I agree on some points here, but to build Nuclear Fusion plants won't be cheap and how many will they build, SMR's will provide a great deal more flexible options as to where they are located and also for other uses as well not just producing power, besides, if they can run on recycled nuclear waste? all the better, if they only built Nuclear Fusion plants then that will be the end of getting rid of the nuclear waste for all time.
I do think some fusion energy will come, but like I said they won't come cheaply.
Let’s begin with a question on nuclear power…
You come across as against fission nuclear power. I understand that fusion will be more efficient, eliminate radioactive waste, and replace fission power, but overall, the waste (if properly controlled and managed) is actually fairly small for a fission nuclear power plant. Also, spent fuel is being reused at a high rate, so the waste from spent uranium is also incredibly lower than it was decades ago.
Risk to humans is also low. A typical navy nuclear operator receives a lower dose of radiation doing their job than the average person does from the Sun living a normal life. When fusion comes online, that will be incredible.
Do you consider fission nuclear power worse than fossil fuels? Do you have any concerns for the environment and habitats surrounding massive solar farms or wind farms? Keep up the great work. I'm greatly enjoying The Bleeding Edge and looking forward to the technological revolutions that are ahead of us.
– Anthony S.
Hi, Anthony, and thanks for writing in with this question. Energy production is a hot topic, and you’ve touched on a few interesting points.
As a quick refresher for new readers, nuclear fusion is very different from nuclear fission technology. In short, nuclear fission produces energy by splitting the nucleus of an atom into two – or several – smaller nuclei. When most people refer to nuclear power, this is what they mean.
Of course, this has trade-offs. Fission creates nuclear waste that – without proper storage – can poison our environment.
And history buffs know about high-profile nuclear meltdowns from fission reactors. This is a topic near and dear to me, as I was living and working in Tokyo at the time of the three nuclear meltdowns of fission reactors in Fukushima. I sent my family to the southern part of Japan to be safe while I led my company through months of crisis management.
So it might be a surprise, given my personal experience, that I am not against nuclear fission. Nuclear fission is one of the few technologies that could get the world off fossil fuels, reduce carbon emissions, and still provide all the power our electrical grids need to function 24/7.
Third-generation fission reactor technology has been around since the ’90s. These designs are far safer and even more efficient than the reactors the U.S. currently has online.
But where are these third-generation reactors being built? Mainly in India and China.
And there are even fourth-generation fission reactor designs that are more economical and even safer than the third-generation reactors. Technologies like sodium-cooled fast reactors (SFRs), gas-cooled fast reactors (GFRs), very high temperature reactors (VHTRs), and molten salt reactors (MSRs) all show great promise.
And I wrote just this September about a small company producing small modular reactors (SMRs) that would make the construction of nuclear reactors much easier and cheaper than it has ever been.
Nuclear fission technology is based on mature technology and releases no CO2 into the atmosphere. So why isn’t the U.S. and most of the Western world building third- and fourth-generation nuclear fission reactors? One word… politics.
It’s not logical… it’s not rational… but the ignorance and negative emotions around nuclear fission technology are very real. This is why I simply don’t see a path forward in the U.S. and other developed markets with nuclear fission.
It’s not that I don’t believe in the technology. But I don’t believe that there will ever be a way politically to get the approvals to upgrade the U.S. power generation infrastructure with modern, safe fission technology.
Fusion, on the other hand, is the “power of the Sun,” which I see as far easier to sell. More specifically, nuclear fusion is the combination, at very high temperatures, of two separate nuclei to form a new nucleus. In that process, huge amounts of energy are released.
My favorite approach to nuclear fusion uses a proton-boron (pB-11) fuel. The advantage of using pB-11 is that the reaction produces no neutrons. The output is just three helium nuclei and a whole lot of clean energy. No radioactive waste at all. Bill Gates, the Military, and Google Are All Involved…
These advanced reactors are immensely complex, but I believe with our advancements in materials science – and more specifically in artificial intelligence – we will be able to optimize the magnetic fields required to control the plasma reaction in the reactor.
This will change the political debate entirely and put the world on a path to clean energy. It will be capable of feeding the world’s electricity grids for baseload power… what we all need to keep the global economy humming.
And one final point… You are correct that solar and wind farms also have negatives. This is something that the industry has not been honest about. These technologies can be highly disruptive to natural ecosystems, and solar panels are made with toxic chemicals. After about 15 years, the efficiency of solar panels drops significantly, and they have to be replaced. There will be a massive issue with how to safely dispose of and/or hopefully recycle these panels so that we aren’t just dumping most of them into a landfill.
SLX Price at posting:
55.5¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)
