Posted on 10/27/2025 10:30:06 AM PDT by rlmorel
I have long been a proponent of the deep exploitation of nuclear power, and watched this video today from Bill Whittle titled: LINK: It’s Atom-Splitting Time! that tipped me off to what is afoot on this front, and it is the first IV Generation Nuclear Power plant scheduled to be built and operated in the United States by 2026...next year!
I would like to hear opinions here on Free Republic from our members who have experience in the field, are interested, or simply wish to comment, since I believe this is our path forward. I don't advocate this for "green" purposes (though nuclear power is indeed that) and we have been neglecting this for decades. I thought this has the potential for excellent discourse on the subject. Personally, I have had no direct participation in the industry, though I did work in Nuclear Medicine for years, so I understand the nature, handling, and safety of radioactivity better than most, as well as the truths and largely spread lies about it.
The Trump Administration publicly stated its goals in an Executive Order signed in May 2025 to: Reform the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC): In May 2025, the administration signed executive orders to significantly speed up nuclear reactor licensing, including establishing an 18-month deadline for the construction and operation of new reactors. It also aims to modernize regulatory standards and reconsider license terms to enable longer operation for existing plants.
(NOTE: The other components of this Trump EO address expansion of nuclear capacity, prioritizing federal loans and guarantees to restart closed plants and complete unfinished construction projects, facilitating power uprates for existing reactors, supporting the deployment of advanced nuclear technologies, including small modular reactors (SMRs), domestic fuel production and waste management, national security and AI infrastructure, workforce development, and last (but not least) the promotion of exports to compete for commercial projects worldwide.)
Basically, it is fast tracking nuclear power.
The bureaucracy was so slow from the NRC, EPA, DOE, etc. that the byzantine nature of it, in conjunction with the environmentalists and legal system roadblocks, that it made exploitation of nuclear power, all but impossible, with permits taking decades and environmental and other legal challenges designed solely to kill nuclear power.
As soon as that nuclear tech is usable and we start depending on it, the left will try to shut it down.
The left has shut down all talk about using nuclear power for over 40 years.
Yes,it’s been shown that nuke plants must be done properly. Three Mile Island...Chernobyl...the Japanese coast. But if done properly they’re very good.
This literally is the main reason I have decentralized solar. I'm not a fan of solar over hydrocarbons. But I'm a yuuuuge fan of the word "decentralized". So far my solar and other energy improvements to the house, and the decision to replace our old gas crossover with an EV, have way more than paid for themselves.
IMHO, for those of us who live in a good situation for solar (i.e. in the south where we get lots of sun, a place to put panels without shade, home a lot during the day, drive a lot of local miles for a home charged EV to save a lot of gas, etc.) the #1 drawback is the math on whether or not to get solar and, if so, how much for each home's particular power consumption habits. I plan to upgrade solar again in month to take full advantage of the economies of scale (invest more to increase ROI) and probably for the first time will run against the law of diminishing returns (don't keep investing more if it yields little ROI).
And after I've had the upgraded solar for a year (to see how it handles all seasons) and keep importing the telemetry from my inverters into my SQL database and query the stew out of it, it's my intention to write a small document with simple arithmetic that anyone can use. With 4 years' experience with the solar, 3 years after I upgraded it, I already have the info to do it for people at my latitude (with some info on how to research your own latitude's peak solar hours per day in each month). What I don't have is how far to go in investing with solar to exactly hit the middle ground between the economies of scale and the law of diminishing returns. Once I have that info, I believe lots of freedom loving Americans in the south can take advantage of that information to mostly free themselves from the financial impact of the control-freak left and the global warmageddon doomsday cult energy policies.
That was a good question-I do suspect it has something to do with the molten salt.
No doubt they still use the heat to drive a steam turbine in a closed loop system and I suppose it will retain its heat even though it cannot melt down, so I wonder if it can still drive the steam turbine safely with residual heat even if the “pile” isn’t actively functioning at peak.
Molten salts are interesting and their ability to retain heat either in the actual liquid “pile” (if I understand that correctly) or even the liquid salt “cooling system” could both run a steam turbine for an extended period of time.
The first two nuclear subs, the Nautilus and Seawolf, used different technology. The liquid sodium was a total pain in the ass and extremely dangerous and explosive when it came in contact with water (Yeah, I know...on a submarine and all) and they had to use sodium hydroxide to clean off the parts when doing maintenance.
Rickover was dead set against the Seawolf design, and given the technology available at the time back in the Fifties, using the pressurized water systems was probably a no-brainer, but according to many advocates of nuclear power, that key branch in technology (between pressurized/boiling water reactors and liquid metal reactors) hamstrung us going into the future...at least that is how I understand it.
Sounds reasonable. Thanks
I tend (to a degree) to give the Japanese some benefit of the doubt at the Fukushima site (if that is even possible for building those reactors in such a tsunami/earthquake prone zone) but TMI, and most definitely, Chernobyl deserve all the criticism they get.
Humans were the weakest links at those places, for sure, and made sure the design flaws were allowed to wreak the most damage, IMO. Especially in Chernobyl. TMI just got out of control of the humans who tried to fix problems, but in Chernobyl, the awful design had no chance against the humans who almost seemed like they were TRYING to blow the thing up.
The Japanese just had no chance at all to get in front of the curve, and were bowled over by it.
LOL, just hypothesizing!
That said, I need to take a closer look at what they reveal about the design. (but it sounded reasonable to me, saying it...as it always does until someone tells you how off-base you are!)
Comments?
Cool.
—
Nuclear was hamstrung by government.
These newer gen reactors are inherently stable, they don’t create the hydrogen that can explode...
Low cost, reliable (independent of light, temperature, tide, or wind), domestic production, ability to produce huge amounts, low power density by area needed, ability to produce in proximity to where demand is (near an aluminum plant for example), very safe, very clean (no H2SO4, HNO3, soot, hydrocarbons, sledge, CO2, little mining) and able to provide power for generations (probably hundreds of generations).
It was pure stupidity that we haven’t expanded our nuclear capacity years ago.
People like me, sceptical of electric cars, get the wind taken from our sails when you start talking about nuclear power generation. At that point, the shift to electric vehicles, heating of homes (where applicable) makes complete sense and isn’t just eyewash as has been the case when most the power is generated with coal or natural gas as is the case today.
Nuclear making a small comeback is great news.
Ultimately, that’s where we will be FORCED to go anyhow sooner or later. It’s just as long as you have cheap fossil fuels available, and you have an established industry with huge sums of money and jobs tied up in that, we’ll stick around until the well dries up (pun intended).
“Molten salt has been a design I’ve wanted to see done here.”
It was being researched in the 1950s. Wikipedia has an article on “Molton-Salt Reactor” giving its advantages and disadvantages.
The article also says that the MSR program closed down in the early 1970s in favor of the liquid metal fast-breeder reactor.
It’s fair to say that getting workable reactors of either design ain’t easy.
Excellent summary, Red6...I am much in line with your thoughts.
The idiocy of pushing electric cars, heating, and anything else electric to the point of MANDATING it before the infrastructure is anywhere near to handling it is paramount, IMO.
The Leftists all subscribe to the “Build it and they will come” lunacy, without understanding that they are trying to force people to come LONG before they “build it”.
But that isn’t by accident. They think “Oh well. So people can’t drive. It will ‘save the planet’ more quickly...if you are making omelettes, eggs will get broken...”
I despise those people.
I am into making us ENERGY DOMINANT. Oil, coal, gas, nuclear...all of it. If we have the cheapest and most abundant energy in the world, it will offset the higher cost of labor in this country and help re-shore industries.
I am not against someone who decides, for their purposes, electric cars, or solar, or wind power, is for them. If it fits, do it. I am dead set against government subsidies for them in any way, and mandates to migrate to them in some time frame. Otherwise, spend your own money as befits you.
Just don’t make me pay for it.
As an engineer in Oak Ridge, I spent most of my life involved in or close to things nuclear. I strongly endorse your position. Until fusion power becomes practical, sustaining life as we know it in the US and the world will depends on clean, safe nuclear power. There is no practical alternative.
I have heard of this company. I am fully on-board with multiple approaches to this issue. Let the market decide between choices, or even have coexistence with multiple approaches.
If one is clearly better, safer, cheaper, more reliable, or whatever...that will be shown in a market where people are buying them!
Agree wholly. Fusion power will someday come, perhaps not in the continually rolling “20 year window” (grin) but...someday it will arrive.
Until then, let’s drill-baby-drill, mine-baby-mine, and decay-baby-decay!
You almost had to feel sorry for them.
It would have perhaps withstood a magnitude 8+ earthquake, a huge tsunami, or even a typhoon, but...not two out of the three at the same time. And that was their mistake. It was bound to happen with two-out-of three events happening simultaneously. With a long enough time frame, it was not only possible, it was inevitable.
They reached that point where one system failure or mistake could bring them down, and it did.
The breeder reactors were highly preferred because they produced plutonium.
It’s a fascinating opportunity, but salt is nearly inherently safe.
Fascinating!
Drill Baby!
.
Physically How Big is a small one?
That is a good question, I was wondering myself...I will paw around and see if I can find out.
Roll one up on an 18 Wheel Flatbed-
.
May be wishing a little,But still.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.