TerraPower signs on to the Equal by 30 campaign, committing to “equal pay, equal leadership and equal opportunities” for women in clean energy by 2030.
Posted on 06/11/2022 12:29:50 PM PDT by ameribbean expat
SEOUL -- South Korean industrial giants like SK and Samsung are stepping up operations in nuclear power, zeroing in on small, easier-to-build reactors, as the country pivots back to nuclear energy under a new president.
SK announced in May a wide-ranging partnership with Bill Gates-founded startup TerraPower with a focus on small reactors, spanning technology development and commercialization. With energy company SK Innovation taking on a central role, SK seeks to harness the group's expertise in each step, from development to installation to operation.
TerraPower plans to build a midsize next-generation demonstration reactor, slated to come online around 2028, in the state of Wyoming with funding from the U.S. Department of Energy.
(Excerpt) Read more at asia.nikkei.com ...
CDC helped fund and bring in a virus from overseas
Now the DOE is bringing in small nuclear power plants from overseas.
I feel so safe.
The Koreans don’t even need B-52s to deliver them.
Small to midsized modular reactors are the natural long term energy solution if the politicians would get on board and let it happen.
Small to midsized modular reactors are the natural long term energy”
It really is but the ruling class is never going to let it happen. They are going to use the climate BS to force “renewables”. They want control and will inflict misery on all of us.
TerraPower signs on to the Equal by 30 campaign, committing to “equal pay, equal leadership and equal opportunities” for women in clean energy by 2030.
Excellent potential for a widely distributed power system.
It would be much more resilient than the current system, and much more flexible.
Much safer as well.
“I feel so safe.”
These don’t melt down. You can come out now.
“Small to midsized modular reactors are the natural long term energy solution if the politicians would get on board and let it happen.”
Bill Gate and Warren Buffet want to build one in Wyoming. I don’t have a problem with them just the assholes who want to build them.
All the smart countries going nuclear to counteract libtard energy starvation 🤪
Great, South Korea will have energy.
We won’t.
A really good bet.
An “all in” American energy policy would do what it could to make the modern, much safer, small, modular nuclear power systems the dominant electric energy source.
There are many things it can mean.
1. Industrial parks with a single (or set) of the newest small nuclear power sources as the electric/power source for the whole park, with no need for delivery of energy from outside. The long term costs of the power plant can be amortized over the long term use of the park.
2, Fewer massively long distance (and wasteful) power lines, as the small modular nuclear plants can be scaled to serve a single rural district/region on its own, and multiple modules can be “ganged” together for cities/a city.
3. If EVs were really essential, power in the roadway, instead of batteries, would be more efficient, and small modular nuclear sources could power the roadway grids, scaled to meet different concentrations and different routes .
DARPA and the Defense Production Act could be employed to get the costs down for initial generation of the factory-to-site small modular units. Once the initial buildout goals were achieved, competition in the industry could continue the expansion.
One of the benefits would be we could move to elinate heating oil, with its elimination served in part by greater use of natural gas, while natural gas demand for electricity was reduced, and refineries no longer had to manage seasonal switches of production to get out the heating oil. The affect would be more oil avaliable for cars and planes. All around the economy there would be many consequential benefits.
It is obvious and who ever does it first wins the market
See HOLTEC
Our petroleum resources are finite. We could be totally independent for 2 or 3 decades, or “mostly independent” for 3 to 4. But we will eventually be mostly dependent on foreign energy if we don’t invest heavily in nuclear energy over the next 2 decades or go heavily back to coal, which we have centuries of reserves. A combination of nuclear and coal would be ideal for the US, reserving most petroleum/NG for uses like air travel, military, maritime power, etc.
The reactor are SOUTH Korean, not from the Commie North Koreans. South Korea is still an ally of ours.
Small nuclear reactors built in factories to a standard pattern with a cookie cutter installation are the next best thing to mid sized thorium reactors.
2028 is a long way off at the pace of change these days. Building it in Wyoming gives the wrong message. Maybe in another 20 years at that pace there would be acceptance.
This needs Manhattan Project like intensity but it will never happen so I’ll get off my horse now.
Large steam plants are about 40% thermally efficient. Then there is the 20% of transmission loss and you end up with any fuel you use in a steam plant only 32% efficient at the outlet in your house not including the energy cost of getting the fuel to the thermal plant.
If you really want to save the erf, and the erf doesn’t need saving, you should look at full cycle efficiency and consider the erf a lifeboat with finite supplies to be made the most of.
The erf does not need saving from CO2 because all the CO2 from all the oil produced and burned compared to natural sources during the year amounts to a little over the tail of an elephant while that from natural sources is all the rest of the elephant. Add coal and you may have a two tailed elephant.
Friend of mine is a system engineer at this place. It already exists. Its not an engineering problem. Its a political problem.
Nobody, even a third party, would dare hide a hidden program in the software that would convert it to a bomb when prompted. In case you didn’t learn this, the Soviet Union was our ally in WW2. Ditto South Vietnam in the 60’s.
Feel free to throw caution to the wind. The establishment has your best interest at heart.
You must be an engineer or smart or both. Your suggestions are very sensible and even workable and therefore can never be. Politicians and ideologues will stand in your way. They don’t want to save the people and make life more prosperous unless there is a lot in it for them.
I have long envisioned the EV common rail with interchanges on each side of the major cities where you are launched into your queue to latch on in express fashion to the next major landing point always bypassing cities not on your route. Launch and landing sites would need to be few but within easy range of the available battery technology. It would be simply amazing. Such a system could be built in the median of existing interstates to begin. If that were available for long journeys I would be on EV like white on rice. As EV now stand they get you to just short of where you want to go on a long trip.
For such a system speeds and spacing would need to be uniform, vehicles would need to be in similar condition etc. There would be no passing only merge on and off the system. Vehicles could run in large packets with spacing between packets to allow for additional vehicles to join the groups. It could be complex to orchestrate but such is right up the alley of computer and sensor boffins.
Inertia blocks the solution to most problems.
An ally for now. South Vietnam was an ally as well.
Also, how good is South Korean software security against a third-party inserting triggering software. As good as ours?
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.