonishing excursion into the workings of the AZ legislature's progress into the world of actual democracy.   Will this publicly verifiable method of conducting the vote counting and auditing process become a national model? Let's hope so.   Globally infamous “magician” DAVID SALTMAN jumps in to doubt the ability of run a fair and accurate vote count when professional slights of hand are lurking.   An Emmy-winning investigative reporter, Saltman challenges Sen. Bennett and Brakey to prove that they can produce a vote count without error.   DONALD SMITH warns of violence at the polls.   Myla Reson then challenges Senator Bennett to do face the realities of the horrendous Palo Verde nuclear plant. No Nukes!!!   In four weeks (on June 3) we will stage a national zoom gathering on how to conduct fair, reliable, verifiable elections this fall….

On the Monday April 29th edition of Georgia Today: Authorities make arrests at the University of Georgia  at a protest over the war in Gaza; The second of two new nuclear reactors at Georgia's Plant Vogtle is up and running; and researchers look for a way to turn food waste into energy.

The Grand Finale is here. We wrestle with the question of whether nuclear can find its groove and the positive learning rates that have eluded it so frequently. Vogtle unit 4 came in 40% cheaper than unit 3. Can those gains continue downwards? Is Vogtle 5 more likely to follow this cost reduction curve compared to a new AP1000 elsewhere?

Today, molten salt reactors (MSRs) are experiencing a resurgence of interest worldwide, with numerous companies and research institutions actively developing various designs. MSRs offer several potential advantages, including enhanced safety, reduced waste generation, and the ability to utilize thorium as a fuel source, as previously mentioned. “There are several molten salt reactor companies that are in the process of cutting deals and getting MOIs [memorandums of intent] with foreign countries,” Mike Conley, author of the book Earth Is a Nuclear Planet: The Environmental Case for Nuclear Power, said as a guest on The POWER Podcast. Conley is a nuclear energy advocate and strong believer in MSR technology. He called MSRs “a far superior reactor technology” compared to light-water reactors (LWRs). The thorium fuel cycle is a key component in at least some MSR designs. The thorium fuel cycle is the path that thorium transmutes through from fertile source fuel to uranium fuel ready for fission. Thorium-232 (Th-232) absorbs a neutron, transmuting it into Th-233. Th-233 beta decays to protactinium-233 (Pa-233), and finally undergoes a second beta minus decay to become uranium-233 (U-233). This is the one way of turning natural and abundant Th-232 into something fissionable. Since U-233 is not naturally found but makes an ideal nuclear reactor fuel, it is a much sought-after fuel cycle. “The best way to do this is in a molten salt reactor, which is an incredible advance in reactor design. And the big thing is, whether you're fueling a molten salt reactor with uranium or thorium or plutonium or whatever, it's a far superior reactor technology. It absolutely cannot melt down under any circumstances whatsoever period,” said Conley. Conley suggested that most of the concern people have about nuclear power revolves around the spread of radioactive material. Specifically, no matter how unlikely it is, if an accident occurred and contamination went airborne, the fact that it could spread beyond the plant boundary is worrisome to many people who oppose nuclear power. “The nice thing about a molten salt reactor is: if a molten salt reactor just goes belly up and breaks or gets destroyed or gets sabotaged, you'll have a messed-up reactor room with a pancake of rock salt on the floor, but not a cloud of radioactive steam that's going to go 100 miles downwind,” Conley explained. And the price for an MSR could be much more attractive than the cost of currently available GW-scale LWR units. “The ThorCon company is predicting that they will be able to build for $1 a watt,” said Conley. “That's one-fourteenth of what Vogtle was,” he added, referring to Southern Company's nuclear expansion project in Georgia, which includes two Westinghouse AP1000 units. Of course, projections do not always align with reality, so MSR pilot projects will be keenly watched to validate claims. There is progress being made on MSR projects. For example, in February 2022, TerraPower and Southern Company announced an agreement to design, construct, and operate the Molten Chloride Reactor Experiment (MCRE)—the world's first critical fast-spectrum salt reactor—at Idaho National Laboratory (INL). Since then, Southern Company reported successfully commencing pumped-salt operations in the Integrated Effects Test (IET), signifying a major achievement for the project. The IET is a non-nuclear, externally heated, 1-MW multiloop system, located at TerraPower's laboratory in Everett, Washington. “The IET will inform the design, licensing, and operation of an approximately 180-MW MCFR [Molten Chloride Fast Reactor] demonstration planned for the early 2030s timeframe,” Southern Company said.

James Krellenstein returns to deeper dive the lessons of Vogtle and VC Summer

James Krellenstein and I continue our deep dive analysis of what went wrong at Vogtle.

James Krellenstein returns to dig into what went wrong at Vogtle and why the nuclear “Renaissance” of the early 2000's ended up a flop.

Výstavba nových jaderných zdrojů je riziková a může se prodražit, budování bezemisní energetiky nás ale přijde draho tak jako tak. Politici by to měli přiznat, říká zmocněnec pro energetickou bezpečnost Václav Bartuška.Ještě v 70. a 80. letech minulého století se v Evropě stavěly desítky jaderných reaktorů. Dnes je takových projektů jen několik, a ještě se komplikují. Jaderná energetika je totiž složité a rizikové odvětví. Stavba jaderných bloků se tak ve vyspělém světě prodražuje a elektřina z nových reaktorů už dávno není levná.Například dva bloky elektrárny Vogtle, které staví firma Westinghouse v USA, měly původně stát 14 miliard dolarů. Teď vycházejí na 35 miliard a elektřina z letos spuštěného bloku vychází v přepočtu na 170 eur na megawatthodinu – výrazně víc než běžná tržní cena. Britská elektrárna Hinkley Point, kterou staví EdF, měla původně garantovanou výkupní cenu 106 eur, od té doby ale garance vystoupala na 150 eur za megawatthodinu. Také nad současné tržní ceny, mezi 120 až 130 eury, oscilující letos i ve střední Evropě. Co se v oboru stalo, že rizikovost investic tak vzrostla? Podle Václava Bartušky, zmocněnce Ministerstva zahraničních věcí pro energetickou bezpečnost, sehrály roli tři jaderné havárie. K první došlo v americké elektrárně Three Miles Islands v USA roku 1979, o sedm let později v Černobylu a v roce 2011 v japonské Fukušimě.  Agenda. Rozhovory s top lídry českého byznysu, zakladateli firem, odborníky. Čtvrthodinka o byznysu z první ruky. Každý všední den na SZ Byznys a ve všech podcastových aplikacích. Odebírejte na Podcasty.cz, Apple Podcasts nebo Spotify.

Georgia politicians react to the war in Israel; Vogtle's second new nuclear reactor is... wait for it... wait for it... delayed. Again.; and what happens when Georgia unwinds Medicaid a bit too much. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Today Jason and Kelly will be covering the sustainable stories from the month of August 2023. These stories include Vogtle Unit 3 being operational, Norway's largest floating wind farm, London's low emission zones, and Montana's climate lawsuit.  Follow us on social media @sustainabiliME.pod Sources: https://www.georgiapower.com/company/news-center/2023-articles/vogtle-unit-3-goes-into-operation.html https://www.euronews.com/green/2023/08/23/norway-worlds-biggest-floating-wind-farm-will-power-oil-and-gas-platforms#:~:text=The%20world's%20biggest%20floating%20wind,nearby%20oil%20and%20gas%20platforms. https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/28/cars/ulez-expansion-london-vehicle-emissions/index.html https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/14/montana-judge-sides-with-youth-in-climate-trial-00107668  

GDP Script/ Top Stories for Sept 3 Publish Date: sept From the Henssler Financial Studio Welcome to the Gwinnett Daily Post Podcast Today is Sunday September 3rd, and happy 57th birthday to actor Charlie Sheen ****Sheen**** I'm Bruce Jenkins and here are your top stories presented by Mall of Georgia Chrysler Dodge Jeep 1. Gwinnett police seeking information on death of siblings found dead next to I-85 near Buford 2. Decatur woman arrested and charged with allegedly stabbing man at Norcross-area gas station 3. And Transportation officials want funding to begin planning microtransit in northwest Gwinnett All of this and more is coming up on the Gwinnett Daily Post podcast, and if you are looking for community news, we encourage you to listen daily and subscribe!   Break 1 : M.O.G.   Story 1. 2 siblings The Gwinnett County police are investigating the murders of a teenage boy, Juan Angel Montes, 16, and his older sister, Maria Rosaria Montes Dorantes, 23, who were found dead on the side of Interstate 85 in Buford. Their bodies were discovered by a passerby who had pulled off onto the shoulder of I-85 due to car trouble. The siblings had gunshot wounds and were pronounced dead at the scene. There were no vehicles near the bodies, and it remains unclear how they ended up on the roadside. Police are urging anyone with information about the case to come forward and contact detectives or Crime Stoppers. Crime Stoppers offers a cash reward for information leading to an arrest and indictment. ..………….. read more at gwinnettdailypost.com   STORY 2: stabbing A Decatur woman, Keareah Mercedes Harris, 24, is facing aggravated assault and battery charges for an alleged unprovoked stabbing at a Shell gas station on Jimmy Carter Boulevard in unincorporated Norcross. The incident occurred around 11:10 p.m. on August 27. Harris is accused of following a man into the store and slashing his face with a razor blade. Security footage identified Harris as the suspect, and the attack appears to be random and unprovoked. Harris was arrested and is currently held in the Gwinnett County jail. Police are urging anyone with information about the incident to contact detectives or Crime Stoppers, offering a cash reward for information leading to an arrest and indictment. Story 3: transport Gwinnett County transportation officials are planning to expand microtransit services with the creation of a third microtransit zone in northwest Gwinnett, serving residents in Sugar Hill, Buford, and Suwanee. The budget request for this expansion was presented, aiming for capital funds in 2024 and operational funds in 2026. Microtransit, offered through the Ride Gwinnett app, provides on-demand rides within specific zones. Gwinnett has secured $2 million in grant funding for this project, contingent on a $500,000 local match, which is part of the 2024 budget request. The goal is to gradually expand microtransit services throughout the entire county. We have opportunities for sponsors to get great engagement on these shows. Call 770.874.3200 for more info. We'll be right back   Break 2: Slappey- Tom Wages - Obits   Story 4: arts The Lawrenceville Arts Commission is launching Lawrenceville's first community mural project, aiming to transform Jackson Street into a vibrant artistic masterpiece. Artist Teresa Abboud will create the mural, which will welcome visitors to downtown Lawrenceville and promote community engagement. The project began with an open call for local artists to submit designs for a 1,867-square-foot mural, with a portion dedicated to community participation. After reviewing proposals, Abboud was selected as the finalist, and the City Council approved the artwork. This community mural project reflects Lawrenceville's creativity, unity, diversity, and spirit. Story 5: beds   A capacity study commissioned by the Georgia Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities has identified the need for five more behavioral health crisis centers and the creation of around 120 additional beds in the state hospital network for people involved in the criminal justice system by 2025. However, the state must also address workforce issues to fully utilize these resources, especially with the new national 3-digit dialing code, 988, increasing demand for state services. The study also suggests that if crisis centers do not reach about 85% occupancy, more facilities will be required. The impact of 988 on Georgia's safety net remains uncertain.   Story 6: costs   Georgia Power, clean energy advocates, and state regulators' staff have reached a settlement agreement that could result in several billion dollars in costs being borne by company shareholders for the Plant Vogtle nuclear expansion project. The agreement calls for capping the maximum amount paid by Georgia Power customers at $7.6 billion, with expenses above that covered by Georgia Power and its parent company, Southern Co. If approved, the deal would likely result in the average utility customer paying an additional $14 per month for the project. Construction and financing costs for Vogtle have surpassed $34 billion.   We'll be back in a moment   Break 3: ESOG – Ingles 7 - Cumming   Story 7: runner   Jewel Wells and Eli Griggs of Mill Creek High School received the Gwinnett Runner of the Week honors in cross country. Jewel Wells earned the Girls Runner of the Week title for her first-place finish with a course-record time of 19 minutes, 4 seconds in the Kowboy XC Classic. Eli Griggs was named Boys Runner of the Week for his seventh-place finish in the Kowboy XC Classic with a time of 15:48.   Story 8: brookwood   Brookwood secured a 4-3 victory over Grayson in a nine-inning softball game, maintaining their lead in Region 4-7A. The Broncos now hold an 8-2-1 overall record and remain undefeated in the region at 4-0, while Grayson's record stands at 10-3, with a region record of 3-2. Lorelei Sullivan, Tavia Robinson, Madison Oliver, Kiersten Costantino, Keren Leal, and Nya Langlais contributed to Brookwood's offense. Pitcher Jordyn Ray threw all nine innings, allowing three runs on nine hits and striking out six for the win. Mountain View edged past Collins Hill 4-3. Bella Teems pitched a complete game, allowing five hits and striking out seven while also contributing with two hits. Chloe Jones led the Bears' offense, going 3-for-3 with two RBIs. Buford dominated Central Gwinnett with a 17-0 win in three innings. Emma Grace Williams struck out seven in three perfect innings for Buford's victory. Gabby Pierre, Brooklyn Atha, Summer Castorri, and Janie Goldin contributed significantly to Buford's offensive prowess.     We'll have final thoughts after this And now, Leah McGrath, corporate dietician at Ingles markets talks with us about foods that help with swollen feet Break 4: Henssler 60 Thanks again for hanging out with us on today's Gwinnett Daily Post podcast. If you enjoy these shows, we encourage you to check out our other offerings, like the Cherokee Tribune Ledger Podcast, the Marietta Daily Journal, the Community Podcast for Rockdale Newton and Morgan Counties, or the Paulding County News Podcast. Read more about all our stories, and get other great content at Gwinnettdailypost.com. Did you know over 50% of Americans listen to podcasts weekly? Giving you important news about our community and telling great stories are what we do. Make sure you join us for our next episode and be sure to share this podcast on social media with your friends and family. Add us to your Alexa Flash Briefing or your Google Home Briefing and be sure to like, follow, and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. www.wagesfuneralhome.com  www.psponline.com  www.mallofgeorgiachryslerdodgejeep.com  www.esogrepair.com  www.henssler.com  www.ingles-markets.com  www.downtownlawrencevillega.com  www.gcpsk12.org See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It was in 2003 that World Nuclear University was founded by World Nuclear Association, the International Atomic Energy Agency, World Association of Nuclear Operators and the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency,  with a mission to provide comprehensive leadership, communications and technical training to support the next generation of nuclear leaders.As it marks its 20th birthday, host Alex Hunt is joined by World Nuclear University (WNU)  director Isis Leslie to learn more about its work and also its exciting plans for the future. We also hear first-hand what the WNU experience is like from Estiner Katengeza, one of the fellows at this year's Summer Institute, which was held in Japan. In the World Nuclear News round-up Claire Maden reports on developments in Niger and considers the impact on the uranium sector, Warwick Pipe reports on the start of the discharge of treated water from Fukushima and there is also a report on the good news out of the USA from Vogtle. Key links to find out more:World Nuclear NewsWorld Nuclear UniversityWNU Alumni on LinkedinEmail newsletter:Sign up to the World Nuclear News daily or weekly news round-upsContact info:alex.hunt@world-nuclear.orgEpisode credit:  Presenter Alex Hunt. Co-produced and mixed by Pixelkisser Production 

What's been happening:Niger – awaiting the next catalyst?On 26 July news broke of a coup in Niger - borders were closed and a nationwide curfew was declared, and all institutions of the republic were suspended.https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-66320895In the days following we saw statements from Global Atomic and GoviEx that employees were safe and it was business as usual. https://globalatomiccorp.com/investors/news/news-details/2023/Global-Atomic-Updates-the-Situation-in-The-Republic-of-Niger-July31/default.aspxhttps://goviex.com/site/assets/files/4676/2l_nigerupdate_310723_final.pdfWith 25% of the EU's uranium coming from Niger the coup raised a series of concerns for their clean energy sector. Orano the major operator in the region said ‘operations continue as normal'.https://greeninvesting.co/2023/07/niger-coup-threatens-frances-uranium-supply-nuclear-energy-industry/We discuss how this key development might affect the uranium market.Winner of the week:It's a tie between Vogtle & China.Georgia Power declared that Plant Vogtle Unit 3 has entered commercial operation. They are the tied winner because the US administration saw the bigger picture and persisted, and can now look forward.https://www.georgiapower.com/company/news-center/2023-articles/vogtle-unit-3-goes-into-operation.htmlChina approved 6 new nuclear reactors commencements at $17B investment. Even though these are the first approvals for 2023, they are in addition to 10 in 2022. China accounts for 23 of 55 nukes under construction globally.https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Six-reactors-approved-for-construction-in-Chinahttps://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-08-01/china-approves-six-nuclear-reactors-at-17-billion-investment?utm_source=website&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=twitter#xj4y7vzkgBungle of the week:Collectively award it to all of those that proclaimed that renewable pricing can only get cheaper.These last 2 weeks Vattenfall and Ørsted abandoned offshore wind projects in the US & UK due to soaring costs of up to 40%.https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-07-22/biggest-offshore-wind-power-plans-in-crisis-iberdrola-orsted-vattenfall-hithttps://www.rechargenews.com/wind/too-expensive-us-state-refuses-lone-offshore-wind-bid-by-orsted-jv-on-cost-concerns/2-1-1488381Siemens Gamesa board has initiated an "extended technical review" that will incur "significantly higher costs" than previously assumed, estimated to be in excess of 1 billion euros ($1.09 billion).https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2023/06/23/siemens-energy-scraps-profit-outlook-as-wind-turbine-troubles-deepen.htmlhttps://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-06-29/wind-turbines-that-shake-and-break-cost-their-maker-billions#xj4y7vzkgQuestion of the week:KAP's sales have gone up 13% because of (FLEX) in their contracts. What does that mean?Kazatomprom 2Q23 Operations and Trading Update - https://www.kazatomprom.kz/en/media/view/kazatomprom_2Q23_operations_and_trading_updateMoonshots & Fizzers:The potential moonshot is the physical uranium funds… or will they fizzle out?For 11 days before the coup in Niger SPUT had been trading at an average discount of 11.00%, since the coup it has substantially reduced, sitting at an average discount of -7.82%.https://twitter.com/skysurfer75/status/1686513074394578944/photo/1https://twitter.com/janwolansky/status/1686470708984008704/photo/1https://twitter.com/quakes99/status/1686517113756975104?s=20Yellowcake is up nearly 6% in Londonhttps://www.holdcomarkets.com/post/the-month-in-u-inventory-yellowcake-p-nav-discount-too-narrow-in-relation-to-sputhttps://twitter.com/moniology/status/1686030693975912448/photo/1https://twitter.com/HoldcoMarkets/status/1686505128793141248/photo/1Tweet of the week:https://twitter.com/sollidnuclear/status/1683467634216509443?s=20What's been happening“Strategic patience” is required by all… an exciting September coming up.

with Brad Friedman & Desi Doyen

GDP Script/ Top Stories for Sunday July 30 Publish Date: Friday July 28 From the Henssler Financial Studio Welcome to the Gwinnett Daily Post Podcast Today is Sunday July 30th , and happy 75th birthday to actor Arnold Schwarzenegger ****Arnie****   I'm Bruce Jenkins and here are your top stories presented by Mall of Georgia Chrysler Dodge Jeep 1. Motorcycle driver in fatal Peachtree Industrial crash was driving more than 100 mph 2. Volunteer-led Medical Reserve Corps celebrating 16th anniversary of helping the community 3. And Georgia unemployment holds steady in June   All of this and more is coming up on the Gwinnett Daily Post podcast.   Break 1 : M.O.G.   Story 1. vehicular   Duluth police have charged Suwanee resident Taylor Kratzer, 34, with 1st-degree vehicular homicide, reckless driving, speeding, improper lane change, and tag to be displayed, in connection with a fatal accident that occurred on July 13 on Peachtree Industrial Boulevard. Kratzer was riding his motorcycle when he collided with another vehicle at Rogers Bridge Road and then struck and killed a pedestrian identified as Thomas Eurell, 42. Witnesses reported that the motorcycle was traveling at a high speed with erratic lane changes before the crash. Video footage from the city's cameras confirmed the motorcycle's speed exceeded 100 mph on Peachtree Industrial Boulevard............read more on this at gwinnettdailypost.com     STORY 2: 16th   MRC GEM, the Medical Reserve Corps covering Gwinnett, Newton, and Rockdale counties, is celebrating its 16th anniversary with over 1,300 members volunteering in the east metro area. During the COVID-19 pandemic, they administered 375,000 vaccinations and tests and provided 17,256 hours of service to the response efforts. They specialize in various tasks, including establishing community reception centers for vaccinations and testing. The group offers training sessions monthly, providing education in CPR, AED, emergency first aid, mass vaccination efforts, and more. MRC GEM is seeking new, especially younger, members to continue their valuable work in times of crisis.   Story 3: unemployment Georgia's unemployment rate remained steady at 3.2% in June, below the national rate of 3.6%. The state reached an all-time high in the number of jobs, with 4.9 million jobs added, growing across various sectors like accommodation and food services, health care and social assistance, and durable goods manufacturing. The number of employed Georgians also reached a record high of 5.3 million. Initial jobless claims were down by 2% in June, and over the year, first-time unemployment claims fell by 9%. The state posted over 117,000 job listings online, with the top occupations being in health care, sales, business management, and hospitality... … read more on this at gwinnettdailypost.com We'll be right back   Break 2: Slappey- Tom Wages - Obits   Story 4: rock   Melissa McClelland has been appointed as the new principal of Rock Springs Elementary School, and Leslie Hill as the new principal of Trip Elementary School in Gwinnett County. McClelland has 23 years of experience in education, including 19 years in Gwinnett County Public Schools, and replaces Allan Gee, who was promoted to a cluster superintendent position. Hill has 24 years of experience in education, almost all of it in GCPS, and replaces Rukina Walker, who was named the new principal at Grayson High School. Additionally, the Gwinnett County Board of Education approved other leadership appointments for central office positions.   Story 5: sparks   The Georgia Power's Plant Vogtle nuclear expansion project is facing ongoing debate and criticism due to its doubled cost and extended construction time. Utility watchdogs and clean energy advocates argue that the benefits of nuclear power will not outweigh the increasing costs for customers. The state regulators' consultants estimate that the company could collect $2.1 billion more from ratepayers due to delays in completing the project. Despite criticism, Public Service Commissioner Lauren "Bubba" McDonald defends Vogtle, claiming that the power produced will be cheap and clean. Meanwhile, other states like Kentucky and West Virginia are exploring nuclear energy options. Unit 3 is close to completion, while Unit 4 is projected to enter service in early 2024.   Story 6: electric   Electric Cities of Georgia and the Municipal Gas Authority of Georgia have joined forces to create the Georgia Energy Cities initiative for statewide economic development. With 93 energy communities united, the alliance aims to attract businesses and foster economic growth in Georgia. They will provide a pipeline of resources and support to connect companies with the necessary people and assets to choose Georgia for their operations. The partnership seeks to offer increased exposure on a global scale while aligning with state marketing resources to promote industrial growth and innovation. The initiative will act as a single point of contact, facilitating access to community leaders, electric and gas resources, and property databases throughout the state.   We'll be back in a moment   Break 3: ESOG – Ingles 8- G.O.N.   Story 7: mill   Mill Creek sophomore Alexis Eichenberger has been chosen to represent Team Georgia at the American Select Lacrosse Tournament in Delaware. The tournament will feature 20 U.S. regional teams competing in a showcase event. Eichenberger, who plays as a midfielder, had an impressive performance in her freshman season, earning 18 points for Mill Creek. Additionally, she participates in club lacrosse for Southern Zone.   Story 8: seven And now, Leah McGrath, corporate dietician at Ingles Markets talks with us about sugar free items At the Southern Conference's Media Day, seven former Gwinnett standouts were named to the preseason All-Southern Conference Football Team. Four local players were selected for the first team, including Ty James (wide receiver) from Greater Atlanta Christian, Solomon Zubairu (defensive line) from Archer, and Isaac Dowling (linebacker) from Shiloh, all playing for Mercer. Julian Ashby, a Parkview graduate, was also named to the first team as the long snapper for Furman. The second team featured Israel Mukwiza (offensive lineman) from Archer, Will Huzzie (wide receiver) from Duluth, representing East Tennessee State, and Chuck Smith (defensive lineman) from North Gwinnett, playing for Wofford.   Story 9: Harman   Brian Harman, a steady and accurate golfer, won the Open championship at Royal Liverpool last weekend, securing his first major victory. He joins legendary names like Bobby Jones, Walter Hagen, Tiger Woods, and Rory McIlroy as winners at Hoylake. Harman's consistent performance and accurate putting impressed spectators, especially considering the challenging weather conditions. He led from the second round and maintained his position throughout, with fellow former UGA golfer Sepp Straka as his closest challenger. Harman's triumph was celebrated in his hometown of St. Simons and Sea Island, making him a proud Open Champion. Open champion.   We'll have final thoughts after this   Break 4: Lawrenceville - Henssler 60 Thanks again for listening to today's Gwinnett Daily Post podcast. Giving you important news about our community and telling great stories are what we do. Did you know over 50% of Americans listen to podcasts weekly? Make sure you join us for our next episode and be sure to share this podcast on social media with your friends and family. Add us to your Alexa Flash Briefing or your Google Home Briefing and be sure to like, follow, and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Get more news about our community at GwinnettDailyPost.com www.henssler.com  www.ingles-markets.com  www.mallofgeorgiachryslerdodgejeep.com www.psponline.com  www.wagesfuneralhome.com  www.esogrepair.com  www.gon.com  www.downtownlawrencevillega.com See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There's something like a couple dozen proposals now for development of small modular reactors (SMRs), widely seen as the future of nuclear power as a participant in the clean-energy transition. Publicly traded NuScale* is at the vanguard of this trend. We spoke with the Nuclear Energy Institute's Matt Crozat about the prospects for SMRs and nuclear's role in the clean-energy transition at a time when we thought the first of Georgia Power's new Vogtle nuclear power units would have already been brought online. But a "degraded hydrogen seal" was only the latest delay for the $35 billion expansion project funded by ratepayers captive to a monopoly utility supplier. We also spoke at a time when Putin's invasion of Ukraine became even more fraught amid reports Russian troops may have planted explosives at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant they've commandeered. Crozat sees the prospect of new nuclear technologies and the growing acceptance among the public and policy makers of nuclear's critical role in the clean-energy transition as reasons for optimism on nuclear's future."We have as a starting point all of these utilities that have commitments to be carbon-free by mid-century. And that's creating a lot of pressure looking for technologies that can help bring low-carbon solutions into the portfolio, which also requires making sure you have the ability to provide the reliability and resilience to the grid that we need to have that be successful. And nuclear is standing out as one of the possible technologies that can do a lot of the roles alongside of wind and solar and batteries and these others, but it's really becoming something – it needs something that looks like nuclear to make the system work," Crozat says. "A lot of people are coming to this conclusion. At the same moment, we have new technologies that are offering nuclear in different packages than before. And it's really changing the calculus as people are approaching this as a possibility."Our conversation touches on new nuclear, the apparent lack of investor interest in NuScale despite its regulatory progress, carbon taxes, nuclear waste disposal, competitive markets versus monopoly regulation, exporting U.S. nuclear technology, and the prospects for sabotage at Ukraine's Zaporizhzhia plant. As for Zaporizhzhia, Crozat doubts Russia will sabotage the plant: "Russia itself has a very long-term strategic interest in having nuclear energy being a viable strategic outcome. They want to sell reactors, too." Support the show

We are pleased to bring back from episode 10, Tim Echols, Vice-Chair of the Georgia Public Service Commission.  In today's episode 188 of The Green Insider, Tim will discuss Georgia's new nuclear plant, Vogtle. Each Vogtle reactor can generate enough electricity to power half a million homes without burning fossil … The post Echols Has Passion for Georgia and New Vogtle Nuclear Plant appeared first on eRENEWABLE.

Happy EasterEvery Sunday, Gerard and Laurent debate last week's news in the Energy Transition:- Germany vs UK Net Zero policies: “You Can Go your Own Way”- New Carbon Standards will be integrity to the fledgling market- Solar: prices are down, volumes are up- First nuclear plant energized in the US in 30 years (Vogtle 3)

The first nuclear plant in 30 years just fired up in Georgia. Is this the re-emergence of a technology capable of generating baseload, clean electricity - or are the economic and cultural forces too much for new nuclear to overcome? In this episode, Paul explores the promise of nuclear energy as a part of the clean energy transition as well as the challenges that construction of the new Vogtle reactors in Georgia has laid bare.Follow Paul on LinkedIn.

Following Crossover Day, Georgia lawmakers have just about 10 working days left to pass new laws; the long behind schedule Vogtle nuclear power plant has achieved a key step towards actually providing electricity; and a week of scheduled action against the planned Atlanta police training facility continues after violent protests broke out over the weekend.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Grand jury report recommends perjury charges; State urges appeals court to OK Rivian incentive deal; Southern Co. reports big profit increase but costly Vogtle delays loom; School librarians could face criminal charges under Georgia bill

Grand jury report recommends perjury charges; State urges appeals court to OK Rivian incentive deal; Southern Co. reports big profit increase but costly Vogtle delays loom; School librarians could face criminal charges under Georgia bill

Patty Durand, candidate for the Georgia Public Service Commission, explains how the Commission failed to protect consumers from the Vogtle nuclear power plant, what Durand will do differently, if she is elected, and why her candidacy faced legal challenges.… Read More

What's led the world to restart the stalled atomic engine?2022 was a year of important milestones for nuclear power. The most significant piece of climate legislation in US history – the IRA – included tax incentives and investment for the nuclear industry. A $15 per megawatt-hour tax credit for production to keep existing plants competitive, as well as $700 million to build a domestic supply chain for modern reactors, was a statement of intent from a government seeking to increase energy security. There is a resurgence of interest in nuclear power around the world. From the support for nuclear power in recent legislation in the US, to the plans for new reactors in France and the UK, to Japan's commitment to a new generation of advanced nuclear technology. Soaring prices for natural gas and concerns about energy security following Russia's invasion of Ukraine have prompted renewed interest in reliable sources of supply. And at the same time, the international pressure to address climate change has not faded. So, zero-emissions sources have the greatest long-term potential. Diablo Canyon in California, Vogtle in Georgia, as well as major projects planned for Poland and Finland have put nuclear firmly back in the spotlight. How far has safety and efficiency developed in the past decades? What's driven the industry to restart engine of atomic power, previously stalled for decades? We've had a lot of correspondence to the show about nuclear power, so we're dedicating the entire hour to the topic. Ed Crooks is back in the host seat, joined by a distinguished panel of guests. We welcome two new faces to the gang: Katy Huff, Assistant Secretary and head of the Office of Nuclear Energy at the Department of Energy and Carl Perez, CEO of Exodys Energy. Also joining the show is Melissa Lott, Director of the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University's Climate Lab. It's a packed show, with discussion on the Biden administration's strategy for increased nuclear planning, the type of reactors and Exodys Energy's role in developing the technology, and the challenges to increase nuclear development. Let us know your thoughts on nuclear – we're @TheEnergyGang.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

John Wayne: Downwinder? New Documentary DOWNWIND on U.S. Nuke Radiation Poisoning of St. George, Utah – Director Mark Shapiro Nuclear Hotseat Hot Story with Linda Pentz Gunter Bad bad bad bad vibrations! Vogtle 3 in Georgia, one of only 2 new reactors under construction in the US, has been delayed yet again, this time for...

In this first part of holiday special, MacroVoices welcomes nuclear engineer Mark Nelson to the show to discuss all things nuclear. Erik and Mark start with a brief history of the industry, then talk about both real and perceived problems with nuclear power, before moving on to discuss advanced nuclear technologies including small modular nuclear reactors, molten salt cooled reactors and Thorium-fuelled nuclear reactors. https://bit.ly/3Wg3q2J   Radiant Energy Group  Kirk Sorensen: Thorium, an alternative nuclear fuel  Mothers for Nuclear  Clean Core Thorium Energy  Worlds Nuclear Association Library  What Is Nuclear Energy? - Nick Touran  The Story of Storage (Mark Nelson Masterclass) - Decouple Podcast  Something's Rotten with French Nuclear- Decouple Podcast  The Russian Atom feat. Mark Nelson- Decouple Podcast  What Went Wrong at Vogtle? feat. Mark Nelson - Decouple Podcast  A Hard Landing for Soft Energy - Decouple Podcast  On the use and abuse of LCOE - Decouple Podcast  Dutch Waste Facility  Thread on Nuclear Waste  Thread on Dutch Waste Facility    Please visit our website https://www.macrovoices.com to register your free account to gain access to supporting materials    

October saw the big news that a strategic partnership of Cameco Corporation and Brookfield Renewable Partners is to acquire Westinghouse Electric Company for a total enterprise value of approximately USD8 billion.  Brookfield Renewable, together with its institutional partners, will own a 51% interest in Westinghouse and Cameco will own 49%. Closing of the transaction is expected in the second half of 2023, subject to certain conditions, including approval from Brookfield Business Partners unit holders and regulatory approvals. So who better to explain the thinking behind the deal than Cameco President and CEO Tim Gitzel, who says why he thinks the timing is right for the deal and how it fits into what he sees as the future growth of the global nuclear energy sector.   He also outlines the current state and outlook for the uranium/fuel business,  reflects on the impact of the Russian war with Ukraine on the global nuclear industry and says that with new technological developments nuclear has an increasingly crucial role to play in efforts to combat climate change. In the news round-up for the month Claire Maden covers the start of fuel loading at Vogtle 3, the USA's first completely new nuclear unit for more than three decades, while Warwick Pipe outlines the latest state of play in Germany and the decision to rethink the end of year shutdown plans for its final nuclear power plants. We also hear what Greta Thunberg and Bill Gates have been saying about nuclear energy.Key links to find out more:World Nuclear NewsCamecoClosing nuclear in Germany while increasing coal 'a mistake', says Greta ThunbergIAEA interview with Bill GatesPandora's Promise, official websiteEmail newsletter:Sign up to the World Nuclear News daily or weekly news round-upsContact info:alex.hunt@world-nuclear.orgEpisode credit:  Presenter Alex Hunt. Co-produced and mixed by Pixelkisser Production

Georgia Power settles cost dispute with Vogtle co-owner; Lane closures on I-285 to stymie traffic for at least 8 months; Kemp extends gas tax break until after November election; Georgia election heads survived 2020; now they're bracing for this year

Georgia Power settles cost dispute with Vogtle co-owner; Lane closures on I-285 to stymie traffic for at least 8 months; Kemp extends gas tax break until after November election; Georgia election heads survived 2020; now they're bracing for this year

Podcast: The Lunar Society (LS 30 · TOP 5% )Episode: Austin Vernon - Energy Superabundance, Starship Missiles, & Finding AlphaRelease date: 2022-09-08Austin Vernon is an engineer working on a new method for carbon capture, and he has one of the most interesting blogs on the internet, where he writes about engineering, software, economics, and investing.We discuss how energy superabundance will change the world, how Starship can be turned into a kinetic weapon, why nuclear is overrated, blockchains, batteries, flying cars, finding alpha, & much more!Watch on YouTube. Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or any other podcast platform. Read the full transcript here.Subscribe to find out about future episodes!Follow Austin on Twitter. Follow me on Twitter for updates on future episodes.Please share if you enjoyed this episode! Helps out a ton!Timestamps(0:00:00) - Intro(0:01:53) - Starship as a Weapon(0:19:24) - Software Productivity(0:41:40) - Car Manufacturing(0:57:39) - Carbon Capture(1:16:53) - Energy Superabundance(1:25:09) - Storage for Cheap Energy(1:31:25) - Travel in Future(1:33:27) - Future Cities(1:39:58) - Flying Cars(1:43:26) - Carbon Shortage(1:48:03) - Nuclear(2:12:44) - Solar(2:14:44) - Alpha & Efficient Markets(2:22:51) - ConclusionTranscriptIntroDwarkesh Patel (00:00:00):Okay! Today, I have the pleasure of interviewing Austin Vernon who writes about engineering, software, economics, and investing on the internet, though not that much else is known about him. So Austin, do you want to give us a bit of info about your background? I know that the only thing the internet knows about you is this one little JPEG that you had to upload with your recent paper. But what about an identity reveal or I guess a little bit of a background reveal? Just to the extent that you're comfortable sharing.Austin Vernon (00:00:29):My degree is in chemical engineering and I've had a lifelong love for engineering as well as things like the Toyota Production System. I've also worked as a chemical engineer in a large processing facility where I've done a lot of petroleum engineering. I taught myself how to write software and now I'm working on more research and the early commercialization of CO2 electrolysis.Dwarkesh Patel (00:00:59):Okay yeah. I'm really interested in talking about all those things. The first question I have is from Alex Berger, who's the co-CEO of Open Philanthropy. When I asked on Twitter what I should ask you, he suggested that I should ask “Why so shady?” Famously you have kind of an anonymous personality, pseudonymous thing going on the internet. What's up with that?Austin Vernon (00:01:25):Yeah. I think he posted a tweet that said “I don't know who this guy is or if he's credible at all, but his stuff sure is interesting”. That really made me laugh. I thought that was hilarious. Fame just doesn't seem necessary, I think I'm fine with my ideas being well known and communicating, but I have less desire to be personally famous.Starship as a WeaponDwarkesh Patel (00:01:52):Gotcha, gotcha. I wanted to start off with a sexy topic, let's talk about using Starship as a kinetic weapon. I thought that was one of the more amusing posts you wrote. Do you want to talk more about how this would be possible?Austin Vernon (00:02:08):Well, I think the main thing with Starship is that you're taking a technology and you're making it about 100 times cheaper for cargo and 1000 times cheaper for people. When things like that happen that drastically, you're just looking at huge changes and it's really hard to anticipate what some of those can be when the change is that drastic. I think there's a lot of moon-based, Mars-based stuff that doesn't really catch the general public's eye. They also have trouble imagining some of the point-to-point travel that could be possible. But when you start talking about it as a weapon, then I think it lets people know they should be paying attention to this technology. And we certainly do not want to be second or third getting it. We should make sure that we're going to be first.Dwarkesh Patel (00:03:05):Yeah. I think you mentioned this in the post, but as recently as the '90s, the cost of sending one kilogram to space was around $20,000. More recently, SpaceX has brought it to $2,000. Lots of interesting questions pop up when you ask, “What will be possible once we get it down to $200 per kilogram to send into orbit?” One of them could be about how we might manufacture these weapons that are not conventional ballistics. Do you want to talk about why this might be an advancement over conventional ballistic weapons?Austin Vernon (00:03:37):Well, regular conventional ballistic weapons are extremely expensive. This is more like a bomb truck. But usually we think of B52 as the bomb truck and this could be even cheaper than the B52, delivering just mass on target. When you think about how expensive it is to fly a B52 from Barksdale in Louisiana all the way across the world.. you can do it from south Texas or Florida with the Starship and get more emissions per day and the fuel ends up being. When you go orbital, it takes a lot to get to orbit. But then once you're in orbit, your fuel consumption's pretty good. So over long distances, it has a lot of advantage. That's why the point-to-point works for longer distances.Austin Vernon (00:04:27):There's really a sweet spot with these weapons where you want it to be pretty accurate, but you also want it to be cheap. You're seeing that problem with Russia right now as they have some fancy parade style weapons that are really expensive, like multi-billion dollar cruise missiles, but they're missing that $5,000 guided artillery shell or that $20,000 JDM that you can just pit massive. Or the multiple launch rocket system, guided rockets. They're really short on all those because I think they had just had a limited amount of chips they could get from the US into Russia to make these advanced weapons.Austin Vernon (00:05:07):But yeah, so the Starship gives you just a platform to deliver. You could put JDMs in a shroud, or you could just have the iron unguided kinetic projectiles, and it just becomes impossible for a ship to launch missiles to intercept yours if your cost is so low, you can just overwhelm them.Dwarkesh Patel (00:05:29):Okay. There are a few terms there that neither I nor the audience might know. So what is JDM? What is shroud? And why are chips a bottleneck here? Why can't it just be any micro-controller?Austin Vernon (00:05:42):So JDM is Joint Direct Attack Munition. So what we did is we took all our Vietnam surplus bonds and we put this little fin-kit on it and it costs like $20,000, which is cheap for a weapon because the actual bond costs, I don't know, $3,000. And then it turns it into a guided weapon that, before you were probably lucky to get within 500 meters of a target, now you can get it in with two meters. So the number of missions you have to do with your planes and all that goes down by orders of magnitude. So it's an absolutely huge advantage in logistics and in just how much firepower you can put on a target. And we didn't even have to make new bombs, we just put these kits on all our old bombs.Austin Vernon (00:06:33):Let's see.. Yeah the chips are a problem. There's this organization called RUSI. I think they're in the UK, but they've been tearing down all these Russian weapons they found in Ukraine and they all have American chips in them. So technically, they're not supposed to be able to get these chips. And yet, Russia can't make a lot of its own chips. And especially not the specialized kinds you might want for guided weapons. So they've been somehow smuggling in chips from Americans to make their advanced weaponsDwarkesh Patel (00:07:03):What is special about these? As far as I'm aware, the trade with China is still going on and we get a lot of our chips manufactured from Taiwan or China. So why can't they do the same?Austin Vernon (00:07:14):It's the whole integration. It's not just the specific chip, but the board. They're more like PLCs where you almost have wired-in programming and they come with this ability to do the guidance and all that stuff. It all kind of has to work together. I think that's the way I understand it. I don't know. Maybe I don't have a really good answer for that one, but they're hard to replicate is what matters.Dwarkesh Patel (00:07:43):Okay that's interesting. Yeah, I guess that has a lot of interesting downstream effects, because for example, India buys a lot of its weapons from Russia. So if Russia doesn't have access to these, then other countries that buy from Russia won't have access to these either.Dwarkesh Patel (00:07:58):You had an interesting speculation in the post where you suggested that you could just keep these kinetic weapons in orbit, in a sort of Damocles state really, almost literally. That sounds like an incredibly scary and risky scenario where you could have orbital decay and you could have these kinetic weapons falling from the sky and destroying cities. Do you think this is what it will look like or could look like in 10 to 20 years?Austin Vernon (00:08:26):Well, yeah, so the advantage of having weapons on orbit is you can hit targets faster. So if you're launching the rocket from Florida, you're looking at maybe 30 minutes to get there and the target can move away in that time. Whereas if you're on orbit, you can have them spaced out to where you're hitting within a few minutes. So that's the advantage there.Austin Vernon (00:08:46):You really have to have a two stage system I think for most, because if you have a really aerodynamic rod that's going to give you really good performance in the low atmosphere, it'll end up going too fast and just burn up before it gets there. Tungsten's maybe the only thing that you could have that could go all the way through which is why I like the original concept of using these big tungsten rods the size of a telephone pole. But tungsten's pretty expensive. And the rod concept kind of limits what you can do.Austin Vernon (00:09:28):So a lot of these weapons will have, that's what I was talking about with the shroud, something that actually slows you down in the upper atmosphere. And then once you're at the velocity where you're not just going to melt, then you open it up and let it go. So if you actually had it fall from the sky, some may make it to the ground, but a lot would burn up. So a lot of the stuff that makes it to the ground is actually pretty light. It's stuff that can float and has a large surface area. Yeah, that's the whole thing with Starship. Or not Starship, but Starlink. All those satellites are meant to completely fall apart on de-orbit.Dwarkesh Patel (00:10:09):I see. One of the implications of that is that these may be less powerful than we might fear, because since kinetic energy is mass times velocity squared and there's an upper bound on the velocity (velocity being the component that grows the kinetic energy faster), then it suggests that you can upper bound the power these things will have. You know what I mean?Austin Vernon (00:10:32):Yeah, so even the tungsten rods. Sometimes people, they're not very good at physics, so they don't do the math. They think it's going to be a nuclear weapon, but it's really not. I think even the tungsten rod is like 10 tons of T&T or something. It's a big bomb, but it's not a super weapon.Austin Vernon (00:10:54):So I think I said in the post, it's about using advanced missiles where they're almost more defensive weapons so I can keep you from pitting your ship somewhere. Yeah I could try to bombard your cities, but I can't take ground with it. I can't even police sea lanes with it really. I'd still have to use regular ships if I had this air cover to go enforce the rules of the sea and stuff like that.Dwarkesh Patel (00:11:23):Yeah. You speculated in the post, I think, that you could load this up with shrapnel and then it could explode next to an incoming missile or an incoming aircraft. Could these get that accurate? Because that was surprising speculation to me.Austin Vernon (00:11:43):I think for ships, it's pretty... I was watching videos of how fast a ship can turn and stuff. If you're going to do an initial target on a ship to try to kill their radars, you'd want to do it above the ceiling of their missiles. So it's like, how much are they going to move between your release where you stop steering and that? The answer's maybe 1000 feet. So that's pretty simple because you just shrapnel the area.Austin Vernon (00:12:12):Targeting aircraft, you would be steering all the way in. I'd say it's doable, but it'd be pretty hard. You'd actually maybe want to even go slower than you would with the ship attack. You'd need a specialized package to attack the aircraft, but if you have enough synthetic aperture radar and stuff like that, you could see these aircraft using satellites and then guide the bomb in the whole way. You could even load heat seeking missiles into a package that unfurls right next to them and launch conventional missiles too, probably. It'd be pretty hard to do some of this stuff, but they're just the things you might be able to do if you put some effort into it.Dwarkesh Patel (00:12:57):Yeah. The reason I find this kind of speculation really interesting is because when you look at the modern weaponry that's used in conflicts, it just seems directly descendant from something you would've seen in World War II or something. If you think about how much warfare changed between 1900 and 1940, it's like, yeah, they're not even the same class of weapons anymore. So it's interesting to think about possibilities like these where the entire category of weapons has changed.Austin Vernon (00:13:33):You're right and that's because our physical technology hasn't changed that much. So it really has just made more sense to put better electronics in the same tanks. We haven't learned enough about tanks to build a new physical tank that's way better, so we just keep upgrading our existing tanks with better electronics. They're much more powerful, they're more accurate. A lot of times, they have longer range weapons and better sensors. So the tank looks the same, but it maybe has several times more killing power. But the Ukraine war right now, they're using a lot of 40, 50 year old weapons so that especially looks like that.Dwarkesh Patel (00:14:20):Yeah. Which kind of worries you if you think about the stockpiles our own military has. I'm not well educated on the topic, but I imagine that we don't have the newest of the new thing. We probably have maintained versions of decades old technology.Austin Vernon (00:14:35):We spend so much, we've got relatively... This kind of gets into debate about how ready our military is. For certain situations, it's more ready than others. I'd say in general, most people talking about it have the incentive to downplay our capabilities because they want more defense spending. There's lots of reasons. So I think we're probably more capable than what you might see from some editorial in The Hill or whatever. Us just sending a few weapons over to Ukraine and seeing how successful they've been at using them, I think, shows a little bit of that.Austin Vernon (00:15:18):There's so much uncertainty when it comes to fighting, especially when you're talking about a naval engagement, where we don't just don't have that many ships in general… you can have some bad luck. So I think you always want to be a little bit wary. You don't want to get overconfident.Dwarkesh Patel (00:15:37):Yeah. And if the offensive tech we sent to Ukraine is potentially better than the defensive tech, it's very possible that even a ballistic missile that China or Russia could launch would sink a battleship and then kill the 2,000 or 1,000 whatever soldiers that are on board. Or I guess, I don't know, you think this opens up avenues for defensive tech as well?Austin Vernon (00:16:03):Yeah––generally the consensus is that defensive technology has improved much more recently than offensive technology. This whole strategy China has is something they call anti-access/area denial, A2/AD. That's basically just how missiles have gotten better because the sensors on missiles have gotten better. So they can keep our ships from getting close to them but they can't really challenge us in Hawaii or something. And it really goes both ways, I think people forget that. So yeah, it's hard for us to get close to China, but Taiwan has a lot of missiles with these new sensors as well. So I think it's probably tougher for China to do it close to Taiwan than most people would say.Dwarkesh Patel (00:16:55):Oh, interesting. Yeah, can you talk more about that? Because every time I read about this, people are saying that if China wanted to, they could knock out Taiwan's defenses in a short amount of time and take it over. Yeah, so can you talk about why that's not possible?Austin Vernon (00:17:10):Well, it might be, but I think it's a guess of the uncertainty [inaudible 00:17:14]. Taiwan has actually one of the largest defense budgets in the world and they've recently been upping it. I think they spend, I don't know, $25 billion a year and they added an extra $5 billion. And they've been buying a lot of anti-ship missiles, a lot of air defense missiles.. Stuff that Ukraine could only dream of. I think Ukraine's military budget was $2 billion and they have a professional army. And then the other thing is Taiwan's an island, whereas Russia could just roll over the land border into Ukraine.Austin Vernon (00:17:44):There's just been very few successful amphibious landings in history. The most recent ones were all the Americans in World War II and Korea. So the challenge there is just... It's kind of on China to execute perfectly and do that. So if they had perfect execution, then possibly it would be feasible. But if their air defenses on their ships aren't quite as good as we think they could possibly be, then they could also end up with half their fleet underwater within 10 hours.Dwarkesh Patel (00:18:20):Interesting. And how has your view of Taiwan's defensive capabilities changed... How has the Ukraine conflict updated your opinion on what might happen?Austin Vernon (00:18:29):I didn't really know how much about it. And then I started looking at Wikipedia and stuff and all this stuff they're doing. Taiwan just has a lot of modern platforms like F16s with our anti-ship missiles. They actually have a lot of their own. They have indigenous fighter bombers, indigenous anti-ship missiles because they're worried we might not always sell them to them.Austin Vernon (00:18:54):They've even recently gotten these long range cruise missiles that could possibly target leadership in Beijing. So I think that makes it uncomfortable for the Chinese leadership. If you attack them, you're going to have to go live in a bunker. But again, I'm not a full-time military analyst or something, so there's a lot of uncertainty around what I'm saying. It's not a given that China's just going to roll over them.Software ProductivityDwarkesh Patel (00:19:22):Okay. That's comforting to hear. Let's talk about an area where I have a little bit of a point of contact. I thought your blog post about software and the inability of it to increase productivity numbers, I thought that was super fascinating. So before I ask you questions about it, do you want to lay out the thesis there?Austin Vernon (00:19:43):Yeah. So if there's one post I kind of felt like I caught lightning in a bottle on, it's that one. Everything I wanted to put in, it just fit together perfectly, which is usually not the case.Austin Vernon (00:19:55):I think the idea is that the world's so complex and we really underestimate that complexity. If you're going to digitize processes and automate them and stuff, you have to capture all that complexity basically at the bit level, and that's extremely difficult. And then you also have diminishing returns where the easily automatable stuff goes first and then it's increasing corner cases to get to the end, so you just have to go through more and more code basically. We don't see runaway productivity growth from software because we're fighting all this increasing complexity.Dwarkesh Patel (00:20:39):Yeah. Have you heard of the waterbed theory of complexity by the way?Austin Vernon (00:20:42):I don't think so.Dwarkesh Patel (00:20:44):Okay. It's something that comes up in compiler design: the idea is that there's a fixed amount of complexity in a system. If you try to reduce it, what you'll end up doing is just you'll end up migrating the complexity elsewhere. I think an example that's used of this is when they try to program languages that are not type safe, something like Python. You can say, “oh, it's a less complex language”, but really, you've added complexity when, I don't know, two different types of numbers are interacting like a float and an int. As your program grows, that complexity exponentially grows along with all the things that could go wrong when you're making two things interact in a way that you were expecting not to. So yeah, the idea is you can just choose where to have your complexity, but you can't get rid of that complexity.Austin Vernon (00:21:38):I think that's kind of an interesting thing when you start pairing it with management theory... when you add up all the factors, the most complex thing you're doing is high volume car manufacturing. And so we got a lot of innovations and organization from car manufacturers like the assembly line. Then you had Sloan at GM basically creating the way the modern corporation is run, then you have the Toyota Production System.Austin Vernon (00:22:11):But arguably now, creating software is actually the most complex thing we do. So there's all these kinds of squishy concepts that underlie things like the Toyota Production System that softwares had to learn and reimagine and adopt and you see that with Agile where, “oh, we can't have long release times. We need to be releasing every day,” which means we're limiting inventory there.Austin Vernon (00:22:42):There's a whole thing especially that's showing up in software that existed in carbon manufacturing where you're talking about reducing communication. So Jeff Bezos kind of now famously said, "I want to reduce communication," which is counterintuitive to a lot of people. This is age-old in car manufacturing where Toyota has these cards that go between workstations and they tell you what to do. So people normally think of them as limiting inventory, but it also tells the worker exactly what they're supposed to be doing at what pace, at what time. The assembly line is like that too. You just know what to do because you're standing there and there's a part here and it needs to go on there, and it comes by at the pace you're supposed to work at.Austin Vernon (00:23:29):It's so extreme that there's this famous paper, by List, Syverson and Levitt. They went to a car factory and studied how defects propagated in cars and stuff. Once a car factory gets up and running, it doesn't matter what workers you put in there, if workers are sick or you get new workers, the defect rate is the same. So all the knowledge is built into the manufacturing line.Austin Vernon (00:23:59):There's these concepts around idiot-proofing and everything that are very similar to what you'll see. You had Uncle Bob on here. So Uncle Bob says only put one input into a function and stuff like that because you'll mix them up otherwise. The Japanese call it poka-yoke. You make it where you can't mess it up. And that's another way to reduce communication, and then software, of course you have APIs.Austin Vernon (00:24:28):So I'm really interested in this overall concept of reducing communication, and reducing how much cooperation and everything we need to run the economy.Dwarkesh Patel (00:24:41):Right. Right. Speaking of the Toyota Production System, one thing they do to reduce that defect rate is if there's a problem, all the workers in that chain are forced to go to the place where the defect problem is and fix it before doing anything else. The idea there is that this will give them context to understand what the problem was and how to make sure it doesn't happen again. It also prevents a build up of inventory in a way that keeps making these defects happen or just keeps accumulating inventory before the place that can fix the defects is able to take care of them.Austin Vernon (00:25:17):Right. Yeah, yeah. Exactly.Dwarkesh Patel (00:25:19):Yeah. But I think one interesting thing about software and complexity is that software is a place where complexity is the highest in our world right now but software gives you the choice to interface with the complexity you want to interface with. I guess that's just part of specialization in general, but you could say for example that a machine learning model is really complex, but ideally, you get to a place where that's the only kind of complexity you have to deal with. You're not having to deal with the complexity of “How is this program compiled? How are the libraries that I'm using? How are they built?” You can fine tune and work on the complexity you need to work on.Dwarkesh Patel (00:26:05):It's similar to app development. Byrne Hobart has this blog post about Stripe as solid state. The basic idea is that Stripe hides all the complexity of the financial system: it charges a higher fee, but you can just treat it as an abstraction of a tithe you have to pay, and it'll just take care of that entire process so you can focus on your comparative advantage.Austin Vernon (00:26:29):It's really actually very similar in car manufacturing and the Toyota Production System if you really get into it. It's very much the same conceptual framework. There's this whole idea in Toyota Production System, everyone works at the same pace, which you kind of talked about. But also, your work content is the same. There's no room for not standardizing a way you're going to do things. So everyone gets together and they're like, “All right, we're going to do this certain part. We're going to put it together this certain way at this little micro station. And it's going to be the same way every time.” That's part of how they're reducing the defect rates. If your assembly process is longer than what your time allotment is to stay in touch with the rest of the process, then you just keep breaking it down into smaller pieces. So through this, each person only has to know a very small part of it.Austin Vernon (00:27:33):The overall engineering team has all sorts of strategies and all sorts of tools to help them break up all these processes into very small parts and make it all hold together. It's still very, very hard, but it's kind of a lot of the same ideas because you're taking away the complexity of making a $30,000 car or 30,000 part car where everyone's just focusing on their one little part and they don't care what someone else is doing.Dwarkesh Patel (00:28:06):Yeah. But the interesting thing is that it seems like you need one person who knows how everything fits together. Because from what I remember, one of the tenets of the Toyota Production System was you need to have a global view. So, in that book, was it the machine or the other one, the Toyota Production System book? But anyways, they were talking about examples where people would try to optimize for local efficiencies. I think they especially pointed to Ford and GM for trying to do this where they would try to make machines run all the time. And locally, you could say that, “oh this machine or process is super efficient. It's always outputting stuff.” But it ignores how that added inventory or that process had a bad consequence for the whole system.Dwarkesh Patel (00:28:50):And so it's interesting if you look at a company like Tesla that's able to do this really well. Tesla is run like a monarchy and this one guy has this total global view of how the entire process is supposed to run and where you have these inefficiencies.. You had some great examples of this in the blog post. I think one of the examples is this guy (the author) goes to this factory and he asks, "Is this an efficient factory?" And the guy's like, "Yeah, this is totally efficient. There's nothing we can do, adopting the Toyota way, to make this more efficient."Dwarkesh Patel (00:29:22):And so then he's like, "Okay, let me look." And he finds that they're treating steel in some way, and the main process does only take a couple of seconds, but some local manager decided that it would be more efficient to ship their parts out, to get the next stage of the process done somewhere else. So this is locally cheaper, but the result is that it takes weeks to get these parts shipped out and get them back. Which means that the actual time that the parts spend getting processed is 0.1% of the time, making the whole process super inefficient. So I don't know, it seems like the implication is you need a very monarchical structure, with one person who has a total view, in order to run such a system. Or am I getting that wrong?Austin Vernon (00:30:12):Not necessarily. I mean, you do have to make sure you're not optimizing locally, but I think it's the same. You have that same constraint in software, but I think a lot of times people are just running over it because processing has been getting so much cheaper. People are expensive, so if you could save development time, it just ends up the trade offs are different when you're talking about the tyranny of physical items and stuff like that, the constraints get a little more severe. But I think you have the same overall. You still have to fight local optimization, but the level you have to is probably different with physical goods.Austin Vernon (00:30:55):I was thinking about the smart grid situation from a software perspective, and there's this problem where, okay, I'm putting my solar farm here and it's impacting somewhere far away, and that's then creating these really high upgrade costs, that cost two or three times more than my solar farm. Well, the obvious thing would be, if you're doing software, is like you're going to break all these up into smaller sections, and then you wouldn't be impacting each other and all that, and you could work and focus on your own little thing.Austin Vernon (00:31:29):But the problem with that is if you're going to disconnect these areas of the grid, the equipment to do that is extremely expensive. It's not like I'm just going to hit a new tab and open a new file and start writing a new function. And not only that, but you still have to actually coordinate how this equipment is going to operate. So if you just let the grid flow as it does, everyone knows what's going to happen because they could just calculate the physics. If you start adding in all these checkpoints where humans are doing stuff, then you have to actually interface with the humans, and the amount of things that can happen really starts going up. So it's actually a really bad idea to try to cart all this stuff off, just because of the reality of the physical laws and the equipment you need and everything like that.Dwarkesh Patel (00:32:22):Okay. Interesting. And then I think you have a similar Coasean argument in your software post about why vertically integrating software is beneficial. Do you want to explain that thesis?Austin Vernon (00:32:34):Yeah. I think it actually gets to what we're talking about here, where it allows you to avoid the local optimization. Because a lot of times you're trying to build a software MVP, and you're tying together a few services… they don't do quite what you need, so if you try to scale that, it would just break. But if you're going to take a really complex process, like car manufacturing or retail distribution, or the home buying process or something, you really have to vertically integrate it to be able to create a decent end-to-end experience and avoid that local optimization.Austin Vernon (00:33:20):And it's just very hard otherwise, because you just can't coordinate effectively if you have 10 different vendors trying to do all the same thing. You end up in just constant vendor meetings, where you're trying to decide what the specs are or something instead of giving someone the authority, or giving a team the authority to just start building stuff. Then if you look at these companies, they have to implement these somewhat decentralized processes when they get too complex, but at least they have control over how they're interfacing with each other. Walmart, as the vendors, control their own stock. They don't tell the vendor, "We need X parts." It's just like, it's on you to make sure your shelf is stocked.Dwarkesh Patel (00:34:07):Yeah. Yeah. So what was really interesting to me about this part of the post was, I don't know, I guess I had heard of this vision of we're software setting, where everybody will have a software as a service company, and they'll all be interfacing with each other in some sort of cycle where they're all just calling each other's APIs. And yeah, basically everybody and their mother would have a SAAS company. The implication here was, from your argument, that given the necessity of integrating all those complexity vertically in a coherent way, then the winners in software should end up being a few big companies, right? They compete with each other, but still...Austin Vernon (00:34:49):I think that's especially true when you're talking about combining bits and apps. Maybe less true for pure software. The physical world is just so much more complex, and so the constraints it creates are pretty extreme, compared to like... you could maybe get away with more of everyone and their mom having an API in a pure software world.Dwarkesh Patel (00:35:14):Right. Yeah. I guess, you might think that even in the physical world, given that people really need to focus on their comparative advantage, they would just try to outsource the software parts to these APIs. But is there any scenario where the learning curve for people who are not in the firm can be fast enough that they can keep up with the complexity? Because there's huge gains for specialization and competition that go away if this is the world we're forced to live in. And then I guess we have a lot of counter examples, or I guess we have a lot of examples of what you're talking about. Like Apple is the biggest market cap in the world, right? And famously they're super vertically integrated. And yeah, obviously their thing is combining hardware and software. But yeah, is there any world in which it can keep that kind of benefit, but have it be within multiple firms?Austin Vernon (00:36:10):This is a post I've got on my list I want to write. The blockchain application, which excites me personally the most, is reimagining enterprise software. Because the things you're talking about, like hard typing and APIs are just basically built into some of these protocols. So I think it just really has a lot of exciting implications for how much you can decentralize software development. But the thing is, you can still do that within the firm. So I think I mentioned this, if the government's going to place all these rules on the edge of the firm, it makes transactions with other firms expensive. So a few internal transactions can be cheaper, because they're avoiding the government reporting and taxes and all that kind of stuff. So I think you'd have to think about how these technologies can reduce transaction costs overall and decentralize that, but also what are the costs between firms?Dwarkesh Patel (00:37:22):Yeah, it's really interesting if the costs are logistic, or if they're based on the knowledge that is housed, as you were talking about, within a factory or something. Because if it is just logistical and stuff, like you had to report any outside transactions, then it does imply that those technology blockchain could help. But if it is just that you need to be in the same office, and if you're not, then you're going to have a hard time keeping up with what the new requirements for the API are, then maybe it's that, yeah, maybe the inevitability is that you'll have these big firms that are able to vertically integrate.Austin Vernon (00:37:59):Yeah, for these big firms to survive, they have to be somewhat decentralized within them. So I think you have... you're going to the same place as just how are we viewing it, what's our perception? So even if it's a giant corporation, it's going to have very independent business units as opposed to something like a 1950s corporation.Dwarkesh Patel (00:38:29):Yeah. Byrne Hobart, by the way, has this really interesting post that you might enjoy reading while you're writing that post. It's type safe communications, and it's about that Bezos thing, about his strict style for how to communicate and how little to communicate. There's many examples in Amazon protocols where you have to... the only way you can put in this report, is in this place you had to give a number. You can't just say, "This is very likely," you had to say like, "We project X percent increase," or whatever. So it has to be a percent. And there's many other cases where they're strict about what type definition you can have in written reports or something. It has kind of the same consequence that type strict languages have, which is that you can keep track of what the value is through the entire chain of the flow of control.Austin Vernon (00:39:22):You've got to keep work content standardized.Dwarkesh Patel (00:39:26):So we've been hinting at the Coasean analysis to this. I think we just talked about it indirectly, but for the people who might not know, Coase has this paper called The Theory of Firms, and he's trying to explain why we have firms at all. Why not just have everybody compete in the open market for employment, for anything? Why do we have jobs? Why not just have... you can just hire a secretary by the day or something.Dwarkesh Patel (00:39:51):And the conclusion he comes to is that by having a firm you're reducing the transaction cost. So people will have the same knowledge about what needs to get done, obviously you're reducing the transaction cost of contracting, finding labor, blah, blah, blah. And so the conclusion it comes to is the more the transaction costs are reduced within people in a firm, as compared to the transaction cost between different firms, the bigger firms will get. So I guess that's why the implication of your argument was that there should be bigger tech firms, right?Austin Vernon (00:40:27):Yes, yes, definitely. Because they can basically decrease the transaction costs faster within, and then even at the limit, if you have large transaction costs outside the firm, between other firms that are artificially imposed, then it will make firms bigger.Dwarkesh Patel (00:40:45):What does the world look like in that scenario? So would it just be these Japanese companies, these huge conglomerates who are just... you rise through the ranks, from the age of 20 until you die? Is that what software will turn into?Austin Vernon (00:40:59):It could be. I mean, I think it will be lots of very large companies, unless there's some kind of change in inner firm transaction costs. And again, that could possibly come from blockchain like technology, but you probably also need better regulation to make that cheaper, and then you would have smaller firms. But again, in the end, it doesn't really matter. You'd be working in your little unit of the big bank of corporate, or whatever. So I don't know what that would look like on a personal level.Car ManufacturingDwarkesh Patel (00:41:40):Yeah. Okay. So speaking of these Japanese companies, let's talk about car manufacturing and everything involved there. Yeah, so we kind of hinted at a few elements of the Toyota way and production earlier, but do you want to give a brief overview of what that is, so we can compare it to potentially other systems?Austin Vernon (00:42:02):I think all these kinds of lean Toyota process systems, they do have a lot of similarities, where mostly you want to even-out your production, so you're producing very consistently, and you want to break it into small steps and you want to limit the amount of inventory you have in your system. When you do this, it makes it easy to see how the process is running and limit defects. And the ultimate is you're really trying to reduce defects, because they're very expensive. It's a little bit hard to summarize. I think that's my best shot at it there, quickly off the top of my head.Dwarkesh Patel (00:42:49):Yeah. The interesting thing about the Toyota system, so at least when the machine was released, is they talk about... that book was released I think the nineties, and they went to the history of Toyota, and one of the interesting things they talked about was there was a brief time where the company ran... I think, was this after World War II? But anyways, the company ran into some troubles. They needed to layoff people to not go bankrupt. They had much more debt on books than they had assets. So yeah, they wanted to layoff people, but obviously the people were not happy about this, so there were violent protests about this. And in fact I think the US written constitution gave strong protections to labor that they hadn't had before, which gave labor an even stronger hand here.Dwarkesh Patel (00:43:42):So anyway, Toyota came to this agreement with the unions that they'd be allowed to do this one time layoff to get the company on the right track, but afterwards they could never lay somebody off. Which would mean that a person who works at Toyota works there from the time they graduate college or high school till they die. Right? I don't know, that's super intense in a culture. I mean, in software, where you have the average tenure in a company's one year, the difference is so much.Dwarkesh Patel (00:44:13):And there's so many potential benefits here, I guess a lot of drawbacks too. But one is, obviously if you're talking in a time scale of 50 years, rather than one year, the incentives are more aligned between the company and the person. Because anything you could do in one year is not going to have a huge impact on your stock options in that amount of time. But if this company's your retirement plan, then you have a much stronger incentive to make sure that things at this company run well, which means you're probably optimizing for the company's long term cash flow yourself. And also, there's obviously benefits to having that knowledge built up in the firm from people who have been there for a long time. But yeah, that was an interesting difference. One of the interesting differences, at least.Austin Vernon (00:45:00):I mean, I think there's diminishing returns to how long your tenure's going to be. Maybe one year's too short, but there's a certain extent to where, if you grow faster than your role at the company, then it's time to switch. It's going to depend on the person, but maybe five years is a good number. And so if you're not getting promoted within the firm, then your human capital's being wasted, because you could go somewhere else and have more responsibility and perform better for them. Another interesting thing about that story, is almost all lean turnarounds, where they're like, we're going to implement something like Toyota production system, they come with no layoff promises. Because if you're going to increase productivity, that's when everyone's like, "Oh gosh, I'm going to get laid off." So instead you have to increase output and take more market share, is what you do.Dwarkesh Patel (00:46:00):It's kind of like burning your bridges, right? So this is the only way.Austin Vernon (00:46:05):The process really requires complete buy-in, because a lot of your ideas for how you're going to standardize work content come from your line workers, because that's what they're doing every day. So if you don't have their buy-in, then it's going to fail. So that's why it's really necessary to have those kinds of clauses.Dwarkesh Patel (00:46:22):Yeah. Yeah, that makes sense. I think it was in your post where you said, if somebody makes their process more efficient, and therefore they're getting more work allotted to them, then obviously they're going to stop doing that. Right? Which means that, I don't know, do you ought to give more downtime to your best workers or something or the people who are most creative in your company?Austin Vernon (00:46:48):I was just going to say, if you're a worker at a plant, then a lot of times for that level of employee, actually small rewards work pretty well. A lot of people on drilling rigs used to give the guys that met certain targets $100 Walmart gift cards. So sometimes small, it's a reward, new ideas, stuff like that works.Austin Vernon (00:47:15):But because the whole system has to grow together, if you just improve one part of the process, it may not help you. You have to be improving all the right processes so normally it's much more collaborative. There's some engineer that's looking at it and like, "All right, this is where we're struggling," or "We have our defects here." And then you go get together with that supervisor and the workers in that area, then you all figure out what improvements could be together. Because usually the people already know. This is like, you see a problem at the top, and you're just now realizing it. Then you go talk to the people doing the work, and they're like, "Oh yeah, I tried to tell you about that two weeks ago, man." And then you figure out a better process from there.Dwarkesh Patel (00:47:58):Based on your recommendation, and Steven Malina's recommendation, I recently read The Goal. And after reading the book, I'm much more understanding of the value that consultants bring to companies, potentially. Because before you could think, “What does a 21 year old, who just graduated college, know about manufacturing? What are they going to tell this plant that they didn't already know? How could they possibly be adding value?” And afterwards, it occurred to me that there's so many abstract concepts that are necessary to understand in order to be able to increase your throughput. So now I guess I can see how somebody who's generically smart but doesn't have that much industry knowledge might be able to contribute to a plan and value consultants could be bringing.Austin Vernon (00:48:43):I think this applies to consultants or young engineers. A lot of times you put young engineers just right in the thick of it, working in production or process right on the line, where you're talking to the workers the most. And there's several advantages to that. One, the engineer learns faster, because they're actually seeing the real process, and the other is there's easy opportunities for them to still have a positive impact on the business, because there's $100 bills laying on the ground just from going up and talking to your workers and learning about stuff and figuring out problems they might be having and finding out things like that that could help you lower cost. I think there's a lot of consultants that... I don't know how the industry goes, but I would guess there's... I know Accenture has 600,000 employees. I don't know if that many, but it's just a large number, and a lot are doing more basic tasks and there are some people that are doing the more high level stuff, but it's probably a lot less.Dwarkesh Patel (00:49:51):Yeah. Yeah. There was a quote from one of those books that said, "At Toyota we don't consider you an engineer unless you need to wash your hands before you can have lunch." Yeah. Okay. So in your blog post about car manufacturing, you talk about Tesla. But what was really interesting is that in a footnote, I think you mentioned that you bought Tesla stocks in 2014, which also might be interesting to talk about again when we go to the market and alpha part. But anyways. Okay. And then you talk about Tesla using something called metal manufacturing. So first of all, how did you know in 2014 that Tesla was headed here? And what is metal manufacturing and how does it differ from the Toyota production system?Austin Vernon (00:50:42):Yeah. So yeah, I just was goofing around and made that up. Someone actually emailed me and they were like, "Hey, what is this metal manufacturing? I want to learn more about this." It's like, "Well, sorry, I just kind of made that up, because I thought it sounded funny." But yeah, I think it's really the idea that there's this guy, Dimming, and he found a lot of the same ideas that Toyota ended up implementing, and Toyota respected his ideas a lot. America never really got fully on board with this in manufacturing. Of course it's software people that are coming and implementing this and manufacturing now which is like the real American way of doing things.Austin Vernon (00:51:32):Because when you look at these manufacturing processes, the best place to save money and optimize is before you ever build the process or the plant. It's very early on. So I think if there's a criticism of Toyota, it's that they're optimizing too late and they're not creative enough in their production technology and stuff. They're very conservative, and that's why they have hydrogen cars and not battery cars, even though they came out with the Prius, which was the first large sales hybrid.Austin Vernon (00:52:12):So yeah, I think what Tesla's doing with really just making Dimming's ideas our own and really just Americanizing it with like, "Oh, well, we want to cast this, because that would be easier." Well, we can't, because we don't have an alloy. "We'll invent the alloy." I love it. It's great. Mostly, I love Tesla because they do such... I agree with their engineering principles. So I didn't know that the company would come to be so valuable. It's just, I was just always reading their stock reports and stuff so I was like, "Well, at least I need to buy some stock so that I have a justification for spending all this time reading their 10 Ks."Dwarkesh Patel (00:52:53):I want to get a little bit more in detail about the exact difference here. So lean production, I guess, is they're able to produce their cars without defects and with matching demand or whatever. But what is it about their system that prevents them from making the kinds of innovations that Tesla is able to make?Austin Vernon (00:53:16):It's just too incremental. It's so hard to get these processes working. So the faster you change things, it becomes very, very difficult to change the whole system. So one of the advantages Tesla has is, well, if you're making electric cars, you have just a lot less parts. So that makes it easier. And once you start doing the really hard work of basically digitizing stuff, like they don't have speed limit dials, you start just removing parts from the thing and you can actually then start increasing your rate of change even faster.Austin Vernon (00:53:55):It makes it harder to get behind if you have these old dinosaur processes. But I think there's a YouTube channel called The Limiting Factor, and he actually went into the detail of numbers on what it costs for Tesla to do their giga-casting, which saves tons of parts and deletes zillions of thousands of robots from their process. If you already have an existing stamping line and all that, where you're just changing the dyes based on your model, then it doesn't make sense to switch to the casting. But if you're building new factories, like Tesla is, well, then it makes sense to do the casting and you can build new factories very cheaply and comparatively and much easier. So there's a little bit of... they just have lots of technical data, I guess you could say, in a software sense.Dwarkesh Patel (00:54:47):Yeah. That's super interesting. The analogy is actually quite... it's like, Microsoft has probably tens of thousands of software engineers who are just basically servicing its technical debt and making sure that the old systems run properly, whereas a new company like Tesla doesn't have to deal with that. The thing that's super interesting about Tesla is like, Tesla's market cap is way over a trillion, right? And then Toyota's is 300 billion. And Tesla is such a new company. The fact that you have this Toyota, which is legendary for its production system, and this company that's less than two decades old is worth many times more, it's kind of funny.Austin Vernon (00:55:32):Yeah. I would say that, in that measure, I don't like market cap. You need to use enterprise value. These old car companies have so much debt, that if you look at enterprise value, it's not so jarring. Literally, I don't know, I can't remember what GM's worth, like 40 billion or something, and then they have $120 billion in debt. So their enterprise value is five times more than their market cap.Dwarkesh Patel (00:56:02):What is enterprise value?Austin Vernon (00:56:03):Enterprise value is basically what is the value of the actual company before you have any claims on it. It's the market cap plus your debt. But basically, if you're the equity holder and the company gets sold, you have to pay the debt first. So you only get the value of what's left over after the debt. So that's why market cap is... when Tesla has very little debt and a lot of market cap, and then these other guys have a lot of debt with less market cap, it skews the comparison.Dwarkesh Patel (00:56:34):Yeah, and one of the interesting things, it's similar to your post on software, is that it seems like one of the interesting themes across your work is automating processes often leads to decreased eventual throughput, because you're probably adding capacity in a place that you're deciding excess capacity, and you're also making the money part of your operation less efficient by have it interface with this automated part. It sounds like there's a similar story there with car manufacturing, right?Austin Vernon (00:57:08):Yeah. I think if we tie it back into what we were talking about earlier, automation promotes local optimization and premature optimization. So a lot of times it's better to figure out, instead of automating a process to make a really hard to make part, you should just figure out how to make that part easy to make. Then after you do that, then it may not even make sense to automate it anymore. Or get rid of it all together, then you just delete all those robots.Austin's Carbon Capture ProjectDwarkesh Patel (00:57:37):Yeah. Yeah, that's interesting. Okay. So let's talk about the project that you're working on right now, the CO2 electrolysis. Do you want to explain what this is, and what your current approach is? What is going on here?Austin Vernon (00:57:55):Yeah, so I think just overall, electrofuels right now are super underrated, because you're about to get hopefully some very cheap electricity from solar, or it could be, maybe, some land. If we get really lucky, possibly some nuclear, geothermal. It'll just make sense to create liquid fuels, or natural gas, or something just from electricity and air, essentially.Austin Vernon (00:58:25):There's a whole spectrum of ways to do this, so O2 electrolysis is one of those. Basically, you take water, electricity, and CO2, and a catalyst. And then, you make more complex molecules, like carbon monoxide, or formic acid, or ethylene, or ethanol, or methane or methine. Those are all options. But it's important to point out that, right now, I think if you added up all the CO2 electrolyzers in the world, you'd be measuring their output and kilograms per day. We make millions of tons per day off of the products I just mentioned. So there's a massive scale up if it's going to have a wider impact.Austin Vernon (00:59:15):So there's some debate. I think the debate for the whole electrofuels sector is: How much are you going to do in the electrolyzer? One company whose approach I really like is Terraform Industries. They want to make methane, which is the main natural gas. But they're just making hydrogen in their electrolyzer, and then they capture the CO2 and then put it into a methanation reaction. So everything they're doing is already world scale, basically.Austin Vernon (00:59:47):We've had hydrogen electrolyzers power fertilizer plants, providing them with the Hydrogen that they need. Methanation happens in all ammonia plants and several other examples. It's well known, very old. Methanation is hydrogen CO2 combined to make water and methane. So their approach is more conservative, but if you do more in the electrolyzer, like I'm going to make the methane actually in the electrolyzer instead of adding this other process, you could potentially have a much simpler process that has less CapEx and scales downward better. Traditional chemical engineering heavily favors scaling. With the more Terraform processes, they're playing as absolutely ginormous factories. These can take a long time to build.Austin Vernon (01:00:42):So one of the things they're doing is: they're having to fight the complexity that creeps into chemical engineering every step of the way. Because if they don't, they'll end up with a plant that takes 10 years to build, and that's not their goal. It takes 10 years to build a new refinery, because they're so complex. So yeah, that's where I am. I'm more on the speculative edge, and it's not clear yet which products will be favorable for which approaches.Dwarkesh Patel (01:01:15):Okay, yeah. And you're building this out of your garage, correct?Austin Vernon (01:01:19):Yeah. So that's where electrolyzers... Everything with electric chemistry is a flat plate instead of a vessel, so it scales down. So I can have a pretty good idea of what my 100 square centimeter electrolyzer is going to do, if I make it quite a bit bigger. I have to worry about how my flow might interact in the larger one and make sure the mixing's good, but it's pretty straightforward because you're just making your flat plate a larger area. Whereas the scale, it is different from scaling a traditional chemical process.Dwarkesh Patel (01:01:56):I'm curious how cheap energy has to be before this is efficient. If you're turning it into methane or something like that, presumably for fuel, is the entire process energy positive? Or how cheap would energy, electricity you need to get before that's the case?Austin Vernon (01:02:18):The different products and different methods have different crossovers. So Terraform Industries, they're shooting for $10 a megawatt hour for electricity. But again, their process is simpler, a little less efficient than a lot of the other products. They also have better premiums, just worth more per ton than methane. So your crossover happens somewhere in between $10 and $20 a megawatt hour, which is... I mean, that's pretty... Right now, solar, it's maybe like $25. Maybe it's a little higher because payment prices have gone up in the last year, but I think the expectation is they'll come back down. And so, getting down to $15 where you start having crossovers for some of these products like ethanol or ethylene or methanol, it's not science fiction.Dwarkesh Patel (01:03:08):I think in Texas where I live, that's where it's at right? The cost of energy is 20 or something dollars per megawatt hour.Austin Vernon (01:03:16):Well, not this summer! But yeah, a lot of times in Texas, the wholesale prices are around $25 to $30.Dwarkesh Patel (01:03:26):Gotcha. Okay. Yeah. So a lot of the actual details you said about how this works went over my head. So what is a flat plate? I guess before you answer that question, can you just generally describe the approach? What is it? What are you doing to convert CO2 into these other compounds?Austin Vernon (01:03:45):Well, yeah, it literally just looks like an electrolyzer. You have two sides and anode and a cathode and they're just smushed together like this because of the electrical resistance. If you put them far apart, it makes it... uses up a lot of energy. So you smush them together as close as you can. And then, you're basically just trading electrons back and forth. On one side, you're turning CO2 into a more complex molecule, and on the other side, you're taking apart water. And so, when you take apart the water, it balances out the equation, balances out your electrons and everything like that. I probably need to work on that elevator pitch there, huh?Dwarkesh Patel (01:04:31):I guess what the basic idea is, you need to put power in to convert CO2 into these other compounds.Austin Vernon (01:04:38):The inputs are electricity, water, and CO2, and the output is usually oxygen and whatever chemical you're trying to create is, along with some side reactions.Dwarkesh Patel (01:04:49):And then, these chemicals you mentioned, I think ethanol, methane, formic acid, are these all just fuels or what are the other uses for them?Austin Vernon (01:04:58):A lot of people are taking a hybrid approach with carbon monoxide. So this would be like Twelve Co… They've raised a lot of money to do this and 100 employees or something. You can take that carbon monoxide and make hydrogen, and then you have to send gas to make liquid fuels. So they want to make all sorts of chemicals, but one of the main volume ones would be like jet fuel.Austin Vernon (01:05:22):Let's see Formic acid is, it's the little fry of all these. It is an additive in a lot of things like preserving hay for animals and stuff like that. Then, ethanol there's people that want to... There's this company that makes ethylene, which goes into plastics that makes polyethylene, which is the most produced plastic. Or you can burn it in your car, although I think ethanol is a terrible vehicle fuel. But then you can also just make ethylene straight in the electrolyzer. So there's many paths. So which path wins is an interesting race to see.Dwarkesh Patel (01:06:13):The ability to produce jet fuel is really interesting, because in your energy superabundance paper, you talk about... You would think that even if we can electrify everything in solar and when it becomes super cheap, that's not going to have an impact on the prices to go to space for example. But I don't know. If a process like this is possible, then it's some way to in financial terms, add liquidity. And then turn, basically, this cheap solar and wind into jet fuel through this indirect process. So the price to send stuff to space or cheap plane flights or whatever––all of that goes down as well.Austin Vernon (01:06:52):It basically sets a price ceiling on the price of oil. Whatever you can produce this for is the ceiling now, which is maybe the way I think about it.Dwarkesh Patel (01:07:06):Yeah. So do you want to talk a little bit about how your background led into this project? This is your full-time thing, right? I don't know if I read about that, but where did you get this idea and how long have you been pursuing it? And what's the progress and so on.Austin Vernon (01:07:20):I've always loved chemical engineering, and I love working at the big processing plant because it's like being a kid in a candy store. If I had extra time, I'd just walk around and look at the plant, like it's so cool. But the plant where I worked at, their up time was 99.7%. So if you wanted to change anything or do anything new, it terrified everyone. That's how they earned their bonuses: run the plant a 100% uptime all the time. So that just wasn't a good fit for me. And also, so I always wanted my own chemical plant, but it's billions of dollars to build plants so that was a pretty big step. So I think this new technology of... there's a window where you might be able to build smaller plants until it optimizes to be hard to enter again.Dwarkesh Patel (01:08:21):And then, why will it become hard to enter again? What will happen?Austin Vernon (01:08:27):If someone figures out how to build a really cheap electrolyzer, and they just keep it as intellectual property, then it would be hard to rediscover that and compete with them.Dwarkesh Patel (01:08:38):And so, how long have you been working on this?Austin Vernon (01:08:42):Oh, not quite a year. But yeah, I actually got this idea to work on it from writing my blog. So when I wrote the heating fuel post, I didn't really know much about... There's another company in the space, Prometheus Fuels and I'm like, "Oh, this is an interesting idea." And then, I got talking to a guy named Brian Heligman, and he's like, "You should do this, but not what Prometheus is doing." And so, then I started looking at it and I liked it, so I've been working on it since.Dwarkesh Patel (01:09:08):Yeah. It's interesting because if energy does become as cheap as you suspect it might. If this process works, then yeah, this is a trillion dollar company probably, right? If you're going to get the patents and everything.Austin Vernon (01:09:22):I mean, maybe. With chemical plants, there's a certain limitation where your physical limitation is. There's only so many places that are good places for chemical plants. You start getting hit by transportation and all that. So, you can't just produce all th

Austin Vernon is an engineer working on a new method for carbon capture, and he has one of the most interesting blogs on the internet, where he writes about engineering, software, economics, and investing.We discuss how energy superabundance will change the world, how Starship can be turned into a kinetic weapon, why nuclear is overrated, blockchains, batteries, flying cars, finding alpha, & much more!Watch on YouTube. Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or any other podcast platform. Read the full transcript here.Subscribe to find out about future episodes!Follow Austin on Twitter. Follow me on Twitter for updates on future episodes.Please share if you enjoyed this episode! Helps out a ton!Timestamps(0:00:00) - Intro(0:01:53) - Starship as a Weapon(0:19:24) - Software Productivity(0:41:40) - Car Manufacturing(0:57:39) - Carbon Capture(1:16:53) - Energy Superabundance(1:25:09) - Storage for Cheap Energy(1:31:25) - Travel in Future(1:33:27) - Future Cities(1:39:58) - Flying Cars(1:43:26) - Carbon Shortage(1:48:03) - Nuclear(2:12:44) - Solar(2:14:44) - Alpha & Efficient Markets(2:22:51) - ConclusionTranscriptIntroDwarkesh Patel (00:00:00):Okay! Today, I have the pleasure of interviewing Austin Vernon who writes about engineering, software, economics, and investing on the internet, though not that much else is known about him. So Austin, do you want to give us a bit of info about your background? I know that the only thing the internet knows about you is this one little JPEG that you had to upload with your recent paper. But what about an identity reveal or I guess a little bit of a background reveal? Just to the extent that you're comfortable sharing.Austin Vernon (00:00:29):My degree is in chemical engineering and I've had a lifelong love for engineering as well as things like the Toyota Production System. I've also worked as a chemical engineer in a large processing facility where I've done a lot of petroleum engineering. I taught myself how to write software and now I'm working on more research and the early commercialization of CO2 electrolysis.Dwarkesh Patel (00:00:59):Okay yeah. I'm really interested in talking about all those things. The first question I have is from Alex Berger, who's the co-CEO of Open Philanthropy. When I asked on Twitter what I should ask you, he suggested that I should ask “Why so shady?” Famously you have kind of an anonymous personality, pseudonymous thing going on the internet. What's up with that?Austin Vernon (00:01:25):Yeah. I think he posted a tweet that said “I don't know who this guy is or if he's credible at all, but his stuff sure is interesting”. That really made me laugh. I thought that was hilarious. Fame just doesn't seem necessary, I think I'm fine with my ideas being well known and communicating, but I have less desire to be personally famous.Starship as a WeaponDwarkesh Patel (00:01:52):Gotcha, gotcha. I wanted to start off with a sexy topic, let's talk about using Starship as a kinetic weapon. I thought that was one of the more amusing posts you wrote. Do you want to talk more about how this would be possible?Austin Vernon (00:02:08):Well, I think the main thing with Starship is that you're taking a technology and you're making it about 100 times cheaper for cargo and 1000 times cheaper for people. When things like that happen that drastically, you're just looking at huge changes and it's really hard to anticipate what some of those can be when the change is that drastic. I think there's a lot of moon-based, Mars-based stuff that doesn't really catch the general public's eye. They also have trouble imagining some of the point-to-point travel that could be possible. But when you start talking about it as a weapon, then I think it lets people know they should be paying attention to this technology. And we certainly do not want to be second or third getting it. We should make sure that we're going to be first.Dwarkesh Patel (00:03:05):Yeah. I think you mentioned this in the post, but as recently as the '90s, the cost of sending one kilogram to space was around $20,000. More recently, SpaceX has brought it to $2,000. Lots of interesting questions pop up when you ask, “What will be possible once we get it down to $200 per kilogram to send into orbit?” One of them could be about how we might manufacture these weapons that are not conventional ballistics. Do you want to talk about why this might be an advancement over conventional ballistic weapons?Austin Vernon (00:03:37):Well, regular conventional ballistic weapons are extremely expensive. This is more like a bomb truck. But usually we think of B52 as the bomb truck and this could be even cheaper than the B52, delivering just mass on target. When you think about how expensive it is to fly a B52 from Barksdale in Louisiana all the way across the world.. you can do it from south Texas or Florida with the Starship and get more emissions per day and the fuel ends up being. When you go orbital, it takes a lot to get to orbit. But then once you're in orbit, your fuel consumption's pretty good. So over long distances, it has a lot of advantage. That's why the point-to-point works for longer distances.Austin Vernon (00:04:27):There's really a sweet spot with these weapons where you want it to be pretty accurate, but you also want it to be cheap. You're seeing that problem with Russia right now as they have some fancy parade style weapons that are really expensive, like multi-billion dollar cruise missiles, but they're missing that $5,000 guided artillery shell or that $20,000 JDM that you can just pit massive. Or the multiple launch rocket system, guided rockets. They're really short on all those because I think they had just had a limited amount of chips they could get from the US into Russia to make these advanced weapons.Austin Vernon (00:05:07):But yeah, so the Starship gives you just a platform to deliver. You could put JDMs in a shroud, or you could just have the iron unguided kinetic projectiles, and it just becomes impossible for a ship to launch missiles to intercept yours if your cost is so low, you can just overwhelm them.Dwarkesh Patel (00:05:29):Okay. There are a few terms there that neither I nor the audience might know. So what is JDM? What is shroud? And why are chips a bottleneck here? Why can't it just be any micro-controller?Austin Vernon (00:05:42):So JDM is Joint Direct Attack Munition. So what we did is we took all our Vietnam surplus bonds and we put this little fin-kit on it and it costs like $20,000, which is cheap for a weapon because the actual bond costs, I don't know, $3,000. And then it turns it into a guided weapon that, before you were probably lucky to get within 500 meters of a target, now you can get it in with two meters. So the number of missions you have to do with your planes and all that goes down by orders of magnitude. So it's an absolutely huge advantage in logistics and in just how much firepower you can put on a target. And we didn't even have to make new bombs, we just put these kits on all our old bombs.Austin Vernon (00:06:33):Let's see.. Yeah the chips are a problem. There's this organization called RUSI. I think they're in the UK, but they've been tearing down all these Russian weapons they found in Ukraine and they all have American chips in them. So technically, they're not supposed to be able to get these chips. And yet, Russia can't make a lot of its own chips. And especially not the specialized kinds you might want for guided weapons. So they've been somehow smuggling in chips from Americans to make their advanced weaponsDwarkesh Patel (00:07:03):What is special about these? As far as I'm aware, the trade with China is still going on and we get a lot of our chips manufactured from Taiwan or China. So why can't they do the same?Austin Vernon (00:07:14):It's the whole integration. It's not just the specific chip, but the board. They're more like PLCs where you almost have wired-in programming and they come with this ability to do the guidance and all that stuff. It all kind of has to work together. I think that's the way I understand it. I don't know. Maybe I don't have a really good answer for that one, but they're hard to replicate is what matters.Dwarkesh Patel (00:07:43):Okay that's interesting. Yeah, I guess that has a lot of interesting downstream effects, because for example, India buys a lot of its weapons from Russia. So if Russia doesn't have access to these, then other countries that buy from Russia won't have access to these either.Dwarkesh Patel (00:07:58):You had an interesting speculation in the post where you suggested that you could just keep these kinetic weapons in orbit, in a sort of Damocles state really, almost literally. That sounds like an incredibly scary and risky scenario where you could have orbital decay and you could have these kinetic weapons falling from the sky and destroying cities. Do you think this is what it will look like or could look like in 10 to 20 years?Austin Vernon (00:08:26):Well, yeah, so the advantage of having weapons on orbit is you can hit targets faster. So if you're launching the rocket from Florida, you're looking at maybe 30 minutes to get there and the target can move away in that time. Whereas if you're on orbit, you can have them spaced out to where you're hitting within a few minutes. So that's the advantage there.Austin Vernon (00:08:46):You really have to have a two stage system I think for most, because if you have a really aerodynamic rod that's going to give you really good performance in the low atmosphere, it'll end up going too fast and just burn up before it gets there. Tungsten's maybe the only thing that you could have that could go all the way through which is why I like the original concept of using these big tungsten rods the size of a telephone pole. But tungsten's pretty expensive. And the rod concept kind of limits what you can do.Austin Vernon (00:09:28):So a lot of these weapons will have, that's what I was talking about with the shroud, something that actually slows you down in the upper atmosphere. And then once you're at the velocity where you're not just going to melt, then you open it up and let it go. So if you actually had it fall from the sky, some may make it to the ground, but a lot would burn up. So a lot of the stuff that makes it to the ground is actually pretty light. It's stuff that can float and has a large surface area. Yeah, that's the whole thing with Starship. Or not Starship, but Starlink. All those satellites are meant to completely fall apart on de-orbit.Dwarkesh Patel (00:10:09):I see. One of the implications of that is that these may be less powerful than we might fear, because since kinetic energy is mass times velocity squared and there's an upper bound on the velocity (velocity being the component that grows the kinetic energy faster), then it suggests that you can upper bound the power these things will have. You know what I mean?Austin Vernon (00:10:32):Yeah, so even the tungsten rods. Sometimes people, they're not very good at physics, so they don't do the math. They think it's going to be a nuclear weapon, but it's really not. I think even the tungsten rod is like 10 tons of T&T or something. It's a big bomb, but it's not a super weapon.Austin Vernon (00:10:54):So I think I said in the post, it's about using advanced missiles where they're almost more defensive weapons so I can keep you from pitting your ship somewhere. Yeah I could try to bombard your cities, but I can't take ground with it. I can't even police sea lanes with it really. I'd still have to use regular ships if I had this air cover to go enforce the rules of the sea and stuff like that.Dwarkesh Patel (00:11:23):Yeah. You speculated in the post, I think, that you could load this up with shrapnel and then it could explode next to an incoming missile or an incoming aircraft. Could these get that accurate? Because that was surprising speculation to me.Austin Vernon (00:11:43):I think for ships, it's pretty... I was watching videos of how fast a ship can turn and stuff. If you're going to do an initial target on a ship to try to kill their radars, you'd want to do it above the ceiling of their missiles. So it's like, how much are they going to move between your release where you stop steering and that? The answer's maybe 1000 feet. So that's pretty simple because you just shrapnel the area.Austin Vernon (00:12:12):Targeting aircraft, you would be steering all the way in. I'd say it's doable, but it'd be pretty hard. You'd actually maybe want to even go slower than you would with the ship attack. You'd need a specialized package to attack the aircraft, but if you have enough synthetic aperture radar and stuff like that, you could see these aircraft using satellites and then guide the bomb in the whole way. You could even load heat seeking missiles into a package that unfurls right next to them and launch conventional missiles too, probably. It'd be pretty hard to do some of this stuff, but they're just the things you might be able to do if you put some effort into it.Dwarkesh Patel (00:12:57):Yeah. The reason I find this kind of speculation really interesting is because when you look at the modern weaponry that's used in conflicts, it just seems directly descendant from something you would've seen in World War II or something. If you think about how much warfare changed between 1900 and 1940, it's like, yeah, they're not even the same class of weapons anymore. So it's interesting to think about possibilities like these where the entire category of weapons has changed.Austin Vernon (00:13:33):You're right and that's because our physical technology hasn't changed that much. So it really has just made more sense to put better electronics in the same tanks. We haven't learned enough about tanks to build a new physical tank that's way better, so we just keep upgrading our existing tanks with better electronics. They're much more powerful, they're more accurate. A lot of times, they have longer range weapons and better sensors. So the tank looks the same, but it maybe has several times more killing power. But the Ukraine war right now, they're using a lot of 40, 50 year old weapons so that especially looks like that.Dwarkesh Patel (00:14:20):Yeah. Which kind of worries you if you think about the stockpiles our own military has. I'm not well educated on the topic, but I imagine that we don't have the newest of the new thing. We probably have maintained versions of decades old technology.Austin Vernon (00:14:35):We spend so much, we've got relatively... This kind of gets into debate about how ready our military is. For certain situations, it's more ready than others. I'd say in general, most people talking about it have the incentive to downplay our capabilities because they want more defense spending. There's lots of reasons. So I think we're probably more capable than what you might see from some editorial in The Hill or whatever. Us just sending a few weapons over to Ukraine and seeing how successful they've been at using them, I think, shows a little bit of that.Austin Vernon (00:15:18):There's so much uncertainty when it comes to fighting, especially when you're talking about a naval engagement, where we don't just don't have that many ships in general… you can have some bad luck. So I think you always want to be a little bit wary. You don't want to get overconfident.Dwarkesh Patel (00:15:37):Yeah. And if the offensive tech we sent to Ukraine is potentially better than the defensive tech, it's very possible that even a ballistic missile that China or Russia could launch would sink a battleship and then kill the 2,000 or 1,000 whatever soldiers that are on board. Or I guess, I don't know, you think this opens up avenues for defensive tech as well?Austin Vernon (00:16:03):Yeah––generally the consensus is that defensive technology has improved much more recently than offensive technology. This whole strategy China has is something they call anti-access/area denial, A2/AD. That's basically just how missiles have gotten better because the sensors on missiles have gotten better. So they can keep our ships from getting close to them but they can't really challenge us in Hawaii or something. And it really goes both ways, I think people forget that. So yeah, it's hard for us to get close to China, but Taiwan has a lot of missiles with these new sensors as well. So I think it's probably tougher for China to do it close to Taiwan than most people would say.Dwarkesh Patel (00:16:55):Oh, interesting. Yeah, can you talk more about that? Because every time I read about this, people are saying that if China wanted to, they could knock out Taiwan's defenses in a short amount of time and take it over. Yeah, so can you talk about why that's not possible?Austin Vernon (00:17:10):Well, it might be, but I think it's a guess of the uncertainty [inaudible 00:17:14]. Taiwan has actually one of the largest defense budgets in the world and they've recently been upping it. I think they spend, I don't know, $25 billion a year and they added an extra $5 billion. And they've been buying a lot of anti-ship missiles, a lot of air defense missiles.. Stuff that Ukraine could only dream of. I think Ukraine's military budget was $2 billion and they have a professional army. And then the other thing is Taiwan's an island, whereas Russia could just roll over the land border into Ukraine.Austin Vernon (00:17:44):There's just been very few successful amphibious landings in history. The most recent ones were all the Americans in World War II and Korea. So the challenge there is just... It's kind of on China to execute perfectly and do that. So if they had perfect execution, then possibly it would be feasible. But if their air defenses on their ships aren't quite as good as we think they could possibly be, then they could also end up with half their fleet underwater within 10 hours.Dwarkesh Patel (00:18:20):Interesting. And how has your view of Taiwan's defensive capabilities changed... How has the Ukraine conflict updated your opinion on what might happen?Austin Vernon (00:18:29):I didn't really know how much about it. And then I started looking at Wikipedia and stuff and all this stuff they're doing. Taiwan just has a lot of modern platforms like F16s with our anti-ship missiles. They actually have a lot of their own. They have indigenous fighter bombers, indigenous anti-ship missiles because they're worried we might not always sell them to them.Austin Vernon (00:18:54):They've even recently gotten these long range cruise missiles that could possibly target leadership in Beijing. So I think that makes it uncomfortable for the Chinese leadership. If you attack them, you're going to have to go live in a bunker. But again, I'm not a full-time military analyst or something, so there's a lot of uncertainty around what I'm saying. It's not a given that China's just going to roll over them.Software ProductivityDwarkesh Patel (00:19:22):Okay. That's comforting to hear. Let's talk about an area where I have a little bit of a point of contact. I thought your blog post about software and the inability of it to increase productivity numbers, I thought that was super fascinating. So before I ask you questions about it, do you want to lay out the thesis there?Austin Vernon (00:19:43):Yeah. So if there's one post I kind of felt like I caught lightning in a bottle on, it's that one. Everything I wanted to put in, it just fit together perfectly, which is usually not the case.Austin Vernon (00:19:55):I think the idea is that the world's so complex and we really underestimate that complexity. If you're going to digitize processes and automate them and stuff, you have to capture all that complexity basically at the bit level, and that's extremely difficult. And then you also have diminishing returns where the easily automatable stuff goes first and then it's increasing corner cases to get to the end, so you just have to go through more and more code basically. We don't see runaway productivity growth from software because we're fighting all this increasing complexity.Dwarkesh Patel (00:20:39):Yeah. Have you heard of the waterbed theory of complexity by the way?Austin Vernon (00:20:42):I don't think so.Dwarkesh Patel (00:20:44):Okay. It's something that comes up in compiler design: the idea is that there's a fixed amount of complexity in a system. If you try to reduce it, what you'll end up doing is just you'll end up migrating the complexity elsewhere. I think an example that's used of this is when they try to program languages that are not type safe, something like Python. You can say, “oh, it's a less complex language”, but really, you've added complexity when, I don't know, two different types of numbers are interacting like a float and an int. As your program grows, that complexity exponentially grows along with all the things that could go wrong when you're making two things interact in a way that you were expecting not to. So yeah, the idea is you can just choose where to have your complexity, but you can't get rid of that complexity.Austin Vernon (00:21:38):I think that's kind of an interesting thing when you start pairing it with management theory... when you add up all the factors, the most complex thing you're doing is high volume car manufacturing. And so we got a lot of innovations and organization from car manufacturers like the assembly line. Then you had Sloan at GM basically creating the way the modern corporation is run, then you have the Toyota Production System.Austin Vernon (00:22:11):But arguably now, creating software is actually the most complex thing we do. So there's all these kinds of squishy concepts that underlie things like the Toyota Production System that softwares had to learn and reimagine and adopt and you see that with Agile where, “oh, we can't have long release times. We need to be releasing every day,” which means we're limiting inventory there.Austin Vernon (00:22:42):There's a whole thing especially that's showing up in software that existed in carbon manufacturing where you're talking about reducing communication. So Jeff Bezos kind of now famously said, "I want to reduce communication," which is counterintuitive to a lot of people. This is age-old in car manufacturing where Toyota has these cards that go between workstations and they tell you what to do. So people normally think of them as limiting inventory, but it also tells the worker exactly what they're supposed to be doing at what pace, at what time. The assembly line is like that too. You just know what to do because you're standing there and there's a part here and it needs to go on there, and it comes by at the pace you're supposed to work at.Austin Vernon (00:23:29):It's so extreme that there's this famous paper, by List, Syverson and Levitt. They went to a car factory and studied how defects propagated in cars and stuff. Once a car factory gets up and running, it doesn't matter what workers you put in there, if workers are sick or you get new workers, the defect rate is the same. So all the knowledge is built into the manufacturing line.Austin Vernon (00:23:59):There's these concepts around idiot-proofing and everything that are very similar to what you'll see. You had Uncle Bob on here. So Uncle Bob says only put one input into a function and stuff like that because you'll mix them up otherwise. The Japanese call it poka-yoke. You make it where you can't mess it up. And that's another way to reduce communication, and then software, of course you have APIs.Austin Vernon (00:24:28):So I'm really interested in this overall concept of reducing communication, and reducing how much cooperation and everything we need to run the economy.Dwarkesh Patel (00:24:41):Right. Right. Speaking of the Toyota Production System, one thing they do to reduce that defect rate is if there's a problem, all the workers in that chain are forced to go to the place where the defect problem is and fix it before doing anything else. The idea there is that this will give them context to understand what the problem was and how to make sure it doesn't happen again. It also prevents a build up of inventory in a way that keeps making these defects happen or just keeps accumulating inventory before the place that can fix the defects is able to take care of them.Austin Vernon (00:25:17):Right. Yeah, yeah. Exactly.Dwarkesh Patel (00:25:19):Yeah. But I think one interesting thing about software and complexity is that software is a place where complexity is the highest in our world right now but software gives you the choice to interface with the complexity you want to interface with. I guess that's just part of specialization in general, but you could say for example that a machine learning model is really complex, but ideally, you get to a place where that's the only kind of complexity you have to deal with. You're not having to deal with the complexity of “How is this program compiled? How are the libraries that I'm using? How are they built?” You can fine tune and work on the complexity you need to work on.Dwarkesh Patel (00:26:05):It's similar to app development. Byrne Hobart has this blog post about Stripe as solid state. The basic idea is that Stripe hides all the complexity of the financial system: it charges a higher fee, but you can just treat it as an abstraction of a tithe you have to pay, and it'll just take care of that entire process so you can focus on your comparative advantage.Austin Vernon (00:26:29):It's really actually very similar in car manufacturing and the Toyota Production System if you really get into it. It's very much the same conceptual framework. There's this whole idea in Toyota Production System, everyone works at the same pace, which you kind of talked about. But also, your work content is the same. There's no room for not standardizing a way you're going to do things. So everyone gets together and they're like, “All right, we're going to do this certain part. We're going to put it together this certain way at this little micro station. And it's going to be the same way every time.” That's part of how they're reducing the defect rates. If your assembly process is longer than what your time allotment is to stay in touch with the rest of the process, then you just keep breaking it down into smaller pieces. So through this, each person only has to know a very small part of it.Austin Vernon (00:27:33):The overall engineering team has all sorts of strategies and all sorts of tools to help them break up all these processes into very small parts and make it all hold together. It's still very, very hard, but it's kind of a lot of the same ideas because you're taking away the complexity of making a $30,000 car or 30,000 part car where everyone's just focusing on their one little part and they don't care what someone else is doing.Dwarkesh Patel (00:28:06):Yeah. But the interesting thing is that it seems like you need one person who knows how everything fits together. Because from what I remember, one of the tenets of the Toyota Production System was you need to have a global view. So, in that book, was it the machine or the other one, the Toyota Production System book? But anyways, they were talking about examples where people would try to optimize for local efficiencies. I think they especially pointed to Ford and GM for trying to do this where they would try to make machines run all the time. And locally, you could say that, “oh this machine or process is super efficient. It's always outputting stuff.” But it ignores how that added inventory or that process had a bad consequence for the whole system.Dwarkesh Patel (00:28:50):And so it's interesting if you look at a company like Tesla that's able to do this really well. Tesla is run like a monarchy and this one guy has this total global view of how the entire process is supposed to run and where you have these inefficiencies.. You had some great examples of this in the blog post. I think one of the examples is this guy (the author) goes to this factory and he asks, "Is this an efficient factory?" And the guy's like, "Yeah, this is totally efficient. There's nothing we can do, adopting the Toyota way, to make this more efficient."Dwarkesh Patel (00:29:22):And so then he's like, "Okay, let me look." And he finds that they're treating steel in some way, and the main process does only take a couple of seconds, but some local manager decided that it would be more efficient to ship their parts out, to get the next stage of the process done somewhere else. So this is locally cheaper, but the result is that it takes weeks to get these parts shipped out and get them back. Which means that the actual time that the parts spend getting processed is 0.1% of the time, making the whole process super inefficient. So I don't know, it seems like the implication is you need a very monarchical structure, with one person who has a total view, in order to run such a system. Or am I getting that wrong?Austin Vernon (00:30:12):Not necessarily. I mean, you do have to make sure you're not optimizing locally, but I think it's the same. You have that same constraint in software, but I think a lot of times people are just running over it because processing has been getting so much cheaper. People are expensive, so if you could save development time, it just ends up the trade offs are different when you're talking about the tyranny of physical items and stuff like that, the constraints get a little more severe. But I think you have the same overall. You still have to fight local optimization, but the level you have to is probably different with physical goods.Austin Vernon (00:30:55):I was thinking about the smart grid situation from a software perspective, and there's this problem where, okay, I'm putting my solar farm here and it's impacting somewhere far away, and that's then creating these really high upgrade costs, that cost two or three times more than my solar farm. Well, the obvious thing would be, if you're doing software, is like you're going to break all these up into smaller sections, and then you wouldn't be impacting each other and all that, and you could work and focus on your own little thing.Austin Vernon (00:31:29):But the problem with that is if you're going to disconnect these areas of the grid, the equipment to do that is extremely expensive. It's not like I'm just going to hit a new tab and open a new file and start writing a new function. And not only that, but you still have to actually coordinate how this equipment is going to operate. So if you just let the grid flow as it does, everyone knows what's going to happen because they could just calculate the physics. If you start adding in all these checkpoints where humans are doing stuff, then you have to actually interface with the humans, and the amount of things that can happen really starts going up. So it's actually a really bad idea to try to cart all this stuff off, just because of the reality of the physical laws and the equipment you need and everything like that.Dwarkesh Patel (00:32:22):Okay. Interesting. And then I think you have a similar Coasean argument in your software post about why vertically integrating software is beneficial. Do you want to explain that thesis?Austin Vernon (00:32:34):Yeah. I think it actually gets to what we're talking about here, where it allows you to avoid the local optimization. Because a lot of times you're trying to build a software MVP, and you're tying together a few services… they don't do quite what you need, so if you try to scale that, it would just break. But if you're going to take a really complex process, like car manufacturing or retail distribution, or the home buying process or something, you really have to vertically integrate it to be able to create a decent end-to-end experience and avoid that local optimization.Austin Vernon (00:33:20):And it's just very hard otherwise, because you just can't coordinate effectively if you have 10 different vendors trying to do all the same thing. You end up in just constant vendor meetings, where you're trying to decide what the specs are or something instead of giving someone the authority, or giving a team the authority to just start building stuff. Then if you look at these companies, they have to implement these somewhat decentralized processes when they get too complex, but at least they have control over how they're interfacing with each other. Walmart, as the vendors, control their own stock. They don't tell the vendor, "We need X parts." It's just like, it's on you to make sure your shelf is stocked.Dwarkesh Patel (00:34:07):Yeah. Yeah. So what was really interesting to me about this part of the post was, I don't know, I guess I had heard of this vision of we're software setting, where everybody will have a software as a service company, and they'll all be interfacing with each other in some sort of cycle where they're all just calling each other's APIs. And yeah, basically everybody and their mother would have a SAAS company. The implication here was, from your argument, that given the necessity of integrating all those complexity vertically in a coherent way, then the winners in software should end up being a few big companies, right? They compete with each other, but still...Austin Vernon (00:34:49):I think that's especially true when you're talking about combining bits and apps. Maybe less true for pure software. The physical world is just so much more complex, and so the constraints it creates are pretty extreme, compared to like... you could maybe get away with more of everyone and their mom having an API in a pure software world.Dwarkesh Patel (00:35:14):Right. Yeah. I guess, you might think that even in the physical world, given that people really need to focus on their comparative advantage, they would just try to outsource the software parts to these APIs. But is there any scenario where the learning curve for people who are not in the firm can be fast enough that they can keep up with the complexity? Because there's huge gains for specialization and competition that go away if this is the world we're forced to live in. And then I guess we have a lot of counter examples, or I guess we have a lot of examples of what you're talking about. Like Apple is the biggest market cap in the world, right? And famously they're super vertically integrated. And yeah, obviously their thing is combining hardware and software. But yeah, is there any world in which it can keep that kind of benefit, but have it be within multiple firms?Austin Vernon (00:36:10):This is a post I've got on my list I want to write. The blockchain application, which excites me personally the most, is reimagining enterprise software. Because the things you're talking about, like hard typing and APIs are just basically built into some of these protocols. So I think it just really has a lot of exciting implications for how much you can decentralize software development. But the thing is, you can still do that within the firm. So I think I mentioned this, if the government's going to place all these rules on the edge of the firm, it makes transactions with other firms expensive. So a few internal transactions can be cheaper, because they're avoiding the government reporting and taxes and all that kind of stuff. So I think you'd have to think about how these technologies can reduce transaction costs overall and decentralize that, but also what are the costs between firms?Dwarkesh Patel (00:37:22):Yeah, it's really interesting if the costs are logistic, or if they're based on the knowledge that is housed, as you were talking about, within a factory or something. Because if it is just logistical and stuff, like you had to report any outside transactions, then it does imply that those technology blockchain could help. But if it is just that you need to be in the same office, and if you're not, then you're going to have a hard time keeping up with what the new requirements for the API are, then maybe it's that, yeah, maybe the inevitability is that you'll have these big firms that are able to vertically integrate.Austin Vernon (00:37:59):Yeah, for these big firms to survive, they have to be somewhat decentralized within them. So I think you have... you're going to the same place as just how are we viewing it, what's our perception? So even if it's a giant corporation, it's going to have very independent business units as opposed to something like a 1950s corporation.Dwarkesh Patel (00:38:29):Yeah. Byrne Hobart, by the way, has this really interesting post that you might enjoy reading while you're writing that post. It's type safe communications, and it's about that Bezos thing, about his strict style for how to communicate and how little to communicate. There's many examples in Amazon protocols where you have to... the only way you can put in this report, is in this place you had to give a number. You can't just say, "This is very likely," you had to say like, "We project X percent increase," or whatever. So it has to be a percent. And there's many other cases where they're strict about what type definition you can have in written reports or something. It has kind of the same consequence that type strict languages have, which is that you can keep track of what the value is through the entire chain of the flow of control.Austin Vernon (00:39:22):You've got to keep work content standardized.Dwarkesh Patel (00:39:26):So we've been hinting at the Coasean analysis to this. I think we just talked about it indirectly, but for the people who might not know, Coase has this paper called The Theory of Firms, and he's trying to explain why we have firms at all. Why not just have everybody compete in the open market for employment, for anything? Why do we have jobs? Why not just have... you can just hire a secretary by the day or something.Dwarkesh Patel (00:39:51):And the conclusion he comes to is that by having a firm you're reducing the transaction cost. So people will have the same knowledge about what needs to get done, obviously you're reducing the transaction cost of contracting, finding labor, blah, blah, blah. And so the conclusion it comes to is the more the transaction costs are reduced within people in a firm, as compared to the transaction cost between different firms, the bigger firms will get. So I guess that's why the implication of your argument was that there should be bigger tech firms, right?Austin Vernon (00:40:27):Yes, yes, definitely. Because they can basically decrease the transaction costs faster within, and then even at the limit, if you have large transaction costs outside the firm, between other firms that are artificially imposed, then it will make firms bigger.Dwarkesh Patel (00:40:45):What does the world look like in that scenario? So would it just be these Japanese companies, these huge conglomerates who are just... you rise through the ranks, from the age of 20 until you die? Is that what software will turn into?Austin Vernon (00:40:59):It could be. I mean, I think it will be lots of very large companies, unless there's some kind of change in inner firm transaction costs. And again, that could possibly come from blockchain like technology, but you probably also need better regulation to make that cheaper, and then you would have smaller firms. But again, in the end, it doesn't really matter. You'd be working in your little unit of the big bank of corporate, or whatever. So I don't know what that would look like on a personal level.Car ManufacturingDwarkesh Patel (00:41:40):Yeah. Okay. So speaking of these Japanese companies, let's talk about car manufacturing and everything involved there. Yeah, so we kind of hinted at a few elements of the Toyota way and production earlier, but do you want to give a brief overview of what that is, so we can compare it to potentially other systems?Austin Vernon (00:42:02):I think all these kinds of lean Toyota process systems, they do have a lot of similarities, where mostly you want to even-out your production, so you're producing very consistently, and you want to break it into small steps and you want to limit the amount of inventory you have in your system. When you do this, it makes it easy to see how the process is running and limit defects. And the ultimate is you're really trying to reduce defects, because they're very expensive. It's a little bit hard to summarize. I think that's my best shot at it there, quickly off the top of my head.Dwarkesh Patel (00:42:49):Yeah. The interesting thing about the Toyota system, so at least when the machine was released, is they talk about... that book was released I think the nineties, and they went to the history of Toyota, and one of the interesting things they talked about was there was a brief time where the company ran... I think, was this after World War II? But anyways, the company ran into some troubles. They needed to layoff people to not go bankrupt. They had much more debt on books than they had assets. So yeah, they wanted to layoff people, but obviously the people were not happy about this, so there were violent protests about this. And in fact I think the US written constitution gave strong protections to labor that they hadn't had before, which gave labor an even stronger hand here.Dwarkesh Patel (00:43:42):So anyway, Toyota came to this agreement with the unions that they'd be allowed to do this one time layoff to get the company on the right track, but afterwards they could never lay somebody off. Which would mean that a person who works at Toyota works there from the time they graduate college or high school till they die. Right? I don't know, that's super intense in a culture. I mean, in software, where you have the average tenure in a company's one year, the difference is so much.Dwarkesh Patel (00:44:13):And there's so many potential benefits here, I guess a lot of drawbacks too. But one is, obviously if you're talking in a time scale of 50 years, rather than one year, the incentives are more aligned between the company and the person. Because anything you could do in one year is not going to have a huge impact on your stock options in that amount of time. But if this company's your retirement plan, then you have a much stronger incentive to make sure that things at this company run well, which means you're probably optimizing for the company's long term cash flow yourself. And also, there's obviously benefits to having that knowledge built up in the firm from people who have been there for a long time. But yeah, that was an interesting difference. One of the interesting differences, at least.Austin Vernon (00:45:00):I mean, I think there's diminishing returns to how long your tenure's going to be. Maybe one year's too short, but there's a certain extent to where, if you grow faster than your role at the company, then it's time to switch. It's going to depend on the person, but maybe five years is a good number. And so if you're not getting promoted within the firm, then your human capital's being wasted, because you could go somewhere else and have more responsibility and perform better for them. Another interesting thing about that story, is almost all lean turnarounds, where they're like, we're going to implement something like Toyota production system, they come with no layoff promises. Because if you're going to increase productivity, that's when everyone's like, "Oh gosh, I'm going to get laid off." So instead you have to increase output and take more market share, is what you do.Dwarkesh Patel (00:46:00):It's kind of like burning your bridges, right? So this is the only way.Austin Vernon (00:46:05):The process really requires complete buy-in, because a lot of your ideas for how you're going to standardize work content come from your line workers, because that's what they're doing every day. So if you don't have their buy-in, then it's going to fail. So that's why it's really necessary to have those kinds of clauses.Dwarkesh Patel (00:46:22):Yeah. Yeah, that makes sense. I think it was in your post where you said, if somebody makes their process more efficient, and therefore they're getting more work allotted to them, then obviously they're going to stop doing that. Right? Which means that, I don't know, do you ought to give more downtime to your best workers or something or the people who are most creative in your company?Austin Vernon (00:46:48):I was just going to say, if you're a worker at a plant, then a lot of times for that level of employee, actually small rewards work pretty well. A lot of people on drilling rigs used to give the guys that met certain targets $100 Walmart gift cards. So sometimes small, it's a reward, new ideas, stuff like that works.Austin Vernon (00:47:15):But because the whole system has to grow together, if you just improve one part of the process, it may not help you. You have to be improving all the right processes so normally it's much more collaborative. There's some engineer that's looking at it and like, "All right, this is where we're struggling," or "We have our defects here." And then you go get together with that supervisor and the workers in that area, then you all figure out what improvements could be together. Because usually the people already know. This is like, you see a problem at the top, and you're just now realizing it. Then you go talk to the people doing the work, and they're like, "Oh yeah, I tried to tell you about that two weeks ago, man." And then you figure out a better process from there.Dwarkesh Patel (00:47:58):Based on your recommendation, and Steven Malina's recommendation, I recently read The Goal. And after reading the book, I'm much more understanding of the value that consultants bring to companies, potentially. Because before you could think, “What does a 21 year old, who just graduated college, know about manufacturing? What are they going to tell this plant that they didn't already know? How could they possibly be adding value?” And afterwards, it occurred to me that there's so many abstract concepts that are necessary to understand in order to be able to increase your throughput. So now I guess I can see how somebody who's generically smart but doesn't have that much industry knowledge might be able to contribute to a plan and value consultants could be bringing.Austin Vernon (00:48:43):I think this applies to consultants or young engineers. A lot of times you put young engineers just right in the thick of it, working in production or process right on the line, where you're talking to the workers the most. And there's several advantages to that. One, the engineer learns faster, because they're actually seeing the real process, and the other is there's easy opportunities for them to still have a positive impact on the business, because there's $100 bills laying on the ground just from going up and talking to your workers and learning about stuff and figuring out problems they might be having and finding out things like that that could help you lower cost. I think there's a lot of consultants that... I don't know how the industry goes, but I would guess there's... I know Accenture has 600,000 employees. I don't know if that many, but it's just a large number, and a lot are doing more basic tasks and there are some people that are doing the more high level stuff, but it's probably a lot less.Dwarkesh Patel (00:49:51):Yeah. Yeah. There was a quote from one of those books that said, "At Toyota we don't consider you an engineer unless you need to wash your hands before you can have lunch." Yeah. Okay. So in your blog post about car manufacturing, you talk about Tesla. But what was really interesting is that in a footnote, I think you mentioned that you bought Tesla stocks in 2014, which also might be interesting to talk about again when we go to the market and alpha part. But anyways. Okay. And then you talk about Tesla using something called metal manufacturing. So first of all, how did you know in 2014 that Tesla was headed here? And what is metal manufacturing and how does it differ from the Toyota production system?Austin Vernon (00:50:42):Yeah. So yeah, I just was goofing around and made that up. Someone actually emailed me and they were like, "Hey, what is this metal manufacturing? I want to learn more about this." It's like, "Well, sorry, I just kind of made that up, because I thought it sounded funny." But yeah, I think it's really the idea that there's this guy, Dimming, and he found a lot of the same ideas that Toyota ended up implementing, and Toyota respected his ideas a lot. America never really got fully on board with this in manufacturing. Of course it's software people that are coming and implementing this and manufacturing now which is like the real American way of doing things.Austin Vernon (00:51:32):Because when you look at these manufacturing processes, the best place to save money and optimize is before you ever build the process or the plant. It's very early on. So I think if there's a criticism of Toyota, it's that they're optimizing too late and they're not creative enough in their production technology and stuff. They're very conservative, and that's why they have hydrogen cars and not battery cars, even though they came out with the Prius, which was the first large sales hybrid.Austin Vernon (00:52:12):So yeah, I think what Tesla's doing with really just making Dimming's ideas our own and really just Americanizing it with like, "Oh, well, we want to cast this, because that would be easier." Well, we can't, because we don't have an alloy. "We'll invent the alloy." I love it. It's great. Mostly, I love Tesla because they do such... I agree with their engineering principles. So I didn't know that the company would come to be so valuable. It's just, I was just always reading their stock reports and stuff so I was like, "Well, at least I need to buy some stock so that I have a justification for spending all this time reading their 10 Ks."Dwarkesh Patel (00:52:53):I want to get a little bit more in detail about the exact difference here. So lean production, I guess, is they're able to produce their cars without defects and with matching demand or whatever. But what is it about their system that prevents them from making the kinds of innovations that Tesla is able to make?Austin Vernon (00:53:16):It's just too incremental. It's so hard to get these processes working. So the faster you change things, it becomes very, very difficult to change the whole system. So one of the advantages Tesla has is, well, if you're making electric cars, you have just a lot less parts. So that makes it easier. And once you start doing the really hard work of basically digitizing stuff, like they don't have speed limit dials, you start just removing parts from the thing and you can actually then start increasing your rate of change even faster.Austin Vernon (00:53:55):It makes it harder to get behind if you have these old dinosaur processes. But I think there's a YouTube channel called The Limiting Factor, and he actually went into the detail of numbers on what it costs for Tesla to do their giga-casting, which saves tons of parts and deletes zillions of thousands of robots from their process. If you already have an existing stamping line and all that, where you're just changing the dyes based on your model, then it doesn't make sense to switch to the casting. But if you're building new factories, like Tesla is, well, then it makes sense to do the casting and you can build new factories very cheaply and comparatively and much easier. So there's a little bit of... they just have lots of technical data, I guess you could say, in a software sense.Dwarkesh Patel (00:54:47):Yeah. That's super interesting. The analogy is actually quite... it's like, Microsoft has probably tens of thousands of software engineers who are just basically servicing its technical debt and making sure that the old systems run properly, whereas a new company like Tesla doesn't have to deal with that. The thing that's super interesting about Tesla is like, Tesla's market cap is way over a trillion, right? And then Toyota's is 300 billion. And Tesla is such a new company. The fact that you have this Toyota, which is legendary for its production system, and this company that's less than two decades old is worth many times more, it's kind of funny.Austin Vernon (00:55:32):Yeah. I would say that, in that measure, I don't like market cap. You need to use enterprise value. These old car companies have so much debt, that if you look at enterprise value, it's not so jarring. Literally, I don't know, I can't remember what GM's worth, like 40 billion or something, and then they have $120 billion in debt. So their enterprise value is five times more than their market cap.Dwarkesh Patel (00:56:02):What is enterprise value?Austin Vernon (00:56:03):Enterprise value is basically what is the value of the actual company before you have any claims on it. It's the market cap plus your debt. But basically, if you're the equity holder and the company gets sold, you have to pay the debt first. So you only get the value of what's left over after the debt. So that's why market cap is... when Tesla has very little debt and a lot of market cap, and then these other guys have a lot of debt with less market cap, it skews the comparison.Dwarkesh Patel (00:56:34):Yeah, and one of the interesting things, it's similar to your post on software, is that it seems like one of the interesting themes across your work is automating processes often leads to decreased eventual throughput, because you're probably adding capacity in a place that you're deciding excess capacity, and you're also making the money part of your operation less efficient by have it interface with this automated part. It sounds like there's a similar story there with car manufacturing, right?Austin Vernon (00:57:08):Yeah. I think if we tie it back into what we were talking about earlier, automation promotes local optimization and premature optimization. So a lot of times it's better to figure out, instead of automating a process to make a really hard to make part, you should just figure out how to make that part easy to make. Then after you do that, then it may not even make sense to automate it anymore. Or get rid of it all together, then you just delete all those robots.Austin's Carbon Capture ProjectDwarkesh Patel (00:57:37):Yeah. Yeah, that's interesting. Okay. So let's talk about the project that you're working on right now, the CO2 electrolysis. Do you want to explain what this is, and what your current approach is? What is going on here?Austin Vernon (00:57:55):Yeah, so I think just overall, electrofuels right now are super underrated, because you're about to get hopefully some very cheap electricity from solar, or it could be, maybe, some land. If we get really lucky, possibly some nuclear, geothermal. It'll just make sense to create liquid fuels, or natural gas, or something just from electricity and air, essentially.Austin Vernon (00:58:25):There's a whole spectrum of ways to do this, so O2 electrolysis is one of those. Basically, you take water, electricity, and CO2, and a catalyst. And then, you make more complex molecules, like carbon monoxide, or formic acid, or ethylene, or ethanol, or methane or methine. Those are all options. But it's important to point out that, right now, I think if you added up all the CO2 electrolyzers in the world, you'd be measuring their output and kilograms per day. We make millions of tons per day off of the products I just mentioned. So there's a massive scale up if it's going to have a wider impact.Austin Vernon (00:59:15):So there's some debate. I think the debate for the whole electrofuels sector is: How much are you going to do in the electrolyzer? One company whose approach I really like is Terraform Industries. They want to make methane, which is the main natural gas. But they're just making hydrogen in their electrolyzer, and then they capture the CO2 and then put it into a methanation reaction. So everything they're doing is already world scale, basically.Austin Vernon (00:59:47):We've had hydrogen electrolyzers power fertilizer plants, providing them with the Hydrogen that they need. Methanation happens in all ammonia plants and several other examples. It's well known, very old. Methanation is hydrogen CO2 combined to make water and methane. So their approach is more conservative, but if you do more in the electrolyzer, like I'm going to make the methane actually in the electrolyzer instead of adding this other process, you could potentially have a much simpler process that has less CapEx and scales downward better. Traditional chemical engineering heavily favors scaling. With the more Terraform processes, they're playing as absolutely ginormous factories. These can take a long time to build.Austin Vernon (01:00:42):So one of the things they're doing is: they're having to fight the complexity that creeps into chemical engineering every step of the way. Because if they don't, they'll end up with a plant that takes 10 years to build, and that's not their goal. It takes 10 years to build a new refinery, because they're so complex. So yeah, that's where I am. I'm more on the speculative edge, and it's not clear yet which products will be favorable for which approaches.Dwarkesh Patel (01:01:15):Okay, yeah. And you're building this out of your garage, correct?Austin Vernon (01:01:19):Yeah. So that's where electrolyzers... Everything with electric chemistry is a flat plate instead of a vessel, so it scales down. So I can have a pretty good idea of what my 100 square centimeter electrolyzer is going to do, if I make it quite a bit bigger. I have to worry about how my flow might interact in the larger one and make sure the mixing's good, but it's pretty straightforward because you're just making your flat plate a larger area. Whereas the scale, it is different from scaling a traditional chemical process.Dwarkesh Patel (01:01:56):I'm curious how cheap energy has to be before this is efficient. If you're turning it into methane or something like that, presumably for fuel, is the entire process energy positive? Or how cheap would energy, electricity you need to get before that's the case?Austin Vernon (01:02:18):The different products and different methods have different crossovers. So Terraform Industries, they're shooting for $10 a megawatt hour for electricity. But again, their process is simpler, a little less efficient than a lot of the other products. They also have better premiums, just worth more per ton than methane. So your crossover happens somewhere in between $10 and $20 a megawatt hour, which is... I mean, that's pretty... Right now, solar, it's maybe like $25. Maybe it's a little higher because payment prices have gone up in the last year, but I think the expectation is they'll come back down. And so, getting down to $15 where you start having crossovers for some of these products like ethanol or ethylene or methanol, it's not science fiction.Dwarkesh Patel (01:03:08):I think in Texas where I live, that's where it's at right? The cost of energy is 20 or something dollars per megawatt hour.Austin Vernon (01:03:16):Well, not this summer! But yeah, a lot of times in Texas, the wholesale prices are around $25 to $30.Dwarkesh Patel (01:03:26):Gotcha. Okay. Yeah. So a lot of the actual details you said about how this works went over my head. So what is a flat plate? I guess before you answer that question, can you just generally describe the approach? What is it? What are you doing to convert CO2 into these other compounds?Austin Vernon (01:03:45):Well, yeah, it literally just looks like an electrolyzer. You have two sides and anode and a cathode and they're just smushed together like this because of the electrical resistance. If you put them far apart, it makes it... uses up a lot of energy. So you smush them together as close as you can. And then, you're basically just trading electrons back and forth. On one side, you're turning CO2 into a more complex molecule, and on the other side, you're taking apart water. And so, when you take apart the water, it balances out the equation, balances out your electrons and everything like that. I probably need to work on that elevator pitch there, huh?Dwarkesh Patel (01:04:31):I guess what the basic idea is, you need to put power in to convert CO2 into these other compounds.Austin Vernon (01:04:38):The inputs are electricity, water, and CO2, and the output is usually oxygen and whatever chemical you're trying to create is, along with some side reactions.Dwarkesh Patel (01:04:49):And then, these chemicals you mentioned, I think ethanol, methane, formic acid, are these all just fuels or what are the other uses for them?Austin Vernon (01:04:58):A lot of people are taking a hybrid approach with carbon monoxide. So this would be like Twelve Co… They've raised a lot of money to do this and 100 employees or something. You can take that carbon monoxide and make hydrogen, and then you have to send gas to make liquid fuels. So they want to make all sorts of chemicals, but one of the main volume ones would be like jet fuel.Austin Vernon (01:05:22):Let's see Formic acid is, it's the little fry of all these. It is an additive in a lot of things like preserving hay for animals and stuff like that. Then, ethanol there's people that want to... There's this company that makes ethylene, which goes into plastics that makes polyethylene, which is the most produced plastic. Or you can burn it in your car, although I think ethanol is a terrible vehicle fuel. But then you can also just make ethylene straight in the electrolyzer. So there's many paths. So which path wins is an interesting race to see.Dwarkesh Patel (01:06:13):The ability to produce jet fuel is really interesting, because in your energy superabundance paper, you talk about... You would think that even if we can electrify everything in solar and when it becomes super cheap, that's not going to have an impact on the prices to go to space for example. But I don't know. If a process like this is possible, then it's some way to in financial terms, add liquidity. And then turn, basically, this cheap solar and wind into jet fuel through this indirect process. So the price to send stuff to space or cheap plane flights or whatever––all of that goes down as well.Austin Vernon (01:06:52):It basically sets a price ceiling on the price of oil. Whatever you can produce this for is the ceiling now, which is maybe the way I think about it.Dwarkesh Patel (01:07:06):Yeah. So do you want to talk a little bit about how your background led into this project? This is your full-time thing, right? I don't know if I read about that, but where did you get this idea and how long have you been pursuing it? And what's the progress and so on.Austin Vernon (01:07:20):I've always loved chemical engineering, and I love working at the big processing plant because it's like being a kid in a candy store. If I had extra time, I'd just walk around and look at the plant, like it's so cool. But the plant where I worked at, their up time was 99.7%. So if you wanted to change anything or do anything new, it terrified everyone. That's how they earned their bonuses: run the plant a 100% uptime all the time. So that just wasn't a good fit for me. And also, so I always wanted my own chemical plant, but it's billions of dollars to build plants so that was a pretty big step. So I think this new technology of... there's a window where you might be able to build smaller plants until it optimizes to be hard to enter again.Dwarkesh Patel (01:08:21):And then, why will it become hard to enter again? What will happen?Austin Vernon (01:08:27):If someone figures out how to build a really cheap electrolyzer, and they just keep it as intellectual property, then it would be hard to rediscover that and compete with them.Dwarkesh Patel (01:08:38):And so, how long have you been working on this?Austin Vernon (01:08:42):Oh, not quite a year. But yeah, I actually got this idea to work on it from writing my blog. So when I wrote the heating fuel post, I didn't really know much about... There's another company in the space, Prometheus Fuels and I'm like, "Oh, this is an interesting idea." And then, I got talking to a guy named Brian Heligman, and he's like, "You should do this, but not what Prometheus is doing." And so, then I started looking at it and I liked it, so I've been working on it since.Dwarkesh Patel (01:09:08):Yeah. It's interesting because if energy does become as cheap as you suspect it might. If this process works, then yeah, this is a trillion dollar company probably, right? If you're going to get the patents and everything.Austin Vernon (01:09:22):I mean, maybe. With chemical plants, there's a certain limitation where your physical limitation is. There's only so many places that are good places for chemical plants. You start getting hit by transportation and all that. So, you can't just produce all the chemical for the entire world in Texas and transport it all around. It wouldn't work. So you're talking about a full, globe-spanning thing. At that point, if y

Wes, Eneasz, and David discuss the news from the last two weeks from a rationalist perspectiveSupport us on Substack!News discussed:Democrats agreed on environmental/inflation billAirfield in Crimea spontaneously combustsAlso, a conscript barracks in Moscow caught fire. No casualties reported.Also, a Belarusian air force base also spontaneously combustedSecret Service deleted all their texts from around 1/6Outgoing Pentagon officials also had phones wipedMar-A-Lago raidedEquifax glitch misreported credit scores for millions by up to 130 points. Class action lawsuit now. Pelosi went to TaiwanPredictIt being shut down by FedsTrump endorsed “Eric” in Missouri Republican primaryUnited Mine Workers of America to pay more than $13 million in compensation to an Alabama coal company Nebraska teen and mother facing charges for DIY abortion at 28 weeks, cops using Facebook messages as evidenceAmerica's most reliable newscaster ordered to pay $49.3 ($45.2 punative, $4.1 compensatory) million in damages to Sandy Hook familiesTexas statute probably limits punitive damages to $750KHappy News!Kansas abortion amendment got crushedThe adsZOMBIE PIG INVASION!The thrice-damned NRC approved NuScale Power's small, modular reactor designsThe NRC also approved the Vogtle power plant in Georgia to begin loading fuel and testing whether it can run commercially. This is the first new US power plant to receive such approval since the NRC was formed in 19747yr old saves 3yr old from drowningTBC Episode on Labor UnionsGot something to say? Come chat with us on the Bayesian Conspiracy Discord or email us at themindkillerpodcast@gmail.com. Say something smart and we'll mention you on the next show!Follow us!RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/themindkillerGoogle: https://play.google.com/music/listen#/ps/Iqs7r7t6cdxw465zdulvwikhekmPocket Casts: https://pca.st/vvcmifu6 Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/the-mind-killer Apple: Intro/outro music: On Sale by Golden Duck Orchestra This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit mindkiller.substack.com/subscribe

Ohio AFL-CIO President Tim Burga joined the America's Work Force Union Podcast and discussed two of the state AFL-CIO's endorsements in Ohio's Primary Election. He also provided an update on the process to approve redistricting maps in Ohio following numerous rejections by the Ohio Supreme Court due to gerrymandering.    Glenn Kelly, President of the International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers (BAC) Local 8 Southeast, joined the podcast and discussed how the Vogtle nuclear plant project in Georgia is one of the largest union construction projects in the country. He also talked about why Georgia has become ground zero for voting rights and workers' rights, and why growing union membership is critical to keeping the state blue.

Stop me if you've heard this before: Nuclear expansion at Plant Vogtle is delayed. Stop, you say? Okay; The all-GOP elected body that oversees Vogtle's expansion and other utility issues in Georgia saw Republican state lawmakers redraw its districts. Coincidently, that eliminated the one Democrat who'd gained enough momentum to be a serious contender. Oh, you've heard that one too, eh?; Well, in completely related news, Gwinnett County's next school board race will be non-partisan. The move comes after Democrats swept the previous contest. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Patty Durand has announced her campaign to run for Public Service Commissioner in Georgia. In this episode, APN interviews Patty about energy bills, coal ash pollution and the nuclear plant Vogtle.

Vogtle was supposed to be the beginning of a nuclear renaissance. The two AP1000's at this site were the first new reactors to be built in the USA in the 21st century. There was optimism that a novel modular design that economized space and materials would be on budget and on time. Vogtle, however, has become the poster child of the United States' inability to build affordable nuclear reactors. The timeline has almost doubled and the cost overrun tripled. The project bankrupted the reactor vendor Westinghouse and almost bankrupted its parent company Toshiba. Decouple veteran Mark Nelson returns to discuss what we can learn from the challenges of this megaproject. Mark argues that Westinghouse, which had become divorced by a generation from nuclear construction, created a design that looked good on paper but presented major construction challenges. Rather than learning from contemporary successful reactor builders like the South Koreans, the company believed it knew best. The design features of the AP1000 which boasted 1/5th the amount of concrete and steel of a typical reactor and modular construction were supposed to enable parallel construction and speed up the build. In reality, they resulted in unprecedented challenges such as working in confined spaces and defective modules which led to interruptions in the critical paths of the construction schedule. Furthermore, the engineering, procurement and construction firms engaged to build Vogtle had almost no workers or management with lived experience of building reactors let alone a first-of-a-kind novel design like the AP1000. Communication between the Chinese who were years ahead with their four AP1000 builds broke down and lessons were not shared with their American counterparts. The history of successful nuclear buildouts in countries like France, Japan and South Korea shows that lived construction experience and consistent designs built over and over are what bring down nuclear costs and timelines. In essence the tacit knowledge of a skilled management and workforce trumps a fancy new design especially for an atrophied nuclear sector. Vogtle is a cautionary tale for the western nuclear industry which has recently pinned it hopes almost exclusively on the role of advanced nuclear and novel SMR designs. Mark argues what is needed is humility, consulting with and employing the lessons of successful contemporary reactor builders, building simple reactors we are familiar with and focusing on optimizing construction ease over novel designs at least for now.

Dr. Laura K Vogtle, Program Director Department of Occupational Therapy UAB, and Dr. Sarah C Tucker, Professor Department of Occupational Therapy UAB, on understanding Occupational Therapy. Alabama Care is partially supported by ACDD.org. The views expressed are not necessarily the views of this organization.

Coming up on the Science Revolution is Beyond Nuclear's Kevin Kamps. On the 10th anniversary of the Fukushima Crisis, in a similar fashion to the current COVID-19 pandemic, opinion on Fukushima is diverging between those who are horrified by the health risks, and those who are angry at the possible economic damage that could be done to the community. Investigative Journalist Greg Palast drops by on how Stacey Abrams' REAL courage in Georgia was and is her opposition to Vogtle nuclear plant — the last and only nuclear plant under construction in the USA. She won’t back charging Georgians ruinous electric bills to finish it. Also in Geeky Science - good news on CBD. There is a new report out showing it reduces plaque and improves cognition in Alzheimer patients.

Charles Utley is Associate Director of BREDL. The Alvin W. Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, also known as Plant Vogtle is a two-unit nuclear power plant located in Burke County, near Waynesboro, Georgia. Southern Nuclear Company of Georgia, who owns Plant Vogtle wants to build additional nuclear power plants near Waynesboro, GA. This would increase the negative health impacts on nearby residents and increase the cost of electric power. In Burke County, Georgia, environmental samples contained tritium, cesium-137, strontium-90, plutonium, iodine 129, cobalt-60, according to a recent report by Georgia WAND on “Community Impacts at the Crossroads of Nuclear and Climate Injustices in the U.S. South.” Of each of these radioactive isotopes, tritium is the element contributing the highest levels of contamination, showing up in air, rain, groundwater, river water, drinking water, fish, milk, crops, leafy vegetation, and deer. All nuclear power plants routinely release doses of tritium, which can cause birth defects and cancer. Cancer rates rose sharply for all cancers in Burke County while U.S. rates have declined. CNN television news also aired a report from Shell Bluff in Burke County, discussing how cancer rates in that area are 51 percent higher than the national average. With Charles we discuss the work he's done surrounding Plant Vogtle, what's happening now with the plant and in the future, how they pay for and fund the plant, and what they're future plans are. Contact and connect with Charles: bredlutley@gmail.com More on Plant Vogtle: http://www.bredl.org/nuclear/Vogtle.htm Health Impacts of living near a nuclear site: https://gawand.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/GA-WAND_Climate_Nuclear_Report_Dec_2017.pdf https://georgiawatch.org/health-environmental-harms-ignored-at-plant-vogtle-vcm-18-hearings/

Laura Asherman is the Founder of Forage Films LLC and Director of the film Power Lines. The 30 min documentary follows the construction of an additional two new units at the Plant Vogtle Nuclear Power Plants, which at the time of the documentary was five years behind schedule and more than $13 billion over original cost estimates. These overages directly affect ratepayers across Georgia, who are financing the construction through a fee on their monthly power bills, a process fraught with mismanagement and lacking in transparency. These ratepayer payments significantly enrich Georgia Power's yearly profits, giving them little incentive to ensure the project's timely completion. The film includes interviews with BREDL's Charles Utley and members of our chapter Concerned Citizens of Shell Bluff. With Laura we discuss her filmmaking process, the issues concerning Plant Vogtle, actions the community is taking, what she learned from the whole process, and new projects she's working on. There will be excerpts from the film as I talk with Laura. Contact and connect with Laura: laura@foragefilms.com Watch the FULL film: https://vimeo.com/300226940 Learn more about Plant Vogtle: http://www.bredl.org/nuclear/Vogtle.htm http://www.bredl.org/nuclear/200511_BREDL_Petition_to_Intervene_Vogtle_3.htm https://www.powermag.com/vogtle-project-highly-unlikely-to-meet-deadlines/ AP1000: https://www.powermag.com/now-two-ap1000-reactors-in-commercial-operation-vogtle-makes-progress-too/ Plant Vogtle sinking into the ground: http://www.bredl.org/nuclear/Vogtle.htm Background Music Credits: https://www.youtube.com/c/mbbmusic https://soundcloud.com/mbbofficial https://www.instagram.com/mbb_music

by Libbe HaLevy | May 20, 2020 Arnie Gundersen, Chief Engineer at Fairewinds Energy Education, has more than 45 years of nuclear power engineering experience. He holds a nuclear safety patent, was a licensed reactor operator, and is a former nuclear industry senior vice president. During his nuclear power industry career, Arnie managed and coordinated projects at 70-nuclear power plants in the US. Here, he goes over the problems at the Vogtle nuclear reactor build in Georgia, where the weight of the unit is already causing it to sink into Georgia’s red clay. Arnie analyzed the data that became the basis for the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League (BREDL)’s petition to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission called on regulators to revoke the plant’s license for false statements made by its owners, Southern Nuclear Operating Company. Here is the latest Fairewinds blog post by Arnie and Maggie Gundersen about the sinking reactor of Vogtle.Here is the BREDL legal petition and Arnie’s expert report for BREDL via the Fairewinds website.Fairewinds’ research about safety issues of AP1000 reactor design, the same reactors at Vogtle Nancy Burton is Director of Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone (MothballMillstone.org), and she joined us to talk about the implications of the latest Covid cases at Millstone nuclear reactor in Waterford, CT during the current refueling outage.Go to www.nuclearhotseat.com to sign up for weekly information directly to your email boxPodcast is also putlished on YouTube: nutzforart

Leaning (Nuclear) Tower of Vogtle: Fairewinds Energy Education’s Arnie Gundersenon the dangers of a sinking nuclear reactor in Georgia This Week’s Featured Interviews: Arnie Gundersen, Chief Engineer at Fairewinds Energy Education, has more than 45 years of nuclear power engineering experience. He holds a nuclear safety patent, was a licensed reactor operator, and is a...

Vogtle Nuclear in Georgia dangerously sinking under its own weight: Arnie Gundersen explains problems, how it happened, how bad it is... and it's bad. Nancy Burton of Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone reports on 11 Covid positive diagnoses, some of them predating the start of the current refueling process, and how it is disproportionately impacting control room personnel.

Vogtle Nuclear in Georgia dangerously sinking under its own weight: Arnie Gundersen explains problems, how it happened, how bad it is... and it's bad. Nancy Burton of Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone reports on 11 Covid positive diagnoses, some of them predating the start of the current refueling process, and how it is disproportionately impacting control room personnel.

Vogtle Nuclear in Georgia dangerously sinking under its own weight: Arnie Gundersen explains problems, how it happened, how bad it is... and it's bad. Nancy Burton of Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone reports on 11 Covid positive diagnoses, some of them predating the start of the current refueling process, and how it is disproportionately impacting control room personnel.

Chernobyl Fire – representation of radioactive smoke dispersion over Europefrom the 3+ week wildfire in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone This Week’s Featured Interviews: Kate Brown is the author of Manual for Survival: A Chernobyl Guide to the Future. She is an historian of environmental and nuclear history at MIT and the author of Plutopia, which won...

Chernobyl fire in third week as anniversary of 1986 disaster approaches on April 26. Exclusion Zone wildfire chokes Kiev with radioactive smoke into Kiev's on disaster's 34th Anniversary. Covid19/Nuclear UPDATE - First Hanford positive, Vogtle has 38 - cuts 2000 workers, more.

Chernobyl fire in third week as anniversary of 1986 disaster approaches on April 26. Exclusion Zone wildfire chokes Kiev with radioactive smoke into Kiev's on disaster's 34th Anniversary. Covid19/Nuclear UPDATE - First Hanford positive, Vogtle has 38 - cuts 2000 workers, more.

Chernobyl fire in third week as anniversary of 1986 disaster approaches on April 26. Exclusion Zone wildfire chokes Kiev with radioactive smoke into Kiev's on disaster's 34th Anniversary. Covid19/Nuclear UPDATE - First Hanford positive, Vogtle has 38 - cuts 2000 workers, more.

Vogtle has its first positive test: will that slow work on the reactors?

In this final podcast for 2019, Tom discusses company highlights from the past year to include Vogtle 3 and 4, third quarter earnings and reactions to rate cases.

Pacific Gas & Electric faces a June 2020 deadline to exit bankruptcy. Debtwire Municipals Maria Amante tells us the latest on the investor-owned utility in California. Head of Municipal Research Greg Clark gives us his take on large urban school districts in a research analysis report. JEA and the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia continue their legal battle associated with the Vogtle nuclear project. Debtwire Municipals Patrick Ferguson explains the latest in this legal skirmish.

We speak to Department of Energy’s Ed McGinnis about the potential of both Small Modular Reactors and the next generation of large-scale commercial facilities in the United States. For pictures and additional info, visit http://www.energy-cast.com/63-doe.html

Our duty as voters is to judge the job performance of our members of Congress and decide whether or not they deserve to be re-hired or fired from their positions as lawmakers. In this episode, Jen summarizes 20 controversial bills and laws that passed during the 115th Congress which you can use to judge whether your Representative and two Senators have voted in your best interest. Links to all of the votes are listed in this episode's show notes on www.congressionaldish.com Please Support Congressional Dish - Quick Links Click here to contribute a lump sum or set up a monthly contribution via PayPal Click here to support Congressional Dish for each episode via Patreon Send Zelle payments to: Donation@congressionaldish.com Send Venmo payments to: @Jennifer-Briney Use your bank’s online bill pay function to mail contributions to: 5753 Hwy 85 North Number 4576 Crestview, FL 32536 Please make checks payable to Congressional Dish Thank you for supporting truly independent media! Recommended Congressional Dish Episodes CD174: Bank Lobbyist Act CD163: Net Neutrality CD157: Failure to Repeal CD151: AHCA - The House Version (American Health Care Act) CD129: The Impeachment of John Koskinen CD069: Giving Away Your Land CD048: The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) Bills S.2155: Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act, introduced Nov 16, 2017, enacted May 24, 2018. Outlined in detail in CD174: Bank Lobbyist Act First significant re-writing of the banking laws since Dodd-Frank in 2010 Most significant change: Kills a Dodd-Frank requirement that banks with more than $50 billion in assets undergo stress tests to ensure their stabilityr. Bank Lobbyist Act changed that so stress tests will only be required for banks with over $250 billion. This exempts 25 of the 38 largest US banks from important regulations. Passed the Senate 67-31 Passed House of Representatives 258-159   H.R.1628: American Health Care Act of 2017, introduced March 20, 2017, passed House May 4. 2017. Outlined in detail in CD151: ACHA The House Version (American Health Care Act) There were quite a few versions of bills that would have ripped up the rules placed on insurance companies by the Affordable Care Act, but every version - including this one - eliminated the requirements that health insurance cover “essential health benefits”, which include: Ambulances Emergencies Hospital stays Maternity and newborn care Mental health Prescription drugs Rehab Lab work Preventative visits Dental and vision for children Would have also allowed - in some circumstance - insurance companies to charge us more for “pre-existing conditions” Passed the House of Representatives 217-213 All Democrats no's 20 Republicans no’s   S.Amdt. 667 (McConnell) to H.R. 1628: Of a perfecting nature., July 28, 2017. The “Skinny Repeal” is a wildly irresponsible 8 page bill, which was only available to read for a few hours before the vote, which also would have allowed the sale of health insurance that doesn’t cover the essential health benefits. This vote was the famous, dramatic moment when John McCain turned his thumb down and killed the bill. Get the full story in CD157: Failure to Repeal Failed Senate 49-51 All Democrats and Independents voted no   S.J.Res. 34: A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission relating to "Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services." introduced March 7, 2017, enacted April 3, 2017. Regulation overturned: Killed a regulation that applied the privacy requirements of the Communications Act of 1934 to internet access and telecommunications providers. Required them to: Provide privacy notices that clearly and accurately inform customers Get opt-in or opt-out customer approval to use and share customer information Require opt-in’s when the company is making money from selling our information Secure our information Notify customers of data breaches Not condition service upon the customer’s surrender of privacy rights Passed Senate 50-48 All Republicans yes All Democrats and Independents no Passed House 215-205 - All Democrats no   H.R. 21: Midnight Rules Relief Act of 2017, introduced January 3, 2017, passed House January 4, 2017. Allows Congress to bundle rules that they want to prevent into one bill so there is a single vote on a joint resolution of disapproval. This means that each one will not be carefully considered as is required now. Passed the House of Representatives 238-184 Every Democrat voted no Has not been voted on in the Senate   H.R. 26: Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2017, introduced January 3, 2017, passed House January 5, 2017. Changes the Congressional Review Act to require Congressional review of major agency regulations before they can go into effect. Passed the House 237-187 all Republicans voted yes Has not been voted on in the Senate   H.J.Res. 38: Disapproving the rule submitted by the Department of the Interior known as the Stream Protection Rule, introduced January 30, 2017, enacted February 16, 2017. Regulation overturned: Killed the “Stream Protection Rule”, which required permits to specify when coal mining would reach a damaging level for ground and surface water quality. Stricter water quality monitoring requirements in streams. Required land disturbed by mining be restored to a condition similar to what it was before the mining. Passed Senate 54-45 Passed House 228-194   H.J.Res. 41: Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of a rule submitted by the Securities and Exchange Commission relating to "Disclosure of Payments by Resource Extraction Issuers." introduced January 30, 2017, enacted February 14, 2017. Regulation overturned: Kills a regulation requiring fossil fuel companies to annually report any payments made by the company or a subsidiary to a foreign government or the Federal Government for the commercial development of oil, natural gas, or minerals. Passed Senate 52-47 All Republicans yes All Democrats and Independents no Passed House 235-187   H.J.Res. 44: Disapproving the rule submitted by the Department of the Interior relating to Bureau of Land Management regulations that establish the procedures used to prepare, revise, or amend land use plans pusuant to the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, introduced January 30, 2017, enacted March 27, 2017. Regulation overturned: Kills a regulation that enhanced opportunities for public involvement during the preparation of resource management plans by increasing public access to plans in earlier stages of the process, allowing the public to submit data and other information. Passed Senate 51-48 All Republicans yes All Democrats and Indepedents no Passed House 234-186   H.J.Res. 40: Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Social Security Administration relating to Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007, introduced January 30, 2017, enacted February 28, 2017. Regulation overturned: Kills a regulation that required Federal agencies to give the Attorney General information on more people for inclusion in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). People who would be added include people collecting disability benefits due to mental instability. Passed Senate 57-43 All Republicans voted yes Passed House 235-180   H.J.Res. 83: Disapproving the rule submitted by the Department of Labor relating to Clarification of Employer's Continuing Obligation to Make and Maintain an Accurate Record of Each Recordable Injury and Illness, introduced February 21, 2017, enacted April 3, 2017. Regulation overturned: Kills a regulation that made clear that the requirement to record work-related injuries and illnesses is an ongoing obligation; the duty does not expire if the employer fails to create records in the first place. The records must be complete for as long as records are required, which is 5 years and citations can be issued for up to 6 months after that. Passed Senate 50-48 All Republicans yes All Democrats and Independents no Passed House 231-191   H.J.Res. 37: Disapproving the rule submitted by the Department of Defense, the General Services Administration, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration relating to the Federal Acquisition Regulation, introduced January 30, 2017, enacted March 27, 2017. Regulation overturned: Kills a regulation that required contractors for the Defense Department, General Services Administration, and NASA to report their compliance with 14 federal labor laws, required contractors to provide documentation on “hours worked, overtime hours, pay, and additions to or deductions from pay” in each pay period, and limited mandatory arbitration of employee claims for contracts and subcontracts worth more than $1 million. Passed Senate 49-48 All Republicans voted yes All Democrats and Independents voted no Passed House 236-187   H.J.Res. 111: Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by Bureau of Consumer Finanacial Protection relating to "Arbitration Agreements" introduced July 20, 2017, enacted November 1, 2017. Regulation Overturned: Killed a regulation that prohibited banks and other financial institutions from forcing arbitration in their contracts to prevent customers from filing and participating in class action lawsuits. Passed Senate 51-50 VP Mike Pence broke the tie All Democrats and Independents voted no Passed House 231-190 All Democrats voted no   S.J.Res. 57: A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by Bureau of Consumer financial Protection relating to "Indirect Auto Lending and Cmopliance with the Equal Credit Opportunity Act" introduced March 22, 2018, enacted May 21, 2018. CFPB regulation overturned: Killed a regulation that included auto dealers in the definition of “creditor” for the purpose of prohibiting them from discriminating in any way in a credit transaction on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, or welfare assistance. Passed Senate 51-47 All Republicans yes All Independents no Passed House 234-175   S. 204: Trickett Wendler, Frank Mongiello, Jordan McLinn, and Matthew Bellina Right to Try Act of 2017, introduced January 24, 2017, enacted May 30, 2018. Allows people diagnosed with a life-threatening diseases or conditions who have exhausted approved treatment options and can’t participate in a clinical trial on an experimental drug that has not been FDA approved to get that drug directly from the drug company, with a doctor’s approval. Allows drug companies to sell their unapproved drugs directly to customers as long as the drugs have to have been through a completed Phase 1 of a clinical trial. This law says the Secretary of HHS can’t use the clinical outcomes of the patient’s use of the drug to delay or adversely affect the review or approval of the drug, unless he/she certifies it’s for safety reasons or the drug company requests that data be used. Gives legal immunity to the drug companies, prescribers, dispensers or an “other individual entity” unless there is willful misconduct, gross negligence, to the intentional breaking of a state law. Passed the Senate by unanimous consent (no recorded vote) Passed House 250-169 on May 22 All Republican votes were yes's Along with 22 Democrats   H.R. 772: Common Sense Nutrition Disclosure Act of 2017, introduced January 31, 2017, passed House February 6, 2018. Changes the calorie disclosure requirements from telling us the number of calories in the standard menu item as usually prepared to allowing them to tell us the calories per serving, with them determining what a serving is. Allows restaurants to choose whether they will display calories by entire combo meals, by individual items in combos, by servings in items in combos. Let’s them use ranges, averages, or “other methods” as determined by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (making it a decision of political appointee) Eliminates the requirement that restaurants provide calories in store if “the majority of orders are placed by customers who are off-premises” Restaurants will not be required to get any signed certifications of compliance. Restaurants can not be held liable in civil courts for violating nutrition disclosure laws. Passed the House 266-157 Has not been voted on in the Senate   H.R. 2936: Resilient Federal Forests Act of 2017, introduced June 20, 2017, passed House November 1, 2017. Allows more wood to be removed by the logging industry from Federal Forests and exempts them some from environmental regulations Passed House 232-188 Has not been voted on in the Senate   H.R. 4606: Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act, introduced December 11, 2017, passed House September 6, 2018. Deems the importation or exportation of natural gas to be “consistent with the public interest” and says the applications for importation or exportation “shall be granted without modification or delay” if the volume does not exceed 0.14 billion cubic feet per day and if the application doesn’t require an environmental impact statement. Passed House 260-146 Has not been voted on in the Senate   H.R. 1119: Satisfying Energy Needs and Saving the Environment Act (SENSE Act), introduced Febraury 16, 2017, passed House March 8, 2018. Says the EPA must give coal companies the choice of if their steam generators will comply with emissions standards for hydrogen chloride or sulfur dioxide. The EPA is not allowed to require compliance with both Passed House 215-189 Has not been voted on in the Senate       H.R. 3053: Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 2018, introduced June 26, 2017, passed House May 10, 2018. Forces the continuance of the process of moving all the nuclear waste in the United States to Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Grants the entire US government immunity for damages caused in the course of “any mining, mineral leasing, or geothermal leasing activity” conducted on the land reserved for nuclear waste disposal. Speeds up the approval process by 6 months for interim storage and basically forbids disapproval Would Increase by 57% the amount of spent fuel allowed to be held during construction - no environmental review to make sure the tanks can hold this much The Secretary of Energy does NOT need to consider alternative actions or no-action alternatives to infrastructure projects needed for Yucca mountain as far as environmental analysis are concerned. Passed the House of Representatives 340-72 Has not been voted on in the Senate                       H.R. 7: No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2017, introduced January 13, 2017, passed House January 24, 2017. Makes permanent a common funding law amendment that prevents federal money from being used to perform abortions. This bill would also prevent any government payment assistance on the health insurance exchanges for plans that cover abortion - which effectively would stop health insurance companies from offering abortion coverage in their plans since that would make them ineligible for many of us to purchase. Passed the House of Representatives 238-183 All Republicans voted yes Has not been voted on in the Senate       Additional Reading Article: Pompeo eyes Fox News reporter to head Counterpropaganda Office by Robbie Gramer and Elias Groll, Foreign Policy, September 6, 2018. Article: "Right to Try" is a cruel farce by Beatrice Adler-Bolton, Jacobin Magazine, August 12, 2018. Article: The 'right to try' could cost dying patients a fortune by Michelle Cortez, Bloomberg, June 20, 2018. Article: Congress works to revive long-delayed plan to store nuclear waste in Yucca Mountain by Michael Collins, USA Today, June 3, 2018. Report: Johnson to FDA: Agency should comply with right to try law, U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs, May 31, 2018. Article: Senator behind right-to-try law says its intent is to weaken FDA by Anna Edney, Bloomberg, May 31, 2018. Opinion: Right to Try Act poses big challenge for FDA by Michael D. Becker, NPR, May 24, 2018. Article: Right-to-try bill headed for vote puts bigger burden on FDA to protect patients, Gottlieb says by Ike Swetlitz and Erin Mershon, Stat News, May 17, 2018. Article: Walden, Shimkus, Lance, Walters steer House toward advancing nuclear waste bill by Ripon Advance News Service, May 14, 2018. Article: House passes Yucca bill, but its future is uncertain as Heller pledges to stop it in the Senate by Humberto Sanchez, The Nevada Independent, May 11, 2018. Article: The revenge of the stadium banks by David Dayen, The Intercept, March 2, 2018. Article: Pence says that Congress should get right-to-try legislation 'done' by Erin Mershon, Stat News, January 18, 2018. Statement: Examining patient access to investigational drugs by Scott Gottlieb, FDA.gov, October 3, 2017. Article: What was in the failed Senate 'skinny repair' health care bill? by Tami Luhby, CNN Money, July 28, 2017. Article: Scott Gottlieb: Conflicts surround Trump's FDA pick by Sandee LaMotte, CNN, April 4, 2017. Report: House passes bill to overturn 'midnight' regulations en masse by Lydia Wheeler, The Hill, January 4, 2017. Article: Now you have to keep OSHA injury records for 5 years by Fred Hosier, Safety News Alert, December 21, 2016. Opinion: With Harry Reid's retirement, will the Yucca Mountain plan be revived? by The Times Editorial Board, Los Angeles Times, December 8, 2016. Article: Bankers ease rules on automatic student loan defaults by Danielle Douglas-Gabriel, The Washington Post, October 27, 2016. Article: Sallie Mae under fire for death-induce defaults by Shahien Nasiripour, Huffpost, April 25, 2014. Report: Victim: Gang-rape cover-up by U.S., Halliburton/KBR by Brian Ross, Maddy Sauer, And Justin Rood, ABC News, December 10, 2007. Resources Company Information: Volks Constructors Corporation Congressional Publication: Disapproval of Regulations by Congress: Procedure Under Congressional Review Act, Oct 10, 2001. Court Report: Petition for Review of a Final Order of the Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission Disease Information: Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD), MDA.org Explanatory Statement: Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018 Fact Sheet: President Trump: Cutting Red Tape for American Businesses FDA: Expanded Acces INDs and Protocols Law Resolutions: Congressional Review Act (CRA) Letter: Scott Gottlieb to Elizabeth J. Fischmann, Associate General Councel for Ethics Letter to the Senate: Dean Heller, Re: 2019 NRC Approps LinkedIn Profile: Scott Gottlieb OpenSecrets.org: Rep. Bruce Westerman - Arkansas District 04 OpenSecrets.org: Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers - Washington District 05 OpenSecrets.org: Domino's Pizza OpenSecrets.org: Sen. Ron Johnson - Wisconsin Study Report: Clinical Development Success Rates Study 2006-2015 Sound Clip Sources House Session: Legislative Day of May 22, 2018, HouseLive.gov. 6:13:00 - Rep. Mike Burgess (TX) "The bill we will be voting out soon is about patients. It is about having more time with their loved ones. In the words of Vice President MIKE PENCE, ‘‘It’s about restoring hope and giving patients with life-threatening diseases a fighting chance.’’ With hundreds of thousands of Americans with a terminal illness and their families looking for us to act, I urge Members of this House, the people’s House, to support restoring hope and giving them a fighting chance at life." Hearing: House Hearing; Yucca Mountain, May 10, 2018. 32:00 Representative Greg Walden (OR): You know, the Department of Energy’s Hanford site is just up the mighty Columbia River from where I live and where I grew up. That area and those workers helped us win World War II, and the site’s nuclear program was instrumental in projecting peace through strength throughout the Cold War. While the community has been a constructive partner in support of our vital national security missions, it did not agree to serve as a perpetual storage site for the resulting nuclear waste. Fifty-six million gallons of toxic waste sitting in decades-old metal tanks at Hanford—these are those tanks that were being constructed to hold this waste. They are now buried in the ground. The only entry point is right here. The amount of waste stored at Hanford would fill this entire House Chamber 20 times over. According to a recent Government Accountability Office report, the oldest of these tanks, some of which date back to the 1940s, have single-layer walls, or shells. They were built to last 20 years. They will be almost 100 years old by the estimated end of their waste treatment. The Department of Energy has reported that 67 of these tanks are assumed or known to have leaked waste into the soil. There is an understandable sense of urgency in the Northwest behind the cleanup efforts that are under way at Hanford. H.R. 3053 will provide the pathway to clean up the contaminated Hanford site. You see, the waste from Hanford will end up in a secure permanent storage site that we believe will be Yucca Mountain. 35:15 Representative Greg Walden (OR): The legislation authorizes the Department of Energy to contract with private companies to store nuclear waste while DOE finishes the rigorous scientific analysis of the repository design and the associated Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensing process. So, an interim storage facility can bring added flexibility to DOE’s disposal program and may provide a more expeditious near-term pathway to consolidate spent nuclear fuel. 41.31 Representative Fred Upton (MI): In my district, we have two nuclear plants. Both of them have run out of room in their storage, so they have dry casks that are literally a John Shimkus baseball throw away from Lake Michigan. Every one of these 100-some sites across the country is in an environmentally sensitive area, and at some point they’re going to run out of room. In Michigan, we’ve got two other sites that also have dry casks in addition to the two in my district. 45:05 Representative Buddy Carter (GA): This legislation is important not only because of what it means to the future of clean-energy opportunities for this country, but also what this means for our communities. Nuclear energy has become a safe and effective way to generate energy, all while not producing greenhouse gas emissions. 53:29 Representative Leonard Lance (NJ): New Jersey is home to four nuclear reactors at three generating stations: Oyster Creek, Hope Creek, and Salem. Oyster Creek will be closing this October. In the congressional district I serve, these plants account for about half of the power generation and 90 percent of the carbon-free electricity. New Jersey’s nuclear plants avoid 14 million tons of carbon emissions each year. Public Service, FirstEnergy, and Exelon are doing their part in storing their station’s spent nuclear fuel on-site, but we need a permanent site. The expertise and know-how of the federal government has a responsibility to my constituents and to the American people. I want the 3,000 metric tons of nuclear waste out of New Jersey and consolidated in a national protected facility. 58:54 Representative Dina Titus (NV): The first ‘‘Screw Nevada’’ bill was passed in 1982, and since that time, Nevada’s residents, elected officials, business leaders, health and environmental groups have steadfastly opposed the Yucca Mountain repository. I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record over 100 letters from those groups in opposition. 59:19 Representative Dina Titus (NV): You’ve heard that the legislation before you now, ‘‘Screw Nevada 2.0,’’ is a work of compromise, a bipartisan effort, not perfect, but a step forward. Well, that, frankly, is an opinion. It’s not the facts. Here are the facts: the legislation overrides environmental laws, allowing the EPA to move the goalposts in terms of radiation limits to ensure that nothing will ever interfere with the agenda of the nuclear industry. It sets up a consent-based process for the establishment of an interim storage facility but imposes a permanent facility at Yucca Mountain. It increases the amount of nuclear waste to be dumped in Nevada by 37 percent, 110 metric tons more that were not considered in any of the environmental or safety studies being used to justify the project. It also removes the prohibition currently in law that prohibits Nevada from being the de facto interim storage facility until a permanent one can be licensed. It was also changed after passing out of committee to address the high scoring costs—is it already three minutes? Chairman: Gentlewoman’s time has expired. Representative Paul Tonko: Mr. Speaker, we grant the gentlelady another minute. Chairman: Gentlelady’s recognized. Rep. Titus: Thank you. —to address the high scoring costs, making it less likely that we get host benefits. Also, contrary to the sponsor’s comments, the area around Yucca Mountain is not some desolate area. It has iconic wildlife, endangered species, and Native American artifacts. Also, the proposed facility sits above the water table and on an active fault and can only be reached by roads that travel through 329 of your congressional districts. 1:03:53 Representative Ruben Kihuen (NV): You know, Mr. Speaker, I find it offensive. I sit here and listen to all my colleagues, and they all want to send nuclear waste to the state of Nevada. They’re all generating this nuclear waste, and they want to send it to my backyard right in the Fourth Congressional District. You know, bottom line is this, Mr. Speaker: if you generate nuclear waste, you should keep it in your own backyard. Don’t be sending it to our backyard. 1:11:27 Representative Joe Courtney (CT): Next to me is a picture of Haddam Neck, Connecticut, which is a pristine part of the state where the Connecticut River and the Salmon River come together. Where the circle is on the photograph, there are 43 casks of spent nuclear power uranium rods that, again, today, pretty much cordon off that whole area. If you drove up in a car, you’d be met by a platoon of heavily armed security guards who, for good reason, have to patrol that area every single day because of the dangerous material that is stored there. That has been the case for over 20 years. It costs Connecticut ratepayers $10 million a year, again, for a site that should be long overdue for renovation and access to folks from all over the world because of its rich archeological and historical area. This bill provides a way out for this area, along with 120 other sites across the country, that host communities have been saddled with storage of spent nuclear fuel because of the fact that this country has been unable to come together with a coherent policy. And this bill provides a way out. 1:15:23 Representative Dana Rohrabacher (CA): This bill authorizes the construction of Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste storage site, which would alleviate the burden of incredible risk that is now borne by communities throughout the country, such as in my district, where homes are not far located from the closed San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. That, and many other plants throughout the nation, have closed their doors in decades. Yet, Congress has yet to agree of how to safely store that waste, while—and what’s really important is we must store the waste—but while we develop new nuclear energy technologies, that we are capable of doing, that are safe and produce less of their own waste and can consume the waste of older plants—I reminded Secretary of Energy Perry of that yesterday—but, in the meantime, until that technology—by the way, it is sinful that we have not developed that technology, which we are capable of, that could eat this waste—but until we do, having safe storage at Yucca Mountain makes all the sense to me and is safe for my constituents. 1:17:07 Representative Rick Allen (GA): Mr. Speaker, I have the great honor of representing Georgia’s 12th Congressional District, which is home to every nuclear reactor in our state, and we are leading the way in the new nuclear. At Plant Vogtle, in my district, there are thousands of spent fuel rods being held in spent fuel pools and dry cask storage containers, and in the next few years we’re going to double the number of nuclear reactors online at Vogtle. Hearing: House Hearing; Forests Act, November 1, 2017. 3:02:49 Representative Bruce Poliquin (MA): Now, H.R. 2936 brings federal regulations in line with this new technology and new standards of safety by allowing family-owned logging business the ability to train 16- and 17-year-olds under very close supervision of their parents. 3:23:31 Representative Greg Walden (OR): In Oregon, this bill would take away arbitrary prohibition on harvesting trees over 21 inches in diameter. It’s tied the hands of our forest managers. 3:28:00 Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers (WA): I represent the Colville National Forest, which is about a million-acre forest. It’s really the engine of our economy in the Northwest, because what happens on the Colville National Forest determines whether or not we have Vaagen’s lumber or 49 Degrees North ski resort or the biomass facility that Avista runs, converting wood waste into electricity. This is all providing jobs, energy, recreational opportunities. Yet mills have been closed, jobs have been lost. It’s unacceptable. It’s time to pass the Resilient Federal Forests legislation. 5:32:57 Representative Jeff Denham (CA): The Resilient Federal Forests Act gives us the tools to immediately reduce the threat of catastrophic wildfires. It allows us to expedite the removal of dead trees and rapidly mitigate disease-infested areas. 5:41:58 Representative Louie Gohmert (TX): If you want to just leave it to nature, nature will destroy massive numbers of acres of land. So we have a responsibility. Even in the Garden of Eden when things were perfect, God said, tend the garden. 6:06:29 Representative Raul Grijalva (AZ): This is not the first time we have seen the bill, this piece of legislation. House Republicans sent a version to the Senate in the 113th and the 114th Congress, where it languished on the shelf because our colleagues on the other side of the Capitol found it too extreme. Rather than view that experience as an opportunity to seek compromise, this time around, today, we are considering a bill that is even more extreme and polarizing. They doubled the environmental review waivers, added language to undermine the Endangered Species Act, and scaled back protections for national monuments and roadless areas. 6:07:39 Representative Raul Grijalva (AZ): But this bill is not about forest health or wildfire mitigation; it’s about increasing the number of trees removed from our forests. 6:18:24 Representative Tom McClintock (CA): You know, there’s an old adage that excess timber comes out of the forest one way or the other—it’s either carried out or it burns out. When we carried it out, we had resilient, healthy forests and a thriving economy, as excess timber was sold and harvested before it could choke our forests to death. In the years since then, we’ve seen an 80 percent decline in timber sales from our federal lands and a concomitant increase in acreage destroyed by forest fire. I would remind my friend from Oregon that timber sales used to generate us money, not cost us money. The direct revenues and spin-off commerce generated by these sales provided a stream of revenues that we could then use to improve our national forests and share with the local communities affected. 6:22:38 Representative Jared Huffman (CA): Title I of this bill allows intensive logging projects of 10,000 to 30,000 acres each. That’s as big as the entire city of San Francisco. Projects of that size can proceed on federal public lands without any environmental review under NEPA, without any compliance with the Endangered Species Act. Title II of the bill eliminates the requirement that the Forest Service consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service; essentially, lets the Forest Service decide for itself if it wants to follow the Endangered Species Act consultation requirements regarding any of its projects on public lands. Title III further chokes judicial review by prohibiting the recovery of attorneys' fees for any challenges to forest management activity under the Equal Access to Justice Act, including meritorious successful challenges. This severely limits public review of logging projects on federal public lands. Hearing: Examining patient access to investigational drugs, Energy & Commerce, October 3, 2017. House Session: Legislative Day of January 4, 2017, Houselive.gov 4:15:30 - Rep. Darrell Issa (CA) "For the freshmen of either party,when you go to make a vote on this, re-member, we are not changing the un-derlying law. Only one regulation under the underlying law has ever been repealed, and it was bipartisan in both the House and the Senate when it was repealed. It has been 16 years, and the few that will likely be considered under this act and the underlying law will be just that, a relatively few regulations that are believed to be unnecessary and for which the House, the Senate, and the President concur.   Video: Josh Lyman Sick of Congress, YouTube, July 23, 2012. Community Suggestions See more Community Suggestions HERE. Cover Art Design by Only Child Imaginations Music Presented in This Episode Intro & Exit: Tired of Being Lied To by David Ippolito (found on Music Alley by mevio)  

Our conversation with Ga Public Service Commissioner Tim Echols

Vogtle update, Trump-Putin summit, Ga Gov's race

Ga Public Service Commissioner Tim Echols discusses this week's pivotal Commission decision: whether to continue work on two new reactors at nuclear Plant Vogtle

INTERVIEWS: Don Hancock from Southwest Research and Information Center returns to update us on the leak of Plutonium and Americium from the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad New Mexico. Dr. Catherine Euler of Mamabears Against Nukes gives us the rundown on how to interpret the WIPP radiation data. Mimi German, Ms. RadCast Herself, offers insight into those pesky "now they work/now they don't" EPA radiation monitors. PLUS: 84-year-old Sister Megan Rice asks the judge to sentence her to life in prison for her non-violent peace demonstration at the supposedly secure Y-12 nuclear facility; Second safety-conscious Hanford manager fired after she spoke out for - wait for it! - safety! Georgia's planned new Vogtle reactors receive $6.5 billion in federal loan guarantees; Fukushima Unit 4 cooling system stops for four hours; high levels of cesium found in Fukushima reservoirs used for agriculture; and Ukraine rebels capture Rosnov Nuclear Power Plant... then don't know what to do with it. Oy!

INTERVIEWS: Don Hancock from Southwest Research and Information Center returns to update us on the leak of Plutonium and Americium from the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad New Mexico. Dr. Catherine Euler of Mamabears Against Nukes gives us the rundown on how to interpret the WIPP radiation data. Mimi German, Ms. RadCast Herself, offers insight into those pesky "now they work/now they don't" EPA radiation monitors. PLUS: 84-year-old Sister Megan Rice asks the judge to sentence her to life in prison for her non-violent peace demonstration at the supposedly secure Y-12 nuclear facility; Second safety-conscious Hanford manager fired after she spoke out for - wait for it! - safety! Georgia's planned new Vogtle reactors receive $6.5 billion in federal loan guarantees; Fukushima Unit 4 cooling system stops for four hours; high levels of cesium found in Fukushima reservoirs used for agriculture; and Ukraine rebels capture Rosnov Nuclear Power Plant... then don't know what to do with it. Oy!

INTERVIEWS: Don Hancock from Southwest Research and Information Center returns to update us on the leak of Plutonium and Americium from the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad New Mexico. Dr. Catherine Euler of Mamabears Against Nukes gives us the rundown on how to interpret the WIPP radiation data. Mimi German, Ms. RadCast Herself, offers insight into those pesky "now they work/now they don't" EPA radiation monitors. And Chizo Hamada shares international Fukushima 3 Anniversary events. PLUS: 84-year-old Sister Megan Rice asks the judge to sentence her to life in prison for her non-violent peace demonstration at the supposedly secure Y-12 nuclear facility; Second safety-conscious Hanford manager fired after she spoke out for - wait for it! - safety! Georgia's planned new Vogtle reactors reeive $6.5 billion in federal loan guarantees; Fukushima Unit 4 cooling system stops for four hours; high levels of cesium found in Fukushima reservoirs used for agriculture; and Ukraine rebels capture Rosnov Nuclear Power Plant... then don't know what to do with it. Oy!

INTERVIEWS: Don Hancock from Southwest Research and Information Center returns to update us on the leak of Plutonium and Americium from the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad New Mexico. Dr. Catherine Euler of Mamabears Against Nukes gives us the rundown on how to interpret the WIPP radiation data. Mimi German, Ms. RadCast Herself, offers insight into those pesky "now they work/now they don't" EPA radiation monitors. And Chizo Hamada shares international Fukushima 3 Anniversary events. PLUS: 84-year-old Sister Megan Rice asks the judge to sentence her to life in prison for her non-violent peace demonstration at the supposedly secure Y-12 nuclear facility; Second safety-conscious Hanford manager fired after she spoke out for - wait for it! - safety! Georgia's planned new Vogtle reactors reeive $6.5 billion in federal loan guarantees; Fukushima Unit 4 cooling system stops for four hours; high levels of cesium found in Fukushima reservoirs used for agriculture; and Ukraine rebels capture Rosnov Nuclear Power Plant... then don't know what to do with it. Oy!

Veteran journalist Karl Grossman traces nuclear media manipulation back to before Hiroshima and up to the present day. A special encore presentation of one of our most popular interviews. PLUS: Republicans on House Energy and Commerce Committee refuse to learn any lessons from the NRC's technical staff and the Japan Lessons Learned from Fukushima Task Force, reject safety recommendations. NRC pushes back San Onofre never-start decision to late April or early May. Vogtle and Summer new nuke construction pushed back again because contractor Southern Company can't even get the concrete and rebar right. TEPCO may be forced to permanently shut down largest nuclear facility in the world because "inactive" quake faults may not be so inactive. Bulgaria nixes nukes by voter no-show at referendum. European Union finds nuclear decontamination a growth industry, but Fukushima can barely fill 10% of its decontamination jobs. Gee, I wonder why...

Veteran journalist Karl Grossman traces nuclear media manipulation back to before Hiroshima and up to the present day. A special encore presentation of one of our most popular interviews. PLUS: Republicans on House Energy and Commerce Committee refuse to learn any lessons from the NRC's technical staff and the Japan Lessons Learned from Fukushima Task Force, reject safety recommendations. NRC pushes back San Onofre never-start decision to late April or early May. Vogtle and Summer new nuke construction pushed back again because contractor Southern Company can't even get the concrete and rebar right. TEPCO may be forced to permanently shut down largest nuclear facility in the world because "inactive" quake faults may not be so inactive. Bulgaria nixes nukes by voter no-show at referendum. European Union finds nuclear decontamination a growth industry, but Fukushima can barely fill 10% of its decontamination jobs. Gee, I wonder why...

BEST NUCLEAR HOTSEAT INTERVIEW EVER: Dr. Helen Caldicott. She talks about her March 11-12 Symposium: "The Medical and Environmental Consequences of Fukushima" - a watershed event for our movement - as well as how she became an activist while still a teenager, major breakthroughs along her journey, and specific tips to make our activism even more effective. PLUS; Vogtle reactor ready for the nuclear "ding and dent" center (but the NRC says the shrinkwrap wasn't damaged!); Fukushima Governor hospitalized with symptoms consistent with exposure to radiation; Miyagi rice contaminated with too much radiation for Japan... but it's still legal to sell it in the US; new song debuts, "What Part of Fukushima Do You Not Understand?; NRC's Chair Macfarlane meets with SanO activists, but will it make any difference in their decision on restart? Stay tuned...

BEST NUCLEAR HOTSEAT INTERVIEW EVER: Dr. Helen Caldicott. She talks about her March 11-12 Symposium: "The Medical and Environmental Consequences of Fukushima" - a watershed event for our movement - as well as how she became an activist while still a teenager, major breakthroughs along her journey, and specific tips to make our activism even more effective. PLUS; Vogtle reactor ready for the nuclear "ding and dent" center (but the NRC says the shrinkwrap wasn't damaged!); Fukushima Governor hospitalized with symptoms consistent with exposure to radiation; Miyagi rice contaminated with too much radiation for Japan... but it's still legal to sell it in the US; new song debuts, "What Part of Fukushima Do You Not Understand?; NRC's Chair Macfarlane meets with SanO activists, but will it make any difference in their decision on restart? Stay tuned...

 IN THIS NUCLEAR HOTSEAT PODCAST: Activists send in their requests to Santa for a nuclear-free 2013; US 2012 nuclear scorecard show nukes a losing proposition everywhere; NRC denies San Onofre hearing; Russia gives us a clue what could be happening with Fukushima produce; Construction cost overruns and construction delays at Vogtle; French electricity giant EDF‘s...