Ed Pheil is the principle designer at Elysium. The design is meant to slot into any existing power station you already have too. So if you have a coal power station, just swap out the coal burning part and keep your turbine generators & transformers etc. As Ed has said there is 100s of years of nuclear waste to consume here, so efficiency is not critical. Using less efficient existing infrastructure is fine. I have to say I was a thorium fan, but consuming nuclear waste has to be the most sensible win. Also as pointed out metal alloys that can handle chloride salts are already nuclear rated. Ones for fluoride salts that Kirk needs, not yet. Thorium will have its day, but we have nuclear waste that needs attention 1st.
Honestly, we really wanted to include more about the founders. Both of them have really interesting stories :) The problem was that we didn't reach out to them. I think the video could have been much better with some of their quotes and insights.
Thorium isn't used because it doesn't generate plutonium so they don't care but I think that a nuclear power plant is actually a pyrophoric generator that uses high energy light to generate heat.
"Give them something to like, and then they'll do the work required to understand it. People are smart when they're interested in something." That is shockingly profound.
This is the fundamental principle behind how I strive to approach teaching. Find out how to make the student interested, and then let their own creativity and curiosity guide their learning.
That may work for consumer goods like smart phones, dust suckers or cars; but I doubt that this applies also for large energy infrastructure installations such as power plants, refineries or chemical plants.
The problem is that people don't like things they don't understand, and if they don't like it, they'll resist learning about it at virtually any cost. The one sure way to make people appreciate reliable, affordable energy is to take it away from them.
@@phamnuwen9442 Hinkley Point needed 92,5 GBP/MWh to make a utility interested in the investment. How much do you think will the Elysium concept need to get going? How do you define the attribute "affordable"? Even very expensive radio-isotope generators are affordable if there is no other option available.
@@gunnarkaestle I don't know the details of Hinkley Point C, or the EPR, but from a first principles standpoint, a well designed nuclear reactor should beat any other technology by a wide margin. Korea is an example of reasonably affordable PWR deployment. I think they're building them for $5/watt. I'm not a nuclear fundamentalist though. I'll use any reliable, affordable energy source including fossil fuel if I'm denied the freedom to invest in and consume energy from advanced reactors. By the way, if you think an MSR is similar to a PWR in some general sense you need to study the technology further.
@@jimseldiesel1362 I mean there’s clues right? We somehow dupe people into rebuying the same cell phone every two years. If we could channel that kind of marketing genius into something other than bilking people, we’d have flying nuclear cars by now.
I missed the humor when answering the question: Shall I sell my house and invest all the money into Elysium venture? How does the company survive until 2028 when the first plant is planned to be built (if somebody orders it)?
Nah man stressful tests and exams are way better the government said so and we all know we can trust the government its not like its corrupt or anything yeah the guy who called the fbi on hunter biden and the guy who stole nancy pelocys computer in the capital raid are both dead but im sure thats just a coincidence :)
When you mentioned how people are more likely to know a sports score than something which actually influences their lives, I became a fan. I am a book author, columnist, and radio show host. I have said as much, many times in print and on the radio--much to my chagrin. Keep up the good work!
Haha, I hate the turbine Rankine cycle fairy, it is our biggest frenemy in the nuclear field. If we had a safer more economical way to convert heat / radiant energy to electricity we would adopt it in half a heartbeat!
Her last point is absolutely true: nuclear reactors seriously need a face-change! Do the chimneys really have to be so monolithic and frightening? Though I must say wind-farms also give me the willies.
honestly, i’m an architecture major and i’ve thought a lot about approaching this when i graduate. Oklo’s design for their plant was really inspiring, but all that waste heat can be put to good use for the building. like imagine vertical farms that use waste heat as energy and heat in cold climates, or creating small parks around the plant needed per regulations. or, conversely, using the waste heat to power stirling engines designed to facilitate carbon capture. Also, i can see some of these designs being 3D printed with massive 3D printers - and then repurposing the 3D printer as a crane for refueling. then instead of a beige concrete dome - maybe build a pyramid or some other interesting shape instead and mound the earth around it. in other words, celebrating our gift of the atom rather than treating it like a caged dragon. really honestly, the sky’s the limit.
You sold me on "the world would be much more explodie". Loved this video, and I could listen to your voice all day. This company is doing some interesting stuff..
In 1979 I was the youngest craftsman working on a reactor at a nuclear site in Washington state. I spent over a decade working on power plants of all types and then went on to work in water and wastewater treatment for multiple employers. Be curious, keep learning. I spent 40 years going to classes and learning about everything I could. And it has been a great adventure to build across North America, from the Arctic Circle to the Sonoran desert.
@YutbcanskMyBawlz ! You obviously don’t know much about how construction and specialty craft work. I got offered far more jobs than I had time to work on. It might make more sense to you if you considered me a contractor that had an extremely busy schedule and a long list of clients.
@@briangarrow448 I'm a carpenter currently, and I enjoy all aspects of it, not just framing and millwork installation. Things like laying out compound arches and building curved walls are fun and challenging.
Wow, now this is interesting! Countries like France and UK with older fission plants could do well to move this way, it sounds a lot more viable than waiting for fusion etc I have just binged a few of your videos and I am really struck with the quality of the info and how it is presented. You have got a new sub, All best from UK 👍😊
France and the UK and the rest of Europe, need to get their Heads out of the Sand and look at Molten salt reactors that can USE UP most of the Fuel instead of the Wasteful methods they use today that see the need for deep earth containment for THOUSANDS of years, that is absolutely ridiculous, use Molten salt reactors and "Burn" your old waste to Nothing, and get Gigawatts of Electricity basically Free.
Thank you so much for your presentation. I'm so happy to hear of this safer progression of Molten Salt Reactors. It's a dream come true and has been a long hard journey for many it would seem. Light to All IVO
Yes, please. More episodes covering progress with all forms of molten salt reactors! I’m really enjoying this channel. A joy to watch! Keep up the great work!
I've heard people poo-poo thorium LFTR technology, and I'd like to see something discussing a point-counterpoint. What are thorium's detractors saying, and why? If they're wrong, how?
@@joshuaholton7547 The two main engineering barriers to the LFTR technology are the breakdown of the barrier between the core and the enrichment blanket due to neutron radiation, and the safety risks associated with the removal and chemical separation of the highly-radioactive (but useful) fission products. Neither of these are insurmountable. The two main political barriers are far worse; the irrational fear of nuclear power on the part of the public, and the requirement for research funding to bring the technology to maturity. The freeze plug safety system, low pressure operation, ubiquitous fuel, lack of astronomically expensive fuel assemblies (looking at you General Electric..), and the fact that a molten salt reactor has already been demonstrated and shown to be incredibly stable make it a promising technology worth looking into. We really need to get away from high-pressure designs, and certainly far far away from burning stuff like cavemen to make power. Renewables are nice, but we need base-load capacity now. The anti-science folks can cry all they like, it doesn't change the fact that all this extra CO2 we're producing is going to make this a very tough place for our grandchildren to live.
@@MechMan0124 Thanks for the comprehensive response! I wish I could recall where I'd heard it, but an engineer from the established nuclear industry publicly stated that thorium was a dead end that would provide less power and do nothing to alleviate proliferation concerns, and that really surprised me. I mean, if the guy was just sent out to take a dump on an upstart technology, then OK, that's disappointing, but no surprise, I guess. But one would think that, if anything, the nuclear industry as it exists today would be hungry to accommodate new designs and ideas that would help their image and profit margin. What I have seen so far speaks to the opposite. They seem to see LFTR as a threat instead of an opportunity!
@@joshuaholton7547 The LFTR is a lot more complex than Elysium's MCSFR, so it seems likely to be more expensive. The MCSFR core is just a vat filled with a fuel/coolant mixture, there are no moderator structures or control rods. The LFTR has two separate fluids, graphite moderators and (I think) control rods. The fuel processing system on the LFTR is probably also a lot more complex. Having said that, it's probably a good idea that several ideas are being worked on since you can't tell for sure in advance what will be the most economical solution. Either way, Kirk definitely deserves credit for educating the world about the MSR.
@@joshuaholton7547 That is true, weapons can still be created using the Thorium cycle. The U233 produced would be contaminated by U232 though, which produces some nasty daughter nuclides that would discourage weapons manufacture and make them difficult to handle and hide (lots of easily detectable gamma radiation). I agree though, Thorium isn't the end-all be-all of nuclear power. It presents lots of challenges, and we really have no shortage of Uranium available to mine anyway. The molten salt technology is a separate and proven technology though. Running non-Thorium conventional reactor fuel, molten salt would still offer huge benefits; avoiding the expensive engineered fuel assemblies, operating at safer low pressures, operating at more efficient higher temperatures, allowing "walk-away safe" reactor designs, and giving us easy access to the useful byproducts. The blanket plate deterioration problem goes away with Uranium fuel since there's no enrichment necessary, and uranium nuclides are far more tame to process chemically. Proliferation becomes an issue again, but that's more of a social problem that we need to solve at its underlying causes. Sadly, most reactors are designed and built by GE. GE builds reactors at a a loss and makes their profit by selling the fuel assemblies over the course of the reactors life. GE is the big (only?) fish in the pond, and switching to molten salt designs means losing out on their "Fuel Assembly Subscription" cash cow. They still profit when no new reactors are built. The nuclear industry doesn't even need big oil to stifle progress, it handles that all on its own.
Why don't you use renewables and energy conservation and get ten times the results in 1/5 the time for less than half the cost? Oh and no proliferation risk or nuclear waste.
@@EdPheil Tell me. How did that uranium get in the atmosphere? How did all those man made fission byproducts and actinoids get in the atmosphere? Did a fairy godmother sprinkle them there? If they are renewable, please tell me how you plan to extract them out of the seawater to reuse them. Maybe you could include an estimated cost for the recovery of these elements and how you intend to pay for it.
@@jackfanning7952 Uranium gets into to seawater because rain falls on the ground and dissolves the Uranium oxide out of the ground into the water,which then flows down river to the ocean. In the ocean water evaporates, but thecuranium oxide does not, resulting in increased uranium concentration, until the uranium oxide solubility limit is reached, and is maintained at that cincentration by more rain dissolutiin, and uranium excess precipitating out to the ocean floor. This cycle has been going on for billions of years, and will continue for billions if years, before and after humans exist on earth, unaffected by our use or not. Not sure what you are talking about. It haa nothing to do with this natural renewable uranium cycle.
@@EdPheil Tell me about radioactive cesium, strontium, tritium, americium, plutonium, iodine and the over 200 fission by-products and actinides in the ocean and scattered around everywhere else. Were they around billions of years ago? Are their concentrations, and even their presence at all, a result of human activity? You know, like maybe after 1940? You know where they came from, don't you? Have they been affected by our use or not? Are the alpha, beta and gamma radiation from them any different than the alpha radiation in the naturally occurring radioactive uranium? Is plutonium any different than the naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) that has existed, mostly buried by the way, for billions of years? How about strontium (bone breaker) or cesium (heart stopper) or tritium (you know, heavy water)? Did you know that strontium substitutes for calcium in bones, cesium for potassium in muscle and tritium for water? How much of our bodies are made up of water? Maybe we are gaining weight as a society because of all that heavy water. Haha. Do you like that joke? Not very funny, is it? Neither is nuclear. Which do you think will kill us first: the 2200 test nuclear bombs or the 440 nuclear reactors and their nasty, nasty waste? Is uranium underground or in the bottom of the ocean less hazardous than if it is dug up at a uranium mine and scattered all over the earth's surface in hundreds of millions of tons of ore tailings? How about when they take those still radioactive (and acidic) tailings and pave children's playgrounds and roads in the reservations or use it in building foundations? Is that alpha radiation any more dangerous when it is on the surface like that, right in close proximity to humans, especially children? Or is it the same as when it is on the bottom of the ocean or buried deep in the earth's crust? Is it a little clearer for you now about what I am talking about? If not, I have a million more reasons why I am not pleased with idiots risking all life on Earth messing with something they should leave well enough alone, deep in the underworld. We don't need no steenkin' Pandora's Box.
I am totally addicted to your presentations. Your cannel title caught my eye having learnt about "Luddites" in the industrial revolution period of history 50 years ago. When I use the expression ppl look at me like I have 2 heads. You presentations are clear, easy to understand, witty and fascinating. I am now binge watching them all. Thank you for making an old man happy.
This is what people need to see. I’ve been preaching about modular reactors and I didn’t even know about this new one. I’m excited to see nuclear rise.
That’s because people prefer solar panels and hydro. I’d rather choose reactors that last LONGER & re use the waste. That is IF our government actually invest it rather than being scared. Just don’t build it near the coast so we don’t have Fukushima 2.0. Chernobyl happened during the era of Soviet Russia. Just think about it. As long as they hire competent scientists, there will be no Chernobyl 2.0.
@@robert2690 well, governments are washing brains of people by batteries, solar, wind through subsidiaries and making much more waste for future generations. Unfortunately. There is also a question who are greens and they just refuse nuclear gen 4.
WOW. This was fascinating! I've been watching a lot of videos about upcoming energy storage/energy regeneration and this one by far is the most in-depth one I've seen.
I would be interested in hearing about Thorcon. They are trying to deploy first of a kind reactor in Indonesia. They want to build molten salt reactors in a shipyard and float them to their destination.
Nuclear fission reactors are perfectly safe as long as you maintain them. They have an operational life of 35 years before components start to fail. Keep up with the maintenance and they are the greenest energy type we currently have.
I watch a lot of science and technology videos and read some articles every now and then, but this was the best summary of the basics on nuclear power I have every seen by a factor of 2 :)
@@rongants6082 9:21 She discusses how these reactors will reduce the amount of nuclear waste by consuming the "long-lived actinides." The resulting products are less radioactive, as I understand it.
To everyone else responding :“D stop connecting my compliment to her accent - which is nice. I really just wanted to compliment her for he soothing and clear voice, that’s it.
I think that new nuclear reactors, and especially designs that have not been proven by reactor-centuries of service, are the wrong way to proceed. The two reasons are that renewables are cheaper and fuel-free, and the public has already had it with the broken promises and damages of nuclear power. Just keep what we still have running and replace the coal plants with renewables plus storage. it's working just fine in California, it can work just fine in the rest of the US if the politics, corruption and big money can be overcome.
@@acmefixer1 Dude, there is 440 active nuclear reactors in the world right now and about the same number being built and proposed. France is the lead by number of reactors, for which covers ~75% of their electricity used. And also, last time I checked, some part of electricity in California comes from hidro, some are solar plants (for which either of those effected greatly nature life just to build them) and still buys electricity from other countries...
@@acmefixer1 >new The tech is 60 years old 😂 you have a preconceived notion and are shoe horning in your ignorance thinking wind and solar are actually clean. Big oil propaganda. Please continue to ignore the 400mw natural gas plants parked outside every single wind and solar farm and, by all means, keep calling it "green." You don't know what you're talking about. Nuclear power is by far the safest and most effective energy source on the planet right now.
Not just a great topic, but very well laid out explanation...You have a talent for putting forward the right info to understand your topics without unnecessary filler. Thank you.
I very much enjoyed this video. I played it at a lower speed to absorb everything you were saying. The molten salt reactor idea is what turned me on to UA-cam actually. Kirk is the founding father of the new movement from old ideas of course.
I used to follow a company called Moltex, who were also planning some sort of modular moten salt reactor, but I have lost track of them and how they are doing. Love the videos, looking forward to teh updates on how these companies' plans are going!
From all I've watched on utube, they're very active. I think they'll have their first reactor in New Brunswick in about a decade or less, but don't quote on the exact timeline. Their technology looks promising also.
@George Mann I hope your conclusions about the corruption in the UK are unfounded. If true, I'm appalled. I'll say that Moltex working with New Brunswick is going to do some good. This will mean Ontario and potentially Saskatchewan will also get in on the game. See, the traditional canadian reactors (CANDU) used D20, so could get away with simple U238 fuel. The spent fuel is really attractive for reuse. So Ontario will be giving them the waste as fuel, New Brunswick will be operating the plants, and Moltex will be designing it for these applications. Saskatechewan has signed a memorandum saying they're in, but I'm not sure of their role. They host Uranium mines, but that's not actually useful to this scenario. Maybe they want to be customers.
I have watched, listened to, read a lot of material on MSR, LFTR, and other next-gen reactors, and her video is very good. It is humorous and nuanced. We candu more to get to the next-generation of reactors.
When some think of nuclear energy they think of mushroom clouds and melt downs. Scary stuff. Nuclear waste is scarier. This and other videos make it less scary. Nuclear seem to me the most practical way to supply the energy needs of the planet. Enjoyed your video.
Since I first heard about LFTR reactors I have had a great interest in them and have been hoping more research would be done here in the U.S. That doesn't seem to be the case however. I am glad research is continuing elsewhere and thanks for providing explanations and updates. (insert happy face emoji here)
@@joshuaholton7547 Aside from you know, actually pioneering the tech at Oak Ridge, in Tennessee. I think that American monied interests quashing innovation that threatens their rice bowls is the phenom that your are railing about, But then, monied interests would never rig things against public interest, *cough cough* Gamestop *cough cough*
I commend you for creating one of the best videos about msr including some critical technical details. I've been reading and listening to material about msr a lot lately, and yours is the only one I would consider showing people who do not really know anything about nuclear except for Fukushima, Chernobyl, and radioactive waste. Thank you a million times!
I'm curious how this differs from LIFTR. One idea Sorensen pointed out was that, if somehow the container broke, the radioactive salt mixture would not sit around killing people, but would bore a hole down into the planet and bury itself because it is liquid and because it is just that hot.
@@charlesjenkins1225 If you haven't found a paying customer base, it is a good strategy not to mess around with the current government, which may spend some R+D dollars.
Actually, we should’ve BEEN having reactors during the 70’s until radical environmentalist NIXON doesn’t like this idea. Now we rely on gas and oil, and now solar and wind farms that require a lot of rare materials to be extracted from the mining, which does produce a lot of carbon emissions. America could’ve been the leading country in the lowest carbon level.
Yes, we definitely need more intelligent people like yourself speaking about next generation fission and fusion power plants. A Kirk Sorensen video would be a great start, and breaking down the science for the layman to understand would make for a great set of follow up videos. The TerraPower traveling wave reactor design would also make a great video also. In addition to solar, wind, and liquid metal and salt water storage, nuclear is a very important part of a carbon free future, and will be even more important as we travel further from the sun, so why not do the leg work of better understanding the science now.
It is much cheaper to hire a bunch of people that study a traveling wave reactor and write scientific papers on this subject instead of building a demo plant. The problem of new reactor designs is the high upfront cost for developing and certifying a design that gives an attractive package to customers (utilities).
Price and sustainability. I fear it'll be very expensive and time consuming to deploy (and thus expensive per unit of produced energy) and its fuel source is not sustainable like wind, solar, geothermal and hydro are (endless). And although she did mention it shortly, funding has become a real headache. Investors are having more and more difficulties getting insurance for their investments, and whithout that, the funds are often not released. Combine that with the continously cheaper costs of wind, solar and hydro... Nuclear does have less impact on the landscape though.
Perfect topic, I oversaw the construction as CM of the 280MW thermal solar in AZ with salt storage back in 2014 our fluid medium runs at 300C. With the salt storage that plant runs at capacity for 4 to 6 hrs after sundown. Thank you for putting this information together you are brilliant and your delivery is fantastic. If I can help in any way let me know.
Well maybe they are planning ahead? XD Design better power plants now to corner the market and become that futuristic monopoly by 2100. far simpler to start with the name than to rebrand later
I don't "love it" as "Brutalist Architecture" is excellent Technology. Steel Reinforced Concrete Construction is the best Building Technology for Containment Domes, which all Nuclear Reactors need, as not only does it protect against any Nuclear Accident, it also protects the Reactor from Loonies & Accidents. A crashed aircraft or truck bomb won't damage the Containment Dome, and thus can't damage the Reactor...
Thankyou for making this. thanks for explaining fission in an accesible way. I'm now going to read more about this tech, also you have a great presenting voice that makes me listen
Yes, please do a video for small molten salt nuclear reactors focusing on why it's difficult to build one today. It just seems like such an easy prospect with today's tech.
2:34 That is one source of hydrogen indeed, neutrons also may have enough energy to dissociate water molecules which also leads to hydrogen production (hence the need for recombiners) 3:27 technically you need to pressurize the water because it has much better heat transfer in liquid form, as well as necessary moderating ability.
H2 recombiners in the containment are only built for desaster preparedness, when overheated fuel elements react with water/steam. The amounts generated by dissociation are rather small and will be vented during normal operation such as Xenon or simply recombine in the water.
I see a lot of potential in molten-salt nuclear power reactors. I am working on a passive safety (decay heat removal) heat exchanger design for nuclear reactor.
@@davidhovland5690 Navy NEVER worked on MSRs. They are afraid of 18 yr olds operating complex reprocessing systems....which a fast chloride MSR does not have, bit they are not aware of fast chloride MSRs.
Being German I was socially implanted with a cringe whenever I hear "nuclear". And too much cost, IMO, was offset to the public in the form of nuclear waste by the energy giants while they profited richly not caring about the radiating world they leave behind. Some more remarks on policy and governance to guardrail this nuclear renaissance, on top of your scientific excellence, I would highly appreciate.
@@bike-cave-man2527 That is not actually true. They are only cost effective as long as other sources can compensate for thier intermittent nature. If you force them to do the same job, then renewables need energy storage and the price skyrockets. They are slowly getting better, but are not competitive with other tech at this time. So as long as the renewable capacity is a smaller percentage of the total production, it remains low cost to the installer. However they drive up the total installation cost. The base load capacity must be large enough to cover for them when not running. This means that installing solar for instance adds cost to a system that already can produce the needed capacity. The operating costs of the renewables are usually low however and eventually pays for that added cost (again as long as it is supplemental, the cost is comparable when storage is included).
@@garysmith5025 I don't really see vehicles being that effective for storage. The idea is fine, but the usage mismatches the with the generation. If I want to power my home with my car, then I need to be charging it during the day. Problems is that is also when we use it as a car, and it won't be home to be charged, and will return discharged to some level. In theory we could put large solar installations at some businesses and charge cars, but what is thier motivation to do so and would they have enough space? I think home based storage will be needed. If cars had swappable batteries and you had two it would work.
@@court2379 Regarding storage, please consider that many pumped storage plants have been built for valley filling, as nuclear power plants didn't like to be shut down during the night - this power needed to be stored. In Belgium the off-peak use during the night was the illumination of highways.
@@court2379 The idea is not to allocate a given EV to a given home (with PV) and to match that. The idea is to combine a fleet of EVs with the grid, so it doesn't matter if a specific vehicle is not conneted to the grid. Its about statistics only. Regarding the infrastructure, please compare with the situations 120 years back: the filling station was the local pharmacy, and the typical gas station developed in the coming decades. So will be the charging infrastructure - in most cases, if there is a garage, this will be a socket at home.
all the nuclear waste from all the nuclear reactors in Europe created since the very first one was fired up could be laid out on a single soccer field and be less than a metre high (in fact you'd have space to walk between the stacks at that height) Storing it isn't an issue. Most of it is kept onsite and contrary to claims, after 400 years it's LESS radioactive than the original fuel (which is quite literally only slightly more radioactive than a banana for any given volume - believe it or not, truckloads of bananas keep setting off radiation sensors intended to find weapons in ports) The problem is vastly overstated by fearmongers
Bravo! You have done the world a great service by making this video. The people of this world need to be made aware of this technology, and you have done so in a very elegant manner!!!
You could cover Kirk Sorensen and FLIBE. Also, Lars Jorgensen is doing ThorCon - a US company trying to kick off in Indonesia to replace coal-fired plants. Jan Pedersen of Copenhagen Atomics is also working on a waste burner and high temperature test loops and related equipment for MSRs.
How come that every time I watch a video on SMRs no-one mentions the CAREM that is the first design of an SMR and the ONLY SMR currently in construction?
Because unfortunately we Argentinians stopped being technologically and geopolitically relevant to the rest of the world during the last 3 decades. CAREM is a nice design, a downscaled version of NuScale's if you will (i.e. a PWR with passive natural circulation for decay heat removal) and I believe the conceptual engineering was done by CNEA back in the 80s. Let's see if construction finishes before the end of the decade though (fiscal restrictions notwithstanding).
Many politicians are actually very smart. They are smart enough to know that serving the interests of the entrenched industries is their own easiest way to personnel wealth. Those who are challenging the status quo must appeal to the entrenched industries. This is something Elysium has figured out. The entrenched nuclear industry is threatened with extinction. By providing them with a way to get rid of their spent nuclear fuel problem, Elysium can be of benefit to them.
The first task of any and all bureaucracies is to perpetuate the organization. No one wants to be the last man to push the off button on a pressurized water reactor.
Always remember the back handers politicians take from companies in order to turn a blind eye. Greed is their sole motivator, I've not seen a politician yet that isn't greedy. The human race needs to get rid of greedy self serving people out of the decision making processes that affect us all. Perhaps by giving us the decisions to make but allowing only verified information on the subject to be circulated and anyone publishing false or misleading information is automatically jailed would allow us to truly govern ourselves.
It doesn't eat waste. It still requires expensive processing to reuse waste which in turn gives off its own more concentrated waste which is much more radioactive.
Ed Pheil is the principle designer at Elysium. The design is meant to slot into any existing power station you already have too. So if you have a coal power station, just swap out the coal burning part and keep your turbine generators & transformers etc. As Ed has said there is 100s of years of nuclear waste to consume here, so efficiency is not critical. Using less efficient existing infrastructure is fine.
I have to say I was a thorium fan, but consuming nuclear waste has to be the most sensible win. Also as pointed out metal alloys that can handle chloride salts are already nuclear rated. Ones for fluoride salts that Kirk needs, not yet. Thorium will have its day, but we have nuclear waste that needs attention 1st.
Honestly, we really wanted to include more about the founders. Both of them have really interesting stories :)
The problem was that we didn't reach out to them. I think the video could have been much better with some of their quotes and insights.
@@TechforLudditesSira Ed is a really approachable guy. Drop the team a message. Make a follow up video :)
Thorium isn't used because it doesn't generate plutonium so they don't care but I think that a nuclear power plant is actually a pyrophoric generator that uses high energy light to generate heat.
@@mrrolandlawrence That is definitely on the agenda! :)
Thorium can also consume nuclear waste.
"Give them something to like, and then they'll do the work required to understand it. People are smart when they're interested in something."
That is shockingly profound.
This is the fundamental principle behind how I strive to approach teaching. Find out how to make the student interested, and then let their own creativity and curiosity guide their learning.
That may work for consumer goods like smart phones, dust suckers or cars; but I doubt that this applies also for large energy infrastructure installations such as power plants, refineries or chemical plants.
The problem is that people don't like things they don't understand, and if they don't like it, they'll resist learning about it at virtually any cost.
The one sure way to make people appreciate reliable, affordable energy is to take it away from them.
@@phamnuwen9442 Hinkley Point needed 92,5 GBP/MWh to make a utility interested in the investment. How much do you think will the Elysium concept need to get going? How do you define the attribute "affordable"? Even very expensive radio-isotope generators are affordable if there is no other option available.
@@gunnarkaestle I don't know the details of Hinkley Point C, or the EPR, but from a first principles standpoint, a well designed nuclear reactor should beat any other technology by a wide margin. Korea is an example of reasonably affordable PWR deployment. I think they're building them for $5/watt.
I'm not a nuclear fundamentalist though. I'll use any reliable, affordable energy source including fossil fuel if I'm denied the freedom to invest in and consume energy from advanced reactors.
By the way, if you think an MSR is similar to a PWR in some general sense you need to study the technology further.
“Give humans something to like, and then they’ll do the work required to understand it.”
Truer words never spoken.
the question is how
@@jimseldiesel1362 I mean there’s clues right? We somehow dupe people into rebuying the same cell phone every two years. If we could channel that kind of marketing genius into something other than bilking people, we’d have flying nuclear cars by now.
@@Grak70 We are trying :( if u have ideas try finding Generation Atomic on fb
Someone stick a smiling cat face on Fukushima before its too late.
Not relevant in this case.
If more people used humor for teaching, more learners would be interested in learning. This channel is good youtube.
There is also Zefrank1
I missed the humor when answering the question: Shall I sell my house and invest all the money into Elysium venture? How does the company survive until 2028 when the first plant is planned to be built (if somebody orders it)?
Nah man stressful tests and exams are way better the government said so and we all know we can trust the government its not like its corrupt or anything yeah the guy who called the fbi on hunter biden and the guy who stole nancy pelocys computer in the capital raid are both dead but im sure thats just a coincidence :)
@@gunnarkaestle humorless capitalist!
@@sai63836 neither one of them are dead
"Otherwise the world would be a lot more...explodey"
"As an offering to the turbine fairy"
All hail the turbine fairy!
"Well, convenient question asking person..."
@@Archpimp may her wings dance electric in the moonlight!
When you mentioned how people are more likely to know a sports score than something which actually influences their lives, I became a fan. I am a book author, columnist, and radio show host. I have said as much, many times in print and on the radio--much to my chagrin. Keep up the good work!
"Offering to the turbine fairies." 😂😂😂😂🤪
How else can you explain it to Luddites?
😂😂 Dialogue of the week.. 👍🏼
Haha, I hate the turbine Rankine cycle fairy, it is our biggest frenemy in the nuclear field. If we had a safer more economical way to convert heat / radiant energy to electricity we would adopt it in half a heartbeat!
@@anydaynow01 ORC?
Yes, that was great!
This is the deep and specific research based futurist channel i was looking for
"Birds chirping happily at the sight of wind turbines"
Not according to biology surveys. LOL.
You had me at: "A sacrifice to the turbine fairey!"
i clicked on it just cuz shes gorgeous
The sacrifice disappears in a puff of feathers and blood.
That's all it took?
Her last point is absolutely true: nuclear reactors seriously need a face-change! Do the chimneys really have to be so monolithic and frightening?
Though I must say wind-farms also give me the willies.
honestly, i’m an architecture major and i’ve thought a lot about approaching this when i graduate. Oklo’s design for their plant was really inspiring, but all that waste heat can be put to good use for the building. like imagine vertical farms that use waste heat as energy and heat in cold climates, or creating small parks around the plant needed per regulations. or, conversely, using the waste heat to power stirling engines designed to facilitate carbon capture. Also, i can see some of these designs being 3D printed with massive 3D printers - and then repurposing the 3D printer as a crane for refueling. then instead of a beige concrete dome - maybe build a pyramid or some other interesting shape instead and mound the earth around it. in other words, celebrating our gift of the atom rather than treating it like a caged dragon. really honestly, the sky’s the limit.
Yes, more such videos, please. You are gift to a parched and thirsty world. Namaste!😄
La casa da papel
word
@@harsha6655 "The house gives paper"? I must be missing something.
LFTR for sure. Kirk Sorensen is the man that started the revival of MSRs
Kirk Sorenson gave our MSR technology to China with NASA funding and DOEs authorization.
First time seeing this channel, totally love it. The host is really clear in explaining and has a relaxing voice. Pleasant to listen to! Keep it up
Why is everyone talking about the style of the video rather than the substance...
You sold me on "the world would be much more explodie". Loved this video, and I could listen to your voice all day.
This company is doing some interesting stuff..
In 1979 I was the youngest craftsman working on a reactor at a nuclear site in Washington state. I spent over a decade working on power plants of all types and then went on to work in water and wastewater treatment for multiple employers. Be curious, keep learning. I spent 40 years going to classes and learning about everything I could. And it has been a great adventure to build across North America, from the Arctic Circle to the Sonoran desert.
That’s so cool! :)
@YutbcanskMyBawlz ! You obviously don’t know much about how construction and specialty craft work. I got offered far more jobs than I had time to work on. It might make more sense to you if you considered me a contractor that had an extremely busy schedule and a long list of clients.
What field were you in?
@@ZincOxideGinger Boilermaker welder.
@@briangarrow448 I'm a carpenter currently, and I enjoy all aspects of it, not just framing and millwork installation. Things like laying out compound arches and building curved walls are fun and challenging.
Wow, now this is interesting! Countries like France and UK with older fission plants could do well to move this way, it sounds a lot more viable than waiting for fusion etc
I have just binged a few of your videos and I am really struck with the quality of the info and how it is presented.
You have got a new sub, All best from UK 👍😊
France and the UK and the rest of Europe, need to get their Heads out of the Sand and look at Molten salt reactors that can USE UP most of the Fuel instead of the Wasteful methods they use today that see the need for deep earth containment for THOUSANDS of years, that is absolutely ridiculous, use Molten salt reactors and "Burn" your old waste to Nothing, and get Gigawatts of Electricity basically Free.
Thank you so much for your presentation. I'm so happy to hear of this safer progression of Molten Salt Reactors. It's a dream come true and has been a long hard journey for many it would seem.
Light to All
IVO
Thorium Reactors, Molten salt Reactors, Nuclear Fusion Reactors, and Fusion Reactors.
As an architect, I love the recommendation that architecture will win public trust!
Just ask Howard Roark...
Yes
More reactor videos!
I really hope we can stray away from this whole irrational nuclear fear soon
I love that the shot of money at 0:28 has $2 bills in the front and center.
Yes, please. More episodes covering progress with all forms of molten salt reactors! I’m really enjoying this channel. A joy to watch! Keep up the great work!
UA-cam algorithm recommended me this, not disappointed. :D
Same
This was unexpectedly entertaining
This is the best thing I heard all year. Another big step humanity takes. It's so cool that I'm alive to witness it all happening
depends on how old are you today...
Ed Pheil would be proud, quite good representation of the MCSFR.
Indeed! Quite good.
@@EdPheil XD
Yes, a talk covering Sorensen’s LFTR work would be great.
I've heard people poo-poo thorium LFTR technology, and I'd like to see something discussing a point-counterpoint. What are thorium's detractors saying, and why? If they're wrong, how?
@@joshuaholton7547 The two main engineering barriers to the LFTR technology are the breakdown of the barrier between the core and the enrichment blanket due to neutron radiation, and the safety risks associated with the removal and chemical separation of the highly-radioactive (but useful) fission products. Neither of these are insurmountable.
The two main political barriers are far worse; the irrational fear of nuclear power on the part of the public, and the requirement for research funding to bring the technology to maturity.
The freeze plug safety system, low pressure operation, ubiquitous fuel, lack of astronomically expensive fuel assemblies (looking at you General Electric..), and the fact that a molten salt reactor has already been demonstrated and shown to be incredibly stable make it a promising technology worth looking into. We really need to get away from high-pressure designs, and certainly far far away from burning stuff like cavemen to make power. Renewables are nice, but we need base-load capacity now. The anti-science folks can cry all they like, it doesn't change the fact that all this extra CO2 we're producing is going to make this a very tough place for our grandchildren to live.
@@MechMan0124 Thanks for the comprehensive response! I wish I could recall where I'd heard it, but an engineer from the established nuclear industry publicly stated that thorium was a dead end that would provide less power and do nothing to alleviate proliferation concerns, and that really surprised me. I mean, if the guy was just sent out to take a dump on an upstart technology, then OK, that's disappointing, but no surprise, I guess. But one would think that, if anything, the nuclear industry as it exists today would be hungry to accommodate new designs and ideas that would help their image and profit margin. What I have seen so far speaks to the opposite. They seem to see LFTR as a threat instead of an opportunity!
@@joshuaholton7547 The LFTR is a lot more complex than Elysium's MCSFR, so it seems likely to be more expensive. The MCSFR core is just a vat filled with a fuel/coolant mixture, there are no moderator structures or control rods. The LFTR has two separate fluids, graphite moderators and (I think) control rods. The fuel processing system on the LFTR is probably also a lot more complex.
Having said that, it's probably a good idea that several ideas are being worked on since you can't tell for sure in advance what will be the most economical solution.
Either way, Kirk definitely deserves credit for educating the world about the MSR.
@@joshuaholton7547 That is true, weapons can still be created using the Thorium cycle. The U233 produced would be contaminated by U232 though, which produces some nasty daughter nuclides that would discourage weapons manufacture and make them difficult to handle and hide (lots of easily detectable gamma radiation).
I agree though, Thorium isn't the end-all be-all of nuclear power. It presents lots of challenges, and we really have no shortage of Uranium available to mine anyway.
The molten salt technology is a separate and proven technology though. Running non-Thorium conventional reactor fuel, molten salt would still offer huge benefits; avoiding the expensive engineered fuel assemblies, operating at safer low pressures, operating at more efficient higher temperatures, allowing "walk-away safe" reactor designs, and giving us easy access to the useful byproducts. The blanket plate deterioration problem goes away with Uranium fuel since there's no enrichment necessary, and uranium nuclides are far more tame to process chemically. Proliferation becomes an issue again, but that's more of a social problem that we need to solve at its underlying causes.
Sadly, most reactors are designed and built by GE. GE builds reactors at a a loss and makes their profit by selling the fuel assemblies over the course of the reactors life. GE is the big (only?) fish in the pond, and switching to molten salt designs means losing out on their "Fuel Assembly Subscription" cash cow. They still profit when no new reactors are built. The nuclear industry doesn't even need big oil to stifle progress, it handles that all on its own.
Great vid. I hope molten salt reactors are adopted and pave the way to cheaper and more available energy.
Why don't you use renewables and energy conservation and get ten times the results in 1/5 the time for less than half the cost? Oh and no proliferation risk or nuclear waste.
@@jackfanning7952 Nuclear IS renewable. Rain replenishes the Uranium supply in seawater forever.
@@EdPheil Tell me. How did that uranium get in the atmosphere? How did all those man made fission byproducts and actinoids get in the atmosphere? Did a fairy godmother sprinkle them there? If they are renewable, please tell me how you plan to extract them out of the seawater to reuse them. Maybe you could include an estimated cost for the recovery of these elements and how you intend to pay for it.
@@jackfanning7952
Uranium gets into to seawater because rain falls on the ground and dissolves the Uranium oxide out of the ground into the water,which then flows down river to the ocean. In the ocean water evaporates, but thecuranium oxide does not, resulting in increased uranium concentration, until the uranium oxide solubility limit is reached, and is maintained at that cincentration by more rain dissolutiin, and uranium excess precipitating out to the ocean floor. This cycle has been going on for billions of years, and will continue for billions if years, before and after humans exist on earth, unaffected by our use or not.
Not sure what you are talking about. It haa nothing to do with this natural renewable uranium cycle.
@@EdPheil Tell me about radioactive cesium, strontium, tritium, americium, plutonium, iodine and the over 200 fission by-products and actinides in the ocean and scattered around everywhere else. Were they around billions of years ago? Are their concentrations, and even their presence at all, a result of human activity? You know, like maybe after 1940? You know where they came from, don't you? Have they been affected by our use or not? Are the alpha, beta and gamma radiation from them any different than the alpha radiation in the naturally occurring radioactive uranium? Is plutonium any different than the naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) that has existed, mostly buried by the way, for billions of years? How about strontium (bone breaker) or cesium (heart stopper) or tritium (you know, heavy water)? Did you know that strontium substitutes for calcium in bones, cesium for potassium in muscle and tritium for water? How much of our bodies are made up of water? Maybe we are gaining weight as a society because of all that heavy water. Haha. Do you like that joke? Not very funny, is it? Neither is nuclear. Which do you think will kill us first: the 2200 test nuclear bombs or the 440 nuclear reactors and their nasty, nasty waste?
Is uranium underground or in the bottom of the ocean less hazardous than if it is dug up at a uranium mine and scattered all over the earth's surface in hundreds of millions of tons of ore tailings? How about when they take those still radioactive (and acidic) tailings and pave children's playgrounds and roads in the reservations or use it in building foundations? Is that alpha radiation any more dangerous when it is on the surface like that, right in close proximity to humans, especially children? Or is it the same as when it is on the bottom of the ocean or buried deep in the earth's crust? Is it a little clearer for you now about what I am talking about? If not, I have a million more reasons why I am not pleased with idiots risking all life on Earth messing with something they should leave well enough alone, deep in the underworld. We don't need no steenkin' Pandora's Box.
I am totally addicted to your presentations. Your cannel title caught my eye having learnt about "Luddites" in the industrial revolution period of history 50 years ago. When I use the expression ppl look at me like I have 2 heads.
You presentations are clear, easy to understand, witty and fascinating.
I am now binge watching them all.
Thank you for making an old man happy.
I like this technique, and I'm really excited about the future. This is a great idea.
Very clearly explained. From the layout to the voice over. This channel deserves more sub!
This is what people need to see. I’ve been preaching about modular reactors and I didn’t even know about this new one. I’m excited to see nuclear rise.
The second atomic age, litterally using up and utilizing the mistakes of the old for the good of all
That’s because people prefer solar panels and hydro.
I’d rather choose reactors that last LONGER & re use the waste. That is IF our government actually invest it rather than being scared. Just don’t build it near the coast so we don’t have Fukushima 2.0.
Chernobyl happened during the era of Soviet Russia. Just think about it. As long as they hire competent scientists, there will be no Chernobyl 2.0.
@@robert2690 well, governments are washing brains of people by batteries, solar, wind through subsidiaries and making much more waste for future generations. Unfortunately. There is also a question who are greens and they just refuse nuclear gen 4.
@@frucajse It’s not that simple. Wind power is massively cheaper per kWh than nuclear and can be deployed quickly.
Definitely not the pie in the sky bs surrounding fusion.
Finally, found a quality Indian science channel ❤️ all the best guys 🔥🔥🔥🤗
Thank you 😊
Head wobble....Head wobble......Head wobble
WOW. This was fascinating! I've been watching a lot of videos about upcoming energy storage/energy regeneration and this one by far is the most in-depth one I've seen.
Yes, more videos about Kirk Sorensen's reactor design, and the corrosion issue in general.
Definitely more on Kirk Sorenson's LFTR and the molten salt reactor planned for Indonesia by Lars Jorgensen of Thorcon
Is that a nuclear power company or a Norwegian death metal festival?
I would be interested in hearing about Thorcon. They are trying to deploy first of a kind reactor in Indonesia. They want to build molten salt reactors in a shipyard and float them to their destination.
Nuclear fission reactors are perfectly safe as long as you maintain them. They have an operational life of 35 years before components start to fail. Keep up with the maintenance and they are the greenest energy type we currently have.
Diaoblo Canyon would like to have a word..... 9 inches of steel piping eaten through in 36 months by high pressure water
@@miscbits6399
And who’s fault is that?
Nuclear fission reactors can last 100 years if maintained & with certain component replacements.
Absolutely I would like to see more videos about reactor design on this channel.
I watch a lot of science and technology videos and read some articles every now and then, but this was the best summary of the basics on nuclear power I have every seen by a factor of 2 :)
Well, you had me sold until I realized that I'm not trying to build a nuclear reactor.
But your tax dollars could. Contact your local representative.
Well you won't with that attitude.
@@anonymoushuman8746 And, your tax dollars will pay for cleanup, long after any power is produced. Look at Windscale.
@@rongants6082 9:21 She discusses how these reactors will reduce the amount of nuclear waste by consuming the "long-lived actinides." The resulting products are less radioactive, as I understand it.
Try watching the video again without your biases.
My brain cannot comprehend how clear your pronunciation is. You have a very soothing voice
That's indian English for u
Well, with an accent as thick as hers, much pronunciation is needed
To everyone else responding :“D stop connecting my compliment to her accent - which is nice. I really just wanted to compliment her for he soothing and clear voice, that’s it.
*pictures of wind turbines* "...you can almost hear the birds chirping in joy..."
I would not say they are chirping out of joy...
Came here to say this ^^
I think that new nuclear reactors, and especially designs that have not been proven by reactor-centuries of service, are the wrong way to proceed. The two reasons are that renewables are cheaper and fuel-free, and the public has already had it with the broken promises and damages of nuclear power. Just keep what we still have running and replace the coal plants with renewables plus storage. it's working just fine in California, it can work just fine in the rest of the US if the politics, corruption and big money can be overcome.
@@acmefixer1 Dude, there is 440 active nuclear reactors in the world right now and about the same number being built and proposed. France is the lead by number of reactors, for which covers ~75% of their electricity used.
And also, last time I checked, some part of electricity in California comes from hidro, some are solar plants (for which either of those effected greatly nature life just to build them) and still buys electricity from other countries...
@@acmefixer1 >new
The tech is 60 years old 😂 you have a preconceived notion and are shoe horning in your ignorance thinking wind and solar are actually clean. Big oil propaganda. Please continue to ignore the 400mw natural gas plants parked outside every single wind and solar farm and, by all means, keep calling it "green." You don't know what you're talking about. Nuclear power is by far the safest and most effective energy source on the planet right now.
Tgatis NOT a picture of wind turbines. Too wide. Just a futuristic building.
Not just a great topic, but very well laid out explanation...You have a talent for putting forward the right info to understand your topics without unnecessary filler. Thank you.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Your speaking voice is very easy to listen to and understand.
No stammering or mumbling!
Subscribed!
bad accent.
I like this channel. :) High tech explanations that are easy to understand.
"an offering to the turbine fairy" LOVE IT!
Smart as a whip and hot as the sun, I love watching this channel!
Like an Indian Harry Potter
I very much enjoyed this video. I played it at a lower speed to absorb everything you were saying. The molten salt reactor idea is what turned me on to UA-cam actually. Kirk is the founding father of the new movement from old ideas of course.
I wish I had teacher like you, I could have pursued my love for science and technology and done something.
I used to follow a company called Moltex, who were also planning some sort of modular moten salt reactor, but I have lost track of them and how they are doing.
Love the videos, looking forward to teh updates on how these companies' plans are going!
From all I've watched on utube, they're very active. I think they'll have their first reactor in New Brunswick in about a decade or less, but don't quote on the exact timeline. Their technology looks promising also.
@@paulbradford6475 Will this be at Lapreau?
@George Mann I hope your conclusions about the corruption in the UK are unfounded. If true, I'm appalled. I'll say that Moltex working with New Brunswick is going to do some good. This will mean Ontario and potentially Saskatchewan will also get in on the game. See, the traditional canadian reactors (CANDU) used D20, so could get away with simple U238 fuel. The spent fuel is really attractive for reuse. So Ontario will be giving them the waste as fuel, New Brunswick will be operating the plants, and Moltex will be designing it for these applications. Saskatechewan has signed a memorandum saying they're in, but I'm not sure of their role. They host Uranium mines, but that's not actually useful to this scenario. Maybe they want to be customers.
I have watched, listened to, read a lot of material on MSR, LFTR, and other next-gen reactors, and her video is very good. It is humorous and nuanced. We candu more to get to the next-generation of reactors.
I saw what you did there. 😀
I did see what you did toooooo. Bottom line is N fuel is not finite we are burning thought it.
Candu better.
"An offering to the turbine fairy..." I love it. I wish I'd used this when teaching the subject.
This was great. Very informative and elegantly presented.
I so wish we could make use of this technology here in South Africa.
When some think of nuclear energy they think of mushroom clouds and melt downs. Scary stuff. Nuclear waste is scarier. This and other videos make it less scary. Nuclear seem to me the most practical way to supply the energy needs of the planet. Enjoyed your video.
Since I first heard about LFTR reactors I have had a great interest in them and have been hoping more research would be done here in the U.S. That doesn't seem to be the case however. I am glad research is continuing elsewhere and thanks for providing explanations and updates. (insert happy face emoji here)
I am highly disappointed in my government (both political parties) for the lack of interest in this.
Some people have got a lot chutzpah for going on about "American innovation" when we have so thoroughly ignored such promising tech.
ahhh you know how "Uncle Sam" is. the rest of the world will spend all tge money and when all the world had done the work and mistakes we pounce
@@joshuaholton7547 Aside from you know, actually pioneering the tech at Oak Ridge, in Tennessee. I think that American monied interests quashing innovation that threatens their rice bowls is the phenom that your are railing about, But then, monied interests would never rig things against public interest, *cough cough* Gamestop *cough cough*
@@drescherjm if it isnt printing money every second of every day, merica' aint involved
"Thanks for coming to my TED talk" xD
cool! Please more molten salt! Flibe, Thorcon, Moltex ...
DFR
I commend you for creating one of the best videos about msr including some critical technical details. I've been reading and listening to material about msr a lot lately, and yours is the only one I would consider showing people who do not really know anything about nuclear except for Fukushima, Chernobyl, and radioactive waste.
Thank you a million times!
I'm curious how this differs from LIFTR. One idea Sorensen pointed out was that, if somehow the container broke, the radioactive salt mixture would not sit around killing people, but would bore a hole down into the planet and bury itself because it is liquid and because it is just that hot.
Sira in secret designing her own reactor 💀💀
Kirk is awesome... tireless advocate... YES do one with him !
Its not Kirk's design though. He proposes LFTR and this is MCSFR. Its mostly Mr. Ed Pheil's baby (and his team)
except he is a Trump supporters. Groan.
@@blondegirlsezthis8798 As far as "supporting" a US President. Kirk also said kind things about Obama while he was President.
@@charlesjenkins1225 If you haven't found a paying customer base, it is a good strategy not to mess around with the current government, which may spend some R+D dollars.
@@blondegirlsezthis8798
I have NOT voted for Trump in either election. Please stop the made up news to attack my character!
2028 sounds so far away, but I guess this is the kind of thing that can't be sped up too much...
Actually, we should’ve BEEN having reactors during the 70’s until radical environmentalist NIXON doesn’t like this idea.
Now we rely on gas and oil, and now solar and wind farms that require a lot of rare materials to be extracted from the mining, which does produce a lot of carbon emissions.
America could’ve been the leading country in the lowest carbon level.
I want it by 2025
Roads would be a good topic, future of road construction , future of transport
How have I never seen this channel before! This is fantastic, thank you so much for making this video :)
On a scale of 1 to 10, how stable is your mood today?
Me: Uranium 235.
Joking aside, this is genuinely exciting news.
Idk it has a 7.038E+8 years half life via alpha decay or a 3.5E+17 years via SF Not at all as unstable as you might think :)
@@CraftyF0X yeah! Try me
@@CraftyF0X BUT, @grovermatic is a neutron moderator...
@@EdPheil I do but keep the peace. 😋
Yes, we definitely need more intelligent people like yourself speaking about next generation fission and fusion power plants. A Kirk Sorensen video would be a great start, and breaking down the science for the layman to understand would make for a great set of follow up videos. The TerraPower traveling wave reactor design would also make a great video also. In addition to solar, wind, and liquid metal and salt water storage, nuclear is a very important part of a carbon free future, and will be even more important as we travel further from the sun, so why not do the leg work of better understanding the science now.
It is much cheaper to hire a bunch of people that study a traveling wave reactor and write scientific papers on this subject instead of building a demo plant. The problem of new reactor designs is the high upfront cost for developing and certifying a design that gives an attractive package to customers (utilities).
Ok, now we've heard the PR flannel I want to hear counsel for the prosecution.
Price and sustainability. I fear it'll be very expensive and time consuming to deploy (and thus expensive per unit of produced energy) and its fuel source is not sustainable like wind, solar, geothermal and hydro are (endless). And although she did mention it shortly, funding has become a real headache. Investors are having more and more difficulties getting insurance for their investments, and whithout that, the funds are often not released. Combine that with the continously cheaper costs of wind, solar and hydro... Nuclear does have less impact on the landscape though.
Perfect topic, I oversaw the construction as CM of the 280MW thermal solar in AZ with salt storage back in 2014 our fluid medium runs at 300C. With the salt storage that plant runs at capacity for 4 to 6 hrs after sundown.
Thank you for putting this information together you are brilliant and your delivery is fantastic. If I can help in any way let me know.
Any video that has you talking about the turbine fairy would be a good video. Molten salt sounds like a gift. Sure Luddites will come around.
Elysium sounds like the name of a futuristic monopoly
Well maybe they are planning ahead? XD Design better power plants now to corner the market and become that futuristic monopoly by 2100. far simpler to start with the name than to rebrand later
"...not these edifices to brutalism." HAHAHA XD I LOVE IT!
I don't "love it" as "Brutalist Architecture" is excellent Technology. Steel Reinforced Concrete Construction is the best Building Technology for Containment Domes, which all Nuclear Reactors need, as not only does it protect against any Nuclear Accident, it also protects the Reactor from Loonies & Accidents. A crashed aircraft or truck bomb won't damage the Containment Dome, and thus can't damage the Reactor...
@@davidhollenshead4892 I wasn't criticising that, just the language made me chuckle is all.
I'd like to see more electric transportation sector content.
Perhaps liquid metal batteries?
Thankyou for making this. thanks for explaining fission in an accesible way. I'm now going to read more about this tech, also you have a great presenting voice that makes me listen
Yes, please do a video for small molten salt nuclear reactors focusing on why it's difficult to build one today. It just seems like such an easy prospect with today's tech.
"There are no solutions only trade-offs." Thomas Sowell.
I could listen to her voice for days and not get bored ❤️
You are making so many videos on energy. Is this a chain reaction 😂😂
What if she is building a nuclear reactor and this is just a big advertisin channel 😏. /s
This is the best video on the subject I've seen. Thankyou!
Keep up the good work. I enjoy your video's. Interested in next generation Nuclear Reactors.
2:34 That is one source of hydrogen indeed, neutrons also may have enough energy to dissociate water molecules which also leads to hydrogen production (hence the need for recombiners)
3:27 technically you need to pressurize the water because it has much better heat transfer in liquid form, as well as necessary moderating ability.
+1
H2 recombiners in the containment are only built for desaster preparedness, when overheated fuel elements react with water/steam. The amounts generated by dissociation are rather small and will be vented during normal operation such as Xenon or simply recombine in the water.
Yes, would love to hear more of your take on Kirk's thoughts and ideas.
Channel name should be “ 50 shades of my hair style ” ... i am subscriber when she has 3k subscribers soon it will be millions , time fly’s
Thanks for sticking around through the transition :)
@@TechforLudditesSira in India is there some progress regarding this spent fuel tech? Or in China?
@@TechforLudditesSira your welcome 🥸
@@zil1832 no we are working on thorium. U can checkout she has made a video:-)
@@harsha6655 i heard we are but i i havent heard of it nowadays so i am quite concerned
Yes, absolutely do that! It's something I would like more videos of.
Will do!
Good to see this topic presented to public, especially in such a sympathetic and charming way.
I see a lot of potential in molten-salt nuclear power reactors.
I am working on a passive safety (decay heat removal) heat exchanger design for nuclear reactor.
they do not work .....sorry
I think the navy tried this. On submarines.
@@davidhovland5690 The problem with the military...........is they do not tell the truth the whole truth, and tend to exaggerate
@@davidhovland5690 Navy NEVER worked on MSRs. They are afraid of 18 yr olds operating complex reprocessing systems....which a fast chloride MSR does not have, bit they are not aware of fast chloride MSRs.
Wait, what? Huh, a *“Turbine Fairy”* ? What sorcery is this?
Not sorcery, thats heresy. She meant the Machine Spirit
Being German I was socially implanted with a cringe whenever I hear "nuclear". And too much cost, IMO, was offset to the public in the form of nuclear waste by the energy giants while they profited richly not caring about the radiating world they leave behind. Some more remarks on policy and governance to guardrail this nuclear renaissance, on top of your scientific excellence, I would highly appreciate.
@@bike-cave-man2527 That is not actually true. They are only cost effective as long as other sources can compensate for thier intermittent nature. If you force them to do the same job, then renewables need energy storage and the price skyrockets. They are slowly getting better, but are not competitive with other tech at this time.
So as long as the renewable capacity is a smaller percentage of the total production, it remains low cost to the installer. However they drive up the total installation cost. The base load capacity must be large enough to cover for them when not running. This means that installing solar for instance adds cost to a system that already can produce the needed capacity.
The operating costs of the renewables are usually low however and eventually pays for that added cost (again as long as it is supplemental, the cost is comparable when storage is included).
@@garysmith5025 I don't really see vehicles being that effective for storage. The idea is fine, but the usage mismatches the with the generation. If I want to power my home with my car, then I need to be charging it during the day. Problems is that is also when we use it as a car, and it won't be home to be charged, and will return discharged to some level. In theory we could put large solar installations at some businesses and charge cars, but what is thier motivation to do so and would they have enough space?
I think home based storage will be needed. If cars had swappable batteries and you had two it would work.
@@court2379 Regarding storage, please consider that many pumped storage plants have been built for valley filling, as nuclear power plants didn't like to be shut down during the night - this power needed to be stored. In Belgium the off-peak use during the night was the illumination of highways.
@@court2379 The idea is not to allocate a given EV to a given home (with PV) and to match that. The idea is to combine a fleet of EVs with the grid, so it doesn't matter if a specific vehicle is not conneted to the grid. Its about statistics only. Regarding the infrastructure, please compare with the situations 120 years back: the filling station was the local pharmacy, and the typical gas station developed in the coming decades. So will be the charging infrastructure - in most cases, if there is a garage, this will be a socket at home.
all the nuclear waste from all the nuclear reactors in Europe created since the very first one was fired up could be laid out on a single soccer field and be less than a metre high (in fact you'd have space to walk between the stacks at that height)
Storing it isn't an issue. Most of it is kept onsite and contrary to claims, after 400 years it's LESS radioactive than the original fuel (which is quite literally only slightly more radioactive than a banana for any given volume - believe it or not, truckloads of bananas keep setting off radiation sensors intended to find weapons in ports)
The problem is vastly overstated by fearmongers
Bravo! You have done the world a great service by making this video. The people of this world need to be made aware of this technology, and you have done so in a very elegant manner!!!
You could cover Kirk Sorensen and FLIBE. Also, Lars Jorgensen is doing ThorCon - a US company trying to kick off in Indonesia to replace coal-fired plants. Jan Pedersen of Copenhagen Atomics is also working on a waste burner and high temperature test loops and related equipment for MSRs.
Shocking part is that this is just part one
I’m sold....let’s start manufacturing these things.....like asap
Hear the birds sign right up to the time they encounter the blades of the windmill.
I wonder how can a bird can come even close to wind turbine or any other animal which can fly
This was so interesting and something that I as an investor would invest in :D
Thank you for this smart, educational, and delightful synopsis of the Elysium reactors.
How come that every time I watch a video on SMRs no-one mentions the CAREM that is the first design of an SMR and the ONLY SMR currently in construction?
Because unfortunately we Argentinians stopped being technologically and geopolitically relevant to the rest of the world during the last 3 decades. CAREM is a nice design, a downscaled version of NuScale's if you will (i.e. a PWR with passive natural circulation for decay heat removal) and I believe the conceptual engineering was done by CNEA back in the 80s.
Let's see if construction finishes before the end of the decade though (fiscal restrictions notwithstanding).
Hey Manuel, this is a Fast Molten Salt Reactor, not an SMR.
I’ll definitely look into CAREM, now that you’ve mentioned it. Thanks for the comment! :)
@@TechforLudditesSira MCSFR Can be a SMR or a Large Moulsr Reactor, uprateable without buying a new reactor.
So much could be achieved if the politicians weren't so stupid.
Or have a job
remember… they are paid to look dum while they get rich in the background.
Many politicians are actually very smart. They are smart enough to know that serving the interests of the entrenched industries is their own easiest way to personnel wealth.
Those who are challenging the status quo must appeal to the entrenched industries. This is something Elysium has figured out. The entrenched nuclear industry is threatened with extinction. By providing them with a way to get rid of their spent nuclear fuel problem, Elysium can be of benefit to them.
The first task of any and all bureaucracies is to perpetuate the organization. No one wants to be the last man to push the off button on a pressurized water reactor.
Always remember the back handers politicians take from companies in order to turn a blind eye. Greed is their sole motivator, I've not seen a politician yet that isn't greedy. The human race needs to get rid of greedy self serving people out of the decision making processes that affect us all. Perhaps by giving us the decisions to make but allowing only verified information on the subject to be circulated and anyone publishing false or misleading information is automatically jailed would allow us to truly govern ourselves.
Who is the presenter, I could listen and watch her explain nuclear technology all day. 😍
It doesn't eat waste. It still requires expensive processing to reuse waste which in turn gives off its own more concentrated waste which is much more radioactive.
Why aren't people pointing out this obvious mis-information?
@@deeas6518 Because "eats waste" gets investor money. Pointing out the full story causes investors to walk away.
Yes, please, more videos on next gen reactors. Also on nuclear waste recycling.