A 17 yr old high-school teenager named Cesare Mencarini just developed a small nuclear fusion reactor & within a month successfully achieved plasma! That's insane. His plans are to attend college as an engineer. Watch out bc he's going to be making changes in the energy industry in the near future! I'm shocked the high-school approved his project. I thought that was so cool. Guess I'm nerdy like that 🤓
@@craigpeacock1903 the difference is a submarine is mostly submerged in water and as long as the pumps are working on a submarine they will be kept cool. This is the issue on land. Having enough water supply which is not linked to the drinking water supply to keep the reactors cool when in operation so they don’t go super critical. In reality it is better to have bigger nuclear reactors on land near large water sources than having many smaller reactors and trying to work out a infallible cooling solution.
@@tigertoo01 The way I understand only ancient nuclear power plants need huge quantities of water. All current designs use closed-loop coolant cycles and end up using similar quantities of water as the coal fueled power plants.
@@priitvosu6818yeah agree but with nuclear you still can’t have a water cooling solution linked to a drinking water supply. Most coal plants need a substantial water supply to operate but if a coal plant has an issue and contaminates that water supply it’s not the end of the world. If a nuclear plant contaminates a water supply then the only solution you have is to dilute it. And you kinda want an ocean for that. The other issue would be is do you really trust humans to monitor and maintain hundreds of small nuclear reactors ? History tells me this is not a good idea. It would take one to have a problem which creates a big problem for a lot of people.
Instead of, "...asking ourselves a simple question, which is safer, a product made in the 1960s, or one made today", I suggest providing conclusive evidence which answers that question in a compelling manner, before we go down a path that potentially puts us in a worse position. In today's war-wracked world, nuclear safety also needs to be looked at in the context of struggles between belligerents using modern weaponry. Reactors operating in or around battlefields is a very sobering possibility to consider.
There's also the issue of terrorism. I recall reading that France had issues with ecoterrorists launching RPG attacks against nuclear plants, because they're not sufficiently green.
@@TheAttacker732 (buzzer sounds) Things that did not happen for 500 Alex.☝️ Environmental activists would not shoot an RPG at a nuclear power plant, because why would they want to create the atomic fallout that would be exactly the thing they fear from the use of nuclear power plants? Get off the Internet, bro. Go outside and touch grass. I don’t know any environmental activists, mainstream or extreme that have possession of an RPG, neither do you. And a more likely scenario would be France wanting to test its own defenses and vulnerability against strikes to its own nuclear power production, and put the whole thing on Eco Warriors, because apparently somebody bought the cover story. 😏
@@taylorphoenix8 Chaïm Nissim published a whole fucking book in 2004, where he admitted to being the perpetrator of the 1982 RPG attack on the French Superphénix breeder/power reactor. And, while looking for the man's name, I also discovered that this was _on top of_ repeated protests, riots, and _molotov cocktail attacks_ against the same reactor's construction & activation.
I wonder what qualifications one needs to be appointed to a ministerial post - particularly Foreign Secretary. Or is it just how many boxes one can tick.
Why not both!! Bring it all. Nuclear, Solar, wind! Definitely need huge wind farm for there. Saw it was windy on an old clip of the moon landing for sure!
This only works effectively if all of the technology is open source. No exclusivity should happen. No proprietary fuel or designs, no one-off modules, no vendor lock-in. Everything should be reproducible anywhere and at any manufacturing plant with all the same regulations and safety measures as everyone else.
Great in theory but has to go through commercialization then ip wear out. Let those get their money invested the reason a company would build it in the first place. Then other will copy and improve.
The coordination required to get everything mine, refine, build, install skills and tech, just to have so many unstable leftovers. I don't know if its a solution if it causes problems. Cheap Energy production for profit is quite the conundrum.
Screw nuclear fission. All efforts need to be made to successfully create nuclear fusion reactors. That's where the future of power will be. Then again proton accelerators may beat that someday.
Where r u from .. 32 countries nowhere near the half . 8ndia has from 1969 & south africa from 1984, so not recently . even india is in rank 5th (maybe) in terms of gdp & 3rd in terms of purchasing power parity .. so they can obviously build it
300mw SMR is more costly, dangerous, difficult to cub overheating. Basic concept of cojoining reactor and steam generator in a stack-up is naive idea. Other security and safety regualation is not different with large 1200mw new model. This proven 1200mw version is the most cheap plant cost. Sooner 1800mw will be coming. The reason of growing size is for economics and safer infrastructur.
From the fact that you are using milliwatts and not megawatt shows that you are not a nuclear engineer and have little clue as to what you are talking about.
this vid totally ignores the gorilla in the room - the licensing process and the inevitable and numerous design changes that WILL crop up in the process- and these would impact each and every small reactor (maybe differently) - and EACH will require their own construction permit and operating license. this is the single biggest challenge historically for the nuc industry. period. i don't believe ANY date or cost estimate - they've NEVER been met.
The stupid thing is about all this is we have the biggest nuclear reactor in the sky which just needs to be harnessed in the cleanest way possible. This is the challenge. The drawback of nuclear reactors is that the fuel is easily exhaustible. If you try to recycle spent fuel you create the elements for nuclear weapons. With just these 2 negative aspects it outweighs the benefits. All efforts to build any nuclear plant using old technology is a wasted effort. You may have a benefit with thorium or fusion but the efforts required as astronomical.
Japan nuclear reactor disaster happen just 12 years ago. How can anyone say nuclear reactor now safer than before? 😂 Japan using the old technology to build the reactor? Impossible,they used the best and most advance modern design nuclear reactor
@@GlenrokMaybe. But who build a newclear reactor next to a see where you can have tsunamies and earthquages and dosnt think about what could happend? Its not that clever if you ask me.
@@Funnyboy2402 yes you’re right. My bad, I knew the two Fukushima plants were 11km apart and somehow believed that meant inland. Regardless- they DID think about what could happen- the plants were designed to cope with tsunamis up to 8.5 m high- which is the highest historical records had shown them to reach. The 2011 tsunami, however, reached almost twice that height, at 15m, which overwhelmed the cooling pumps at the Daichii plant that caused the failure. The earthquakes themselves did not affect either plant badly enough to cause an issue, because they were designed to withstand even greater seismic disturbance. Unfortunately, a tsunami of that size could not have been anticipated. Nevertheless- despite the failure- there was STILL no deaths from radiation poisoning. I’d call that a win overall for nuclear safety standards in the face of such an unprecedented disaster…….
😂agaain this bs comes up every other month. Small reactors wont work no matter what you do you need a containment build and the same amout of radiation shielding regard less of the reactor size what you can do is have reactor cores being mass produced to be assembled on to the plant but there lies rhe problem you cant do it unless you have to build atleast 10 - 30 GW capacity reactors a month and if you are building those then you would want it to be optimised for different types of fuel and it has to be a breader reactor and should be really efficient with neutron all of these are much easier to do in a big large industrial complex built inside the power plant itself
Why are you using in the video the unit of milliWatts (mW) when it should be MegaWatts (MW)?
Came here to write this s soon as I saw it, lol.
A 17 yr old high-school teenager named Cesare Mencarini just developed a small nuclear fusion reactor & within a month successfully achieved plasma! That's insane. His plans are to attend college as an engineer. Watch out bc he's going to be making changes in the energy industry in the near future! I'm shocked the high-school approved his project. I thought that was so cool. Guess I'm nerdy like that 🤓
Cesare mencarini is not suicidal i repeat he's not suicidal
@@saitamaman6714 Easy there, calm down. They only reserve suicides and mysterious causes of death for the people who invent cold fusion. 😉
@@saitamaman6714he obviously was.
@GingerNinja1 It's nothing special and is not the same as a real nu lear reactor...
Some of the audio sounds like it came out of a coffee can that was underwater.
Heck yeah. Heard there is a lot of support not for nuclear in congress among both parties. I'm all for it.
Moon 🐄
What about all the nuclear submarines we hear about? There are plenty of SMRs in action
Thought the same thing.
@@craigpeacock1903 the difference is a submarine is mostly submerged in water and as long as the pumps are working on a submarine they will be kept cool. This is the issue on land. Having enough water supply which is not linked to the drinking water supply to keep the reactors cool when in operation so they don’t go super critical. In reality it is better to have bigger nuclear reactors on land near large water sources than having many smaller reactors and trying to work out a infallible cooling solution.
@@tigertoo01 The way I understand only ancient nuclear power plants need huge quantities of water. All current designs use closed-loop coolant cycles and end up using similar quantities of water as the coal fueled power plants.
@@priitvosu6818yeah agree but with nuclear you still can’t have a water cooling solution linked to a drinking water supply. Most coal plants need a substantial water supply to operate but if a coal plant has an issue and contaminates that water supply it’s not the end of the world. If a nuclear plant contaminates a water supply then the only solution you have is to dilute it. And you kinda want an ocean for that. The other issue would be is do you really trust humans to monitor and maintain hundreds of small nuclear reactors ? History tells me this is not a good idea. It would take one to have a problem which creates a big problem for a lot of people.
20,000 homes require substantially more than 20MW. Thats only 1kw per house! The kettle alone takes double that!
This video was highly informative and kept me engaged throughout
@@AgricultureTechUS why?
@@imtheeastgermanguy5431😂 must be a bot
@@the1992826 I think so too
When this thing will actually produce electricity?
Some of the interviewees sound, was atrocious. Otherwise this video was good.
Instead of, "...asking ourselves a simple question, which is safer, a product made in the 1960s, or one made today", I suggest providing conclusive evidence which answers that question in a compelling manner, before we go down a path that potentially puts us in a worse position. In today's war-wracked world, nuclear safety also needs to be looked at in the context of struggles between belligerents using modern weaponry. Reactors operating in or around battlefields is a very sobering possibility to consider.
Agree. Whats the fallout if one of these is hit by a missile. I know the military would want these for bases.
There's also the issue of terrorism. I recall reading that France had issues with ecoterrorists launching RPG attacks against nuclear plants, because they're not sufficiently green.
@@TheAttacker732 (buzzer sounds) Things that did not happen for 500 Alex.☝️ Environmental activists would not shoot an RPG at a nuclear power plant, because why would they want to create the atomic fallout that would be exactly the thing they fear from the use of nuclear power plants? Get off the Internet, bro. Go outside and touch grass.
I don’t know any environmental activists, mainstream or extreme that have possession of an RPG, neither do you. And a more likely scenario would be France wanting to test its own defenses and vulnerability against strikes to its own nuclear power production, and put the whole thing on Eco Warriors, because apparently somebody bought the cover story. 😏
@@taylorphoenix8 Chaïm Nissim published a whole fucking book in 2004, where he admitted to being the perpetrator of the 1982 RPG attack on the French Superphénix breeder/power reactor.
And, while looking for the man's name, I also discovered that this was _on top of_ repeated protests, riots, and _molotov cocktail attacks_ against the same reactor's construction & activation.
Thank you
I wonder what qualifications one needs to be appointed to a ministerial post - particularly Foreign Secretary. Or is it just how many boxes one can tick.
Key word 300 megawatts many small reactors dont reach that goal yet making affordable and small enought to get fit in a container yet
So we're targeting around 2026 at this point, maybe 2027, if worse comes to worst, says the CEO of Last Energy
But our Minister of Energy says they are duds.
Get government out of the way and costs will drop radically.
last time I checked these were all defunded as they did not work properly
Why did you use the interview clips? That is the worst audio you should have just done it all in voice over. God that's off putting
Your conceited comment is off putting. Turn on CC if your brain is butthurt.
Solar is fine, but a new Moon base will need SMRs. Ditto Mars if ever we go.
Why not both!! Bring it all. Nuclear, Solar, wind! Definitely need huge wind farm for there. Saw it was windy on an old clip of the moon landing for sure!
@@LIGO-LHCBefore I finished reading your comment and saw that you were joking, I thought you were so dumb... lol
Solar and wind are garbage! You're paying billions for temporary power. Many of the fields are leased. Its absurd.
Light up The night
This only works effectively if all of the technology is open source. No exclusivity should happen. No proprietary fuel or designs, no one-off modules, no vendor lock-in.
Everything should be reproducible anywhere and at any manufacturing plant with all the same regulations and safety measures as everyone else.
Great in theory but has to go through commercialization then ip wear out. Let those get their money invested the reason a company would build it in the first place. Then other will copy and improve.
@@pappaflammyboi5799 no not at all. We don't need it
@@LIGO-LHC How about we all just compete on an equal playground. No IP monopolies, no tech lock-down or vendor exclusivity. I'm anti-IP.
@@pappaflammyboi5799I’d prefer that….
The coordination required to get everything mine, refine, build, install skills and tech, just to have so many unstable leftovers. I don't know if its a solution if it causes problems. Cheap Energy production for profit is quite the conundrum.
❤
*China build a lot of Nuclear Power Plant, its brilliant Business development by CHINA*
Screw nuclear fission. All efforts need to be made to successfully create nuclear fusion reactors. That's where the future of power will be.
Then again proton accelerators may beat that someday.
👍🏽
Only wealthy country, like almost half of the world, recently India and South Africa...
Where r u from .. 32 countries nowhere near the half . 8ndia has from 1969 & south africa from 1984, so not recently . even india is in rank 5th (maybe) in terms of gdp & 3rd in terms of purchasing power parity .. so they can obviously build it
What are you even on about?
300mw SMR is more costly, dangerous, difficult to cub overheating.
Basic concept of cojoining reactor and steam generator in a stack-up is naive idea.
Other security and safety regualation is not different with large 1200mw new model.
This proven 1200mw version is the most cheap plant cost.
Sooner 1800mw will be coming.
The reason of growing size is for economics and safer infrastructur.
From the fact that you are using milliwatts and not megawatt shows that you are not a nuclear engineer and have little clue as to what you are talking about.
this vid totally ignores the gorilla in the room - the licensing process and the inevitable and numerous design changes that WILL crop up in the process- and these would impact each and every small reactor (maybe differently) - and EACH will require their own construction permit and operating license. this is the single biggest challenge historically for the nuc industry. period.
i don't believe ANY date or cost estimate - they've NEVER been met.
The stupid thing is about all this is we have the biggest nuclear reactor in the sky which just needs to be harnessed in the cleanest way possible. This is the challenge. The drawback of nuclear reactors is that the fuel is easily exhaustible. If you try to recycle spent fuel you create the elements for nuclear weapons. With just these 2 negative aspects it outweighs the benefits. All efforts to build any nuclear plant using old technology is a wasted effort. You may have a benefit with thorium or fusion but the efforts required as astronomical.
Fusion is the future.
@@randomname4726 and always will be :)
Japan nuclear reactor disaster happen just 12 years ago. How can anyone say nuclear reactor now safer than before? 😂 Japan using the old technology to build the reactor? Impossible,they used the best and most advance modern design nuclear reactor
It was still a 30 year old design at the time of the incident- and it STILL took an unprecedented tsunami to take it out…….
@@GlenrokMaybe. But who build a newclear reactor next to a see where you can have tsunamies and earthquages and dosnt think about what could happend? Its not that clever if you ask me.
@@Funnyboy2402 have a look at just how far inland that reactor actually was from the coast and see if you still feel the same……
@@Glenrok Yea about 100 meters or so....
@@Funnyboy2402 yes you’re right. My bad, I knew the two Fukushima plants were 11km apart and somehow believed that meant inland. Regardless- they DID think about what could happen- the plants were designed to cope with tsunamis up to 8.5 m high- which is the highest historical records had shown them to reach. The 2011 tsunami, however, reached almost twice that height, at 15m, which overwhelmed the cooling pumps at the Daichii plant that caused the failure. The earthquakes themselves did not affect either plant badly enough to cause an issue, because they were designed to withstand even greater seismic disturbance. Unfortunately, a tsunami of that size could not have been anticipated. Nevertheless- despite the failure- there was STILL no deaths from radiation poisoning. I’d call that a win overall for nuclear safety standards in the face of such an unprecedented disaster…….
😂agaain this bs comes up every other month. Small reactors wont work no matter what you do you need a containment build and the same amout of radiation shielding regard less of the reactor size what you can do is have reactor cores being mass produced to be assembled on to the plant but there lies rhe problem you cant do it unless you have to build atleast 10 - 30 GW capacity reactors a month and if you are building those then you would want it to be optimised for different types of fuel and it has to be a breader reactor and should be really efficient with neutron all of these are much easier to do in a big large industrial complex built inside the power plant itself
It's useless
Who hurt you? - (=
@@LIGO-LHC nobody hurt me. It's just proven that nuclear energy is useless
Wow, I'm so glad a real nuclear scientist stopped in to comment! Oh wait, your just a muppet...