bill gates and warren buffet building nuclear reactor in Wyoming

[Space Lynx]

Bill Gates company to build reactor at Wyoming coal plant

Business and government officials say a next-generation, small nuclear plant will be built at a soon-to-be retired coal-fired power plant in Wyoming in the next several years.

apnews.com

Bill Gates and Warren Buffett to build new kind of nuclear reactor in Wyoming

The project in Wyoming – the country’s top coal-producing state – is a small advanced reactor with salt-based storage that could boost output

www.theguardian.com

here we go!!! this is what we need if we are ever going to beat climate change... Fusion still seems to be a dream that may or may not happen, these small nuclear reactors make a lot of sense to me. and apparently they can use waste product so no need to bury the waste anymore... I watched the Netflix bill gates documentary and he mentioned that in the documentary. this could be a game changer if it works.

edit: that netflix documentary also said these new designs are extremely safe and failproof safe... plus wyoming doesn't get earthquakes and tsunami's to my knowledge, so all should be good.

 

[biffzinker]

What about the massive volcano known as Yellowstone National Park?

 

[Space Lynx]

What about the massive volcano known as Yellowstone National Park?

if the Super Volcano ever explodes, you have more to worry about than a small nuclear reactor meltdown, I promise. if the Yellowstone Super Volcano goes, you are looking at probably half the worlds population dying. so let's just hope that doesn't happen ye?

 

[dorsetknob]

The project features a 345 megawatt sodium-cooled fast reactor with molten salt-based energy storage that could boost the system’s power output to 500MW during peak power demand.

So its not a New type of Reactor......
Sodium's Latin name, 'natrium' that will slip past people radar.

When Winfrith AEE (location Dorset England ) was up and running they had up to 9 different Expermental Reactors online
Several were Sodium Salt Designs.

 

[Xzibit]

Spoiler alert: Wyoming is a Crypto friendly state. They want their own power plant to farm crypto.

 

[qubit]

Nuclear is indeed the answer. It's been staring at us in the face for decades, yet the green lobby keep banging on about wind power and other useless technology. Makes one wonder if they're really on the side of the environment, or if there's a secret agenda.

 

[dragontamer5788]

Depleted Uranium? So this is a breeder reactor? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breeder_reactor#/media/File:Sasahara.svg. At least, breeder reactors are the only kind that use depleted Uranium to my knowledge.

The "Pu" elements in the cycle are always a political football. There usually needs to be some kind of discussion on why, or why not, those Plutonium atoms are inaccessible to attackers and/or unsavory countries.

Nuclear is indeed the answer. It's been staring at us in the face for decades, yet the green lobby keep banging on about wind power and other useless technology. Makes one wonder if they're really on the side of the environment, or if there's a secret agenda.

Nuclear definitely is (part of) the answer, and any environmentalist who disparages nuclear is just one of those idiots who follow the "hype culture" without thinking deeper about the problem. Which... most people fall into this hype trap so whatever. I'm not going to assume an agenda when simple idiocy answers the question, lol.

That being said: the problem with Nuclear is and always be, its a taboo technology. People don't like nuclear because people don't like nuclear. Even if a fast-breeder reactor is of a completely different design than Chernobyl or Fukushima, people will make ignorant comparisons. Still though, for something to get done in this country, it needs to have enough support of the people, so a savvy political game needs to be part of the picture.

----------

This "TeraPower" thing, is it a fast breeder reactor? Or is it some other technology? Its not exactly clear what it is... but that could be just savvy politics in this day and age (The less is known about the tech, the less the idiots have to complain about...).

I think the Depleted Uranium cycle, with the Plutonium, is always going to just be a hard thing to push for politically. A Thorium breeder reactor has no Pu in its cycle, but far fewer Thorium reactors have been built. Any kind of nuclear is a win for me, but too many breeder-reactors have been defeated in the political discussion that its hard for me to drum up optimism.

 

[tabascosauz]

Nuclear is indeed the answer. It's been staring at us in the face for decades, yet the green lobby keep banging on about wind power and other useless technology. Makes one wonder if they're really on the side of the environment, or if there's a secret agenda.

More that humans are fickle and weak-willed, and can't commit to shit anymore without balking at the challenges. People saw Chernobyl and Fukushima and immediately jumped to the conclusion that nuclear will be the death of humanity, instead of asking why Western PWRs are designed differently, or why plants run by other companies within the earthquake zone didn't suffer catastrophic release.

Like this "advanced" reactor in question. Immediately the counterargument is that experts "warn" that it's more dangerous because high enrichment fuels are also more suited to weapons development. Yeah, no shit Sherlock, there's also something called oversight and regulation, maybe that's where to focus attention? People not only becoming risk-averse - they're becoming paranoid. There's a potential problem, so explore solutions.

 

[Space Lynx]

The project features a 345 megawatt sodium-cooled fast reactor with molten salt-based energy storage that could boost the system’s power output to 500MW during peak power demand.

So its not a New type of Reactor......
Sodium's Latin name, 'natrium' that will slip past people radar.

When Winfrith AEE (location Dorset England ) was up and running they had up to 9 different Expermental Reactors online
Several were Sodium Salt Designs.

It's not a new reactor no, but it is a new design, at least from what I understand of Bill Gates documentary on Netflix I watched last year. It can re-use nuclear waste to create energy, which is a key game changer.

Depleted Uranium? So this is a breeder reactor? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breeder_reactor#/media/File:Sasahara.svg. At least, breeder reactors are the only kind that use depleted Uranium to my knowledge.

The "Pu" elements in the cycle are always a political football. There usually needs to be some kind of discussion on why, or why not, those Plutonium atoms are inaccessible to attackers and/or unsavory countries.



Nuclear definitely is (part of) the answer, and any environmentalist who disparages nuclear is just one of those idiots who follow the "hype culture" without thinking deeper about the problem. Which... most people fall into this hype trap so whatever. I'm not going to assume an agenda when simple idiocy answers the question, lol.

That being said: the problem with Nuclear is and always be, its a taboo technology. People don't like nuclear because people don't like nuclear. Even if a fast-breeder reactor is of a completely different design than Chernobyl or Fukushima, people will make ignorant comparisons. Still though, for something to get done in this country, it needs to have enough support of the people, so a savvy political game needs to be part of the picture.

----------

This "TeraPower" thing, is it a fast breeder reactor? Or is it some other technology? Its not exactly clear what it is... but that could be just savvy politics in this day and age (The less is known about the tech, the less the idiots have to complain about...).

I think the Depleted Uranium cycle, with the Plutonium, is always going to just be a hard thing to push for politically. A Thorium breeder reactor has no Pu in its cycle, but far fewer Thorium reactors have been built. Any kind of nuclear is a win for me, but too many breeder-reactors have been defeated in the political discussion that its hard for me to drum up optimism.

a multilayer approach is necessary depending where you live. If you live in Nevada/Arizona/New Mexico you need to be 100% solar and massive solar farms need to be erected there. elon musk can ship batteries from his gigafactories, very nearby proximity.

I buy my vitamins from a company called ProCaps Labs, based in Nevada, they run on 100% solar.

If you live in Wash State maybe a hydro damn or nuclear power of some kind if hydro isn't enough... if you live on the east coast ocean cities and those cities line up with the right currents then massive offshore windfarms make sense, and so on and so forth.

More that humans are fickle and weak-willed, and can't commit to shit anymore without balking at the challenges. People saw Chernobyl and Fukushima and immediately jumped to the conclusion that nuclear will be the death of humanity, instead of asking why Western PWRs are designed differently, or why plants run by other companies within the earthquake zone didn't suffer catastrophic release.

Like this "advanced" reactor in question. Immediately the counterargument is that experts "warn" that it's more dangerous because high enrichment fuels are also more suited to weapons development. Yeah, no shit Sherlock, there's also something called oversight and regulation, maybe that's where to focus attention? People not only becoming risk-averse - they're becoming paranoid. There's a potential problem, so explore solutions.

Agreed 100%, Germany for example with its knee jerk reaction over fukushima was not logical at all. Unless germany's nuclear power plants were built in danger zones like tsuanmi and earthquakes... to my knowledge they weren't. overreactions are sadly common in our species...

 

[R-T-B]

What about the massive volcano known as Yellowstone National Park?

I think that'll be a worry well past the plant's expiration date.

So its not a New type of Reactor......

New vs anything America has fielded. Context, dorset. Our reactors are all from like, the 80s at best.

 

[Fouquin]

Nuclear is indeed the answer. It's been staring at us in the face for decades, yet the green lobby keep banging on about wind power and other useless technology. Makes one wonder if they're really on the side of the environment, or if there's a secret agenda.

Because when we went after Nuclear in the 70s it got smashed into oblivion by lobbies and over regulated. Regulation in moderation would have kept the ball rolling, but now that it costs billions to even break ground on a reactor nobody wants to push for it. Anyone who knows anything wants nuclear back on the map.

 

[Voodoo Rufus]

Finally. Another new nuclear project. Hopefully they can build it on time and under budget for once.

 

[Steevo]

About time, Nuclear is clean base load and doesn’t destroy the economy where plants and infrastructure already exist.

Natural gas turbines should be phased out, they are loud and dump CO2 out just like coal.

 

[tabascosauz]

Agreed 100%, Germany for example with its knee jerk reaction over fukushima was not logical at all. Unless germany's nuclear power plants were built in danger zones like tsuanmi and earthquakes... to my knowledge they weren't. overreactions are sadly common in our species...

It's simply insane to me the FUD and double standard that some Westerners believe. In Japan, I can understand those sentiments given the lasting impact of the Tohoku earthquake and it is politically suicidal not to tread carefully after 2011 - but we're not in Japan.

People saw Chernobyl...... and concluded that Soviet BWRs are bad, Soviet politics was bad, and mismanagement was bad. All a reasonable reaction.
People saw Fukushima I/II...... and concluded that nuclear power is bad. the human factor wasn't as different as some people think.

Onagawa: The Japanese nuclear power plant that didn’t melt down on 3/11 - Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (thebulletin.org)
Learning from non-failure of Onagawa nuclear power station: an accident investigation over its life cycle - ScienceDirect
IAEA Expert Team Concludes Mission to Onagawa NPP | IAEA

I try not to sound too enthusiastic about something that was still making the best of a bad situation, especially when reliable and objective English-language sources on it are scarce. There's a lot of safety measures and upgrades needed even at Onagawa, but some politicians are already trying to jump the gun to get it restarted before then.

Because when we went after Nuclear in the 70s it got smashed into oblivion by lobbies and over regulated. Regulation in moderation would have kept the ball rolling, but now that it costs billions to even break ground on a reactor nobody wants to push for it. Anyone who knows anything wants nuclear back on the map.

I get that there needs to be incentive again to jumpstart nuclear again, but you say that like "regulation in moderation" is a good thing. The stakes are too high to allow for anything less than the strictest oversight, I thought history was clear.

 

[Voodoo Rufus]

The larger benefit is that the nuclear plant will help to phase out the remaining coal power that WY uses, all the while giving high paying transferrable jobs from coal to nuclear plant workers.

Natgas is still vital as it produces half the CO2 and none of the heavy emissions that coal does.

 

[sepheronx]

Didn't America's only manufacturer of nuclear tech gone belly up after Fukushima? Westinghouse?

Or is this a one off tech specifically built for this project?

 

[Voodoo Rufus]

There's a lot of nuclear startup companies flaunting 4th gen and advanced nuclear concepts. I can't wait for NuScale to show off their prototype in a while.

 

[64K]

What about the massive volcano known as Yellowstone National Park?

They will worry about those ramifications later.

 

[Space Lynx]

Didn't America's only manufacturer of nuclear tech gone belly up after Fukushima? Westinghouse?

Or is this a one off tech specifically built for this project?

in the documentary on netflix Bill Gates says he had plans to do this current nuclear reactor much sooner, but the trade wars with China that Trump did set him back.

so I am guessing some of the source material is coming from China, but probably not all of it.

 

[mtcn77]

but the trade wars with China that Trump did set him back.

Nonsense, the atomic bomb's uranium came from the Soviets, too. That is just another excuse for sjw self-righteousness.

 

[R-T-B]

Didn't America's only manufacturer of nuclear tech gone belly up after Fukushima? Westinghouse?

Or is this a one off tech specifically built for this project?

I am curious about this aspect.

 

[lexluthermiester]

if the Yellowstone Super Volcano goes, you are looking at probably 99% of the worlds population dying.

Fixed that for you man.. Yellowstone pops and much of all life on Earth will die off. Much worse than anything a failed nuclear plant could ever do.

 

[Caring1]

Nuclear is indeed the answer. It's been staring at us in the face for decades, yet the green lobby keep banging on about wind power and other useless technology. Makes one wonder if they're really on the side of the environment, or if there's a secret agenda.

I just want to point out the fact anyone can install a wind powered generator or solar power unit on their own property, but portable, personal nuclear is not possible.

 

[mtcn77]

I meant technical aspects. Political history is a no-go here.

That is leftist logic. You might have your self righteous superstition, but when the push meets the shove - you cannot get things done and just "word" things. Which has no bearing on real world outcomes.
You are alienating not just from myself, but the whole debate what it means to have private property.
Lol my whole argument is that you cannot overturn private initiative through anonymity, have you got any notion of that?
These are ground truths, not your opinionated perspectives I'm talking about. I made my claim, I laid my basis. Try as you might, I'm well founded.

 

[claes]

Wtf did I just read lol

Honestly it’s almost like you’re trying to be misunderstood