There Is a Nuclear Reactor in This Truck
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 05. 2024
- In the most recent podcast with nuclear physicist James Walker, he and Dr. Peterson discuss the incredible technology shrinking nuclear reactors to the size of a semi truck.
Watch the full episode here: • Nuclear Power Can Save...
Dr. Peterson's extensive catalog is available now on DailyWire+: bit.ly/3KrWbS8
Ep.447
// COURSES //
Discovering Personality: jordanbpeterson.com/personality
Self Authoring Suite: selfauthoring.com
Understand Myself (personality test): understandmyself.com
// BOOKS //
Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life: jordanbpeterson.com/Beyond-Order
12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos: jordanbpeterson.com/12-rules-...
Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief: jordanbpeterson.com/maps-of-m...
#JordanPeterson #JordanBPeterson #DrJordanPeterson #DrJordanBPeterson #DailyWirePlus
I especially wish we would go for Molten Salt Reactors. Specifically the Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor. That thing is so badass. It has multiple built in fail-safes by nature such as already being "melted down" so it cant catastrophically melt down, also the liquid fuel expands AND absorbs neutrons slower the hotter it gets, so as it expands more of it moves outside the core providing less fuel for fission, if theres a leak it drains into a storage tank below by being within a kitchen-sink-like room, and also if power or control is lost itll stop freezing a normally frozen salt plug which melts and makes it drain itself. Its basically infeasible to proliferate nuclear weapons from the products of the reactor (theres small chance to do so while enriching fuel needed to start the reactor, but very little is used and is only needed for startup, after that the reactors dont need to shut down to refuel so they can run for years at a time. Also they can also use nuclear weapons and nuclear waste from currently used reactors instead of enriched fuel to start their fission reactions, and turn them into a lot less and shorter lived radioactive byproducts.). It can use 99% of its fuel, versus current reactors using like 5% of their fuel that make a lot more longer lived waste (1,000's of years vs 83% of LFTRs waste being within 1-300 years and 17% being decades, but its more radiotoxic.). The molten liquid salt is both a coolant and fuel that jackets the core and both shields it from radiation and absorbs the nuetrons, converting it into the isotope of uranium needed to be pumped into and used in the core for fission. This makes LFTR's scaleable, you dont need feet of concrete or lead to shield you. The reactors operate at atmospheric pressure and if theres a loss of containment, the molten salt is actually extremely stable and wont react with the air or water and doesnt build up explosive gasses, just xenon gas like other reactors which "poisons" the reaction but it can be actively removed, just as fuel can be added, without shutdown unlike normal reactors. Thorium is 4 times more abundant than uranium AND is a nuisance byproduct in rare earth metal mining. We have enough thats been buried in Nevada to run for 400,000+ thousand years. To power the USA for a year youd create roughly a briefcase sized amount of waste. There are proposed methods with MSR's to have more efficient turbines than current steam turbines using the liquid salt and gas I think. This is all from memory and Im struggling to recall but theres a shit load of good reasons to go with LFTR's and most of the negatives can be reframed as positives pretty easily. A power grid supported by nuclear and supplemented by renewables where feasible is the best strategy for our best economical, environmental, defensive and political future with a prepared and prolonged infrastructure and society.
So what are the downsides? Sounds too good to be true.
@@precisi0n86 none a Thorium reactor can run on the spent uranium that is being stored for a 1,000 yrs. WONCE it is used the waste is stored now for 300 years. So the spent fuel from a Cando reactor can now be used in Thorium reactor.
@@larrymcknight1933 So why aren’t these reactors everywhere as of like 50 years ago? There must be some downsides to them.
@@precisi0n86Cheap energy presents unique problems of its own, perhaps it creates headaches for too many vested interests…
@@precisi0n86because they are a very recent development (the theory was there earlier, of course, but you know how complex these things are)
A single SMR can power a neighborhood for years without refueling. I’d let them put one in my backyard if I could 😂
A hundred feet underneath isolated from the water table would be fine. Has worked for 50 years successfully in submarines. They are too small to be weaponised. Scale is important.
@@AnonJohn143a concrete vault might be a better idea, could place on surface and the tough construction would help prevent damage from natural disasters or other incidents.
@@WELLbethere fair comment. In truth accessibly is a double edged sword. I.e easier to access and fix on the surface, but also easier to abuse. It's a design/engineering problem. Hopefully they get over the corrosive issues with thorium molten salt reactors, it would make those aspects more straight forward imho.
u lack the qualified people to maintain them
people do not like nuclear reactors, they want hydro
it's getting the licenses and permits and bribes paid that take sooo long...
If you mean paying off environmental and native/tribe shills, then yes. They will reneg on contracts as soon as they think they have sympathy yo get more money.
Don't forget the co$t.
Also, you pay for the "Dance", then an election happens and you have to start all over again. Or get shut down completely until the NEXT election.
Until you are bankrupt, say "Eff 'em all, sideways, and build out natural gas until THEY decide to do what Physics will allow, INSTEAD of Political Whim.
If only there was some society somewhere on Earth that was based on absolute property rights. Ah yes, there was...but...we left it up to government-school-indoctrinated idiots to reinstate that society...
...it's not working out too well with the "Republicans" that system has been able to create.
Turns out JP is an excellent interviewer. He constructs a frame of reference which the layman in a given field can understand, then lets the expert in that field speak.
He is, except at times he over explains his questions. Now I’ll give it a pass because at times it creates more of a conversation but at times he does take up time of the guest sharing his knowledge. Love JP but he can interrupt at times
It sounds like this is the first interview you understood.
That's exactly how good teachers should structure their thoughts.
He's gotten better at it -- at first he had what I call Charlie Rose Syndrome. Lately he lets his guests speak in the frame THEY choose. Mostly.
Canada took his licence away, so I guess he's branching out, not that he needs the money.
Great idea, unfortunately it’s hard to keep citizens under control when energy is plentiful and cheap…..
Someone who finally gets it. That middle class grew way too easily with cheap fuel
@@simshengvue5799
Along with the planet's population. Must be careful. Too many peasants are a threat to the nobles.
Saskatchewan can supply all the fuel needed in Canada for a century. There are about a dozen people inspecial interest groups that have made so much noise and disturbed the locals about it that there is a lot of resistance based on ignorance. The locals want the mines and already work and provide excellent quality jobs in the north that feed entire communities.
People think 3 mile Island and Chernobyl when they think nuclear power because of a long and focused effort against it.
Saskatchewan has the most valuable energy reserves in the world and it’s just sitting there because of politics.
I used to have a theory that politicians who stopped the USA from drilling it's own oil were playing the long game. Let all the other countries use up their reserves 1st. Then, in 100yrs, USA will start drilling more when it's much more valuable.
But then I decided they are just fools or, possibly bribed by foreign powers who want to cripple the US.
Everybody knew Chernobyl was a poor design, including no containment structure! "The absence of a containment structure is especially important. As Cohen point out about Chernobyl, "Post-accident analyses indicate that if there had been a U.S.-style containment, none of the radioactivity would have escaped, and there would have been no injuries or deaths." Three Mile Island was caused by an operator specifically doing something hs shouldn't do. (That's now been engineered out of all other plants.) Chernobl only killed 30 people. P.S. Zero CO2! The zealots in California won't even label hydropower or nuclear power as Green!
Yep, it could be done easily and now of not for relentless selfish stupid scaremongering and Nimby locals and greedy power loving govt gatekeepers. Theres a special place in hell for that kind of thing.
I also remember in the 70s when they told us we were not going to be able to find any more oil. I think they gave us like 10 or 15 years more of oil and then it was all over. So I guess it ended in 1995. What we're using now I don't know what it is it's not oil it's got to be something else.
Start telling everyone that this fuel will save the environment and stop global warming - that hostility will change.
Australia mines alot of Uranium, as a partner commonwealth country
Both Australia and Canada have rich Uranium deposits. There is a lot of Uranium in the ground to last mankind for a long time.
I was waiting for the nuke reactor on this truck part. Must of missed it. :p
Australia has about 1/3?of the known uranium reserves in the world
There are different types/ways to make radioactive fuel. The less popular has a shorter life cycle which does not take nearly as long to break down to safe levels. In addition the “waste” from large power plants has plenty of energy to run smaller plants for a long time, so it can be recycled almost directly if we so wished to do so further reducing any waste. Right now it is disposed of as soon as it drops from maximum efficiency for a large nuclear plant. We have the technology!
Thank you, you are correct and we all will benefit when they stop the waste. CO2 free energy, who would have thought
There is no such thing as waste. The so called waste is only a resource we are not using.
@@mpetersen6 Hence, waste.
@@TheCrazyFinn”so called waste”
@@rush7805 "no such thing as"
I'm not a superficial guy. But this is my favorite attire I've seen you in Dr. Peterson. Everything matches. All the clothing, the hair, beard, microphone, and ear buds. You've come a long way from the baggy sweater classroom lecture that got me hooked. You could wear a burlap sack and still be my role model. My family can't thank yours enough. Just finished the fault section of self-authoring. ❤
Micronuclear reactors are such an advanced idea for the civilised world. The uncivilised part scares me.
NUCLEAR AHHH WE'RE ALL GONNA END UP LIKE TV SHOW FALLOUT. Fear and cowardice are the world's two most renewable and abundant resources.
Risk analysis:
Deaths by nuclear: ~10 000
Deaths by gas & oil: millions and millions
Even hydro-electric and WIND have had more deaths then nuclear, like a lot more. Nuclear is the safety and most abundant energy source we have ever discovered, but people are so easily scared they don't want it.
Where is this "Uncivilised" part of the world you speak about in the 21st century..
Where is this uncivilised part of the world you speak about..
@@PMichaelG earth
@@PMichaelG Shall we start with Arabia, where a sports fan was recently thrashing a footballer with a whip for disappointing his "master"? Or Pakistan, where there are more search requests for bestiality videos than anywhere else in the world? Or Haiti, if you only bother with countries that make it to the news?
Jordan, you should really take an interest in the Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors (LFTR).
No radioactive waste, cheap fuel (no enrichment needed), extremely safe (no pressure vessel needed), much more efficient than conventional uranium based reactors.
And the best thing is, they can consume our radioactive waste to neutralize it and produce even more power from it.
Are you referring to the Oakridge molten salt reactor research project? Scientists still find more problems than solutions to this concept. If I remember correctly they had problems with corrosion and it was not a reliable source of energy. The plant also were unable to produce enough energy reserves.
@@KristelViljoen Sure, LFTRs face technical challenges like corrosion but it's trivial to solve. Again, conventional reactors are much more complex. The problem is a lack of funding due to uranium industry lobby and governments interest in uranium for weapons. That's why thorium research was abandoned years ago.
China noticed that, and they are completing construction of few LFTRs already.
@@hufca it would be great if it is functional and running smoothly. Imagine the economic impact on third world countries.
LFTR no radioactive waste. And their in lies the problem, no waste in which to make atomic bombs which was the prime reason for atomic power stations to begin with!
Are you talking about RDD's (Dirty bombs?)
Wyoming has a very large amount of Uranium Ore in the ground. I worked in a Uranium mill in Wyoming back in the 80s. I was just a young kid back then. Ok, I was in my twenties when the mill shut down. Both good and bad memories. I could not imagine all of the red tape that you would have to go through to open up a uranium project now.
One more thing, I really appreciate the Rex Murphy interviews that Mr. Peterson did, I hope the world will watch those and see what a great mind Mr. Murphy was.
Sask has the largest high grade uranium in the world. Sask Alberta are working together to start small reactors.
Great idea. I remember reading that after the earthquake in Haiti a US Nuclear submarine pulled up and they drew emergency power from it's reactor.
I''m curious about the security required for the material. There are folks around that are not friendly to civilization and would like to use the material to spread terror.
5% enriched is useless for making bombs. The problem is if it’s hit in transport, that’s why the containers used are designed to handle a full on train collision, a missile or a plane crashing on it, because the worst that could happen is that something breaks the container and an explosion spreads the material as dust.
Great video, Jordan...👍
Elliott Lake is ready to reboot efficiently, Sask too. This dude is all about keeping control for his masters. There are a few people that own everything and want to keep Canada preserved for their successors, family. History keeps going.
Thank you for all the work that you do, Mr Peterson
Politicians and Hydro knew Canada required more nuclear plants for a growing population. Politicians got in the way. Higher power prices equals more taxes 😢 Nuclear power is very inexpensive
LFTR’s. Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors are the answer to most of the problems noted here
I really really wish ae would go with the Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor. That thing is so badass. It has multiple built in fail-safes by nature such as already being "melted down" so it cant catastrophically melt down, also the liquid fuel expands AND absorbs neutrons slower the hotter it gets, so as it expands more of it moves outside the core providing less fuel for fission, if theres a leak it drains into a storage tank below by being within a kitchen-sink-like room, and also if power or control is lost itll stop freezing a normally frozen salt plug which melts and makes it drain itself. Its basically infeasible to proliferate nuclear weapons from the products of the reactor (theres small chance to do so while enriching fuel needed to start the reactor, but very little is used and is only needed for startup, after that the reactors dont need to shut down to refuel so they can run for years at a time. Also they can also use nuclear weapons and nuclear waste from currently used reactors instead of enriched fuel to start their fission reactions, and turn them into a lot less and shorter lived radioactive byproducts.). It can use 99% of its fuel, versus current reactors using like 5% of their fuel that make a lot more longer lived waste (1,000's of years vs 83% of LFTRs waste being within 1-300 years and 17% being decades, but its more radiotoxic.). The molten liquid salt is both a coolant and fuel that jackets the core and both shields it from radiation and absorbs the nuetrons, converting it into the isotope of uranium needed to be pumped into and used in the core for fission. This makes LFTR's scaleable, you dont need feet of concrete or lead to shield you. The reactors operate at atmospheric pressure and if theres a loss of containment, the molten salt is actually extremely stable and wont react with the air or water and doesnt build up explosive gasses, just xenon gas like other reactors which "poisons" the reaction but it can be actively removed, just as fuel can be added, without shutdown unlike normal reactors. Thorium is 4 times more abundant than uranium AND is a nuisance byproduct in rare earth metal mining. We have enough thats been buried in Nevada to run for 400,000+ thousand years. To power the USA for a year youd create roughly a briefcase sized amount of waste. There are proposed methods with MSR's to have more efficient turbines than current steam turbines using the liquid salt and gas I think. This is all from memory and Im struggling to recall but theres a shit load of good reasons to go with LFTR's and most of the negatives can be reframed as positives pretty easily. A power grid supported by nuclear and supplemented by renewables where feasible is the best strategy for our best economical, environmental, defensive and political future with a prepared and prolonged infrastructure and society.
Incredible that Jordan not only makes us better people, he also is trying to make our world a better place too
NuScale has an approved reactor design and just needs someone to build it.
They are not a good example as it was rushed and ended up failing in its first attempt due to inflation. Terra Power (bill gates nuclear compsny) will have its first in 2030. Rolls Royce is currently building smr in Europe.
Sadly, as it haas been said, the general population of the US is so fear-based (almost phobia- or magical-thing based) around anything nuclear or it’s waste that it will not boost manufacturing in the US. It will have to be built elsewhere.
@@byronofcascadia8629
Thanks Hollywood and the public school system! I sometimes wonder how Americans find the courage to go to the grocery store. I mean with all the mutants, vampires, zombies, rednecks, gangsters, megaquakes, sharknados, giant snakes, dinosaurs, diseases and scary black guns. Hell most of them don't even know the grocery store doesn't grow the food.
I like the breadth of your interest and right in line with my engineering side!
With the aid of AI and robotics the USA currently has the technology to recycle so called spent fuel rods. The outer layer of the rods are milled away and up to 88% of the fuel rod potential remains.
Met Caroline Kennedy a few weeks ago. My goodness what a good person.This reminded me of a quote JFK made. He spoke of the what could go wrong if nuclear was used in correctly. I think it was There will be ashes in our mouth.
I see this today as if we don't use nuclear power to generate electricity there will be ashes in our mouth. Do what Germany does and build rapidly to fix a big problem.
Thanks again Jordan
I was right there with you until you mentioned Germany.
Ever since the Roman Empire rewrote their history, the German people have been living outside their means.
Their history has been rewritten multiple times, and every time they go back to the same dumb behavior.
Don't do what Germany does.
Just don't.
One day you will see your bills quadruple, and have no power over it.
"There's a nuclear reactor in this truck... and it's HEADED RIGHT FOR TRUDEAU'S HOUSE"
They were flying around reactors in an airplane like a half century ago its not like they magically shrunk it all down just now
Purdue University in Indiana is working on truck transportable electric producing reactors.
There still are mobile reactors. There has been a city provided with energy power from a nuclear powered ship.
But the GOOGLE effect may prevent you from looking it up.
If a frigate uses 1500 gallons of fuel per hour in economical steaming. Gallons per hour does a conventional carrier use?
I know what a frigate used when on plane guard. 6000 gallons per hour.
Very informative. Jordan please look into use of thorium and molten salt reactors.
I would really like Jorden Peterson to interview Tony Seba on his podcast . Tony Seba has made some very strong predictions approx 10 years ago ( many of which have already come true) Tony Seba talks about the convergence of 4 technologies that are rapidly coming together at the same time which he predict will dramatically change the planet. I would like to hear Jorden’s take on this.
Great work bringing attention to this. Thanks Jordan.
On the lighter side, some bloke called Homer Simpson has just applied for the job and Marge has been making yellow cake for years.
There is a nuclear fuel rod that works with Thorium and or Uranium. The company is a U.S. Company
JBP is Albertan! We saw him first, raised him by hand, and unleashed him upon the world. He's ours. Nickleback too!
Chalk river, 1944. Small canadian reactor that became very useful.
Bit of trivia: In December 1956, a Convair B-36 Bomber took off from Carswell AFB with a Nuke Reactor on-board. They were even then trying to explore "Electric Flight" powered by a reactor. LOL
Yellow cake is a fairly typical uranium oxide that is solid and pounded into a fine powder. It looks pretty much like betty crockor yellow cake mix...
I feel like I'm going to be on a government watch list for watching this.
Don’t need uranium, thorium is plentiful and everywhere.
Thorium is fissile but not fertile, so needs a source of neutrons to start it off e.g. linear accelerator...
Idaho has massive stockpiles of Thorium ore. There certainly is potential though no one has figured how to make it work.
@@Ironic1950clone Jimmy
to ustilize thorium, you need breeder reactors. Once you got breeder reactors, all the depleted uranium left over from enrichment becomes fuel, and so does the unused uranium in "nuclear waste". So, long-term, we should use both. The Th-232-U233 breeding cycle and the U-238-Pu-239 cycle. Enriched U-235 is useful as a starting point to get the neutron sources running, but we really should get into using those neutrons for breeding.
@@sandlotscout6358 Is there an actual point to your comment...?
you can see this is really taking Dr. Peterson back to his undergrad chemistry classes, admittedly a dark time for us all!
Do we have trades available for building nuclear reactors? I worked in a paper mill in the 90s where the welders who did the welds on the piping were certified to work in the nuclear plant in Maine. Nomeelds failed and I heard visitors commenting on the weld quality.
Is that Michael Knights support rig?
Wow!
What a Brilliant guy!
Hats off to you, sir!
interesting , Thank You . If it works , We Need
danke 💯
This is straight up from Red Alert. Demolition trucks 😱
1:16 i heard that thorium should be almost the same just without the benefit of making weapons of the leftovers…
I don't think there was a reactor in the truck in the end.......
Yes, I am not amused.
I loved the old Galen Winsor lectures on nuclear topics.
What a bold guy he was!
There is indeed, Jordan...
You had me at cake.
That's really all I feel like I know anything about. Maybe just a different recipe! lol
They lost me on the yellow part.
😂
@@Bambeakz>>> Remember: _Yellow Cake_ and _Yellow Snow_ are NOT the same thing...🤭
@@Bambeakz>>> Remember: There is a difference between _Yellow Cake_ and _Yellow Snow._ 🤭
Nuclear reactors have been powering submarines for decades
I can't recall any report of a dangerous incident save for
The Kursk
I'm all for nuclear just not uranium based. Thorium appears to be a better way. From what I understand, if all the equipment supporting the reactor fails, Thorium shuts itself down but with Uranium it goes into thermal runaway.
Excellent whole interview. Haha, I love the subtle pinstripes. That's very cool
It says 'clean your room' haha
@@lukedodson3441@lukedodson3441 Yeah, I had a good chuckle when I read the stripes. He must have a good sense of humour or may not take him self too seriously.
I sure love the content
I watched the original long form interview about 2 and a 1/2 times.
Ive been talking about SMRs for years. They are the solution to the energy crisis.
Sweden also has large reserves of uranium, with the old kind of nuclear reactors, Sweden could electrify all of Europe for hundreds of years.
ASIA??? There's a HUGE amount coming from AUSTRALIA 🇦🇺. At one point WE WERE supplying Russia, and have long supplied Japan
Fusion should be coming online in a few years too 😊
They have been saying that for decades.
Now, your technology and engineering of nuclear reactors is great and all, but if we made them a little bit smaller, we could fit them into Lobsters, that'll show you who's at the top of the power structure- Jordan Peterson in his head
You could use the nuclear lobsters to fight the dragon of chaos!
@@IamHattman reckon we could train them to clean our rooms?
One of the most interesting videos on you tube
Doesnt Elliott Lake have a sizeable and then made totally inaccessible, supply? So far?
What about thorium reactors? I thought that was the next big thing.
It was it ran for a while in the USA, but the DoD shut it down, you cannot make a bomb with it....
The world's largest Uranium deposits are in Australia.
Unfortunately controlled by the dumbest politicians.
The yellow cake is turned into uranium hexaflouride, which is a remarkably heavy gas. Thats what is centrifuged to enrich the uranium to have a high percentage of U239.
U-235, actually. Theres no U-239, but there’s Pu-239
Technology is not the barrier. There are really only two. 1. Politics "nuclear bad". EU in a surprise lists it as green energy. Also, the deaths per GWhr is the best for nuclear. 2. Get your hands on a Nano reactor and you can make a dirty bomb. This is also the problem in processing waste from our current nuke plants. It is the reason Fukajima had so much waste in storage. One thing to note, you only have ~100 years of fissionable material in the earth. Add breeder reactors, ~10%, and that number jumps to 1000yrs.
I hope this good energy for the world.
We should be using thorium salt, not uranium.
I'd like to see a video that relates to the clickbait image. Does this company have a plan for a complete reactor that fits in a single sea container or even several containers, and if so what can it do? What, if anything, is it licensed to do?
check out ASPI stock... they are going to be HUGE in the development of nuclear power going forward.. and the stock is dirt cheap right now .. less than $4 they enrich isotopes of various kinds for different applications
Why talk about Mineral Extraction when we currently have enough fuel for the the US for over 100 years using Fast Reactors? I really hope JP sees this and digs in.
He's in Canada.
I am well aware of he's in Canada. As Fast Reactors burn Nuclear Waste from the older reactors, I guess I should have said the WORLD for 50 years, but no one really know how much waste Russia, China, and the other nuclear programs have that can also be used as fuel. The person interviewed is focused on extraction because that's what he does. Insanity...
Uranium hexafluoride must be a fairly heavy gas. What would be the effect of a major spill of such a gas? If you move anything sooner of later there will be an accident!
The process of turning uranium to a gas sounds similar to refining gold …. Except with out the gas😊, I worked in a gold refinery many years ago for a stretch , the other metals where leached out from the gold dust one acid and rinse at a time , the other leached out metals themselves in the configuration of acidic liquid was stored in a huge plastic tank and would be reclaimed later like a chrome process , once the gold product was getting clean it would then be situated in a very expensive glass lined metal vat , then it would further broken down with a concoction of some of the nastiest acids until all the product was completely dissolved into a liquid solution , then it would be treated with sulphur dioxide gas ( nasty stuff like mustard gas in the war years) which would re constitute the gold like a gold paper sheet of on the walls of the vat , which we would rinse with de ionised water and scrape off the gold , it would be then put in trays and sent to ovens/kiln where it would melted back down into 99.9% pure gold ingots .
A laborious dangerous process to say the least.
I probably missed out one two procedures in that brief recap , iirc we would test the gold sample with cyanide to see if there where other metals present , if it turned a colour it was positive. Forgive my vagueness , it was decades ago I did this job ( yes I’m old ☺️).
Finally! A glimpse behind the curtain...
So, ultimately it's akin to:
"We shouldn't transport dynamite by covered wagon... People could die!"
Is Canada a stable source with its current government?
The title looks like that there’s a nuclear engine that powers the truck
And they have robot dogs with flame throwers......the world is scary
Russia has been operating a floating reactor in the arctic circle for at least a year now, there's no doubt that it can be done on land. I personally don't think a mobile reactor is a plausible idea though, the daily operations to keep it maintained and running would incredibly challenging.
Not to mention the potential risks involved since the West has many enemies now, not like you're getting a free pass anymore by waving a Canadian or US flag around.
Nuclear submarines and other nuclear navy vessels exist. Mobile reactors have been to the deepest seas and space. In fact there are several nuclear reactors floating in space right now.
The US has 4,000 years of electric independence just using nuclear powered electric plants. Far longer when we use thorium reactors.
We also have about 300 years oil independence and the oil fields are slowly filling back-up as oil is not a fossil fuel, it is a petrochemical.
Safety wise, the US has 25,000 more deaths per year because we use coal electric plants rather than nuclear. 1 million in 40 years.
Hey you should have bought it from Hilliary . I understand she had a bunch of it, Uranium One I believe it was called, I wonder what happened to that.
do daily wire not fly out a film crew anymore?
No need to mine uranium. Treat the used fuel rods and get new rods back. Problem is there is plutonium in the used rods, and people are scared they fall in the wrong hands. I say make thorium reactors, and use the plutonium as starter-fuel to burn the thorium, and we get rid of the plutonium as a bonus.
Please explain further how the Micro reactor generates steam without water? I didn’t understand when explained
If I understood correctly, they use air cooling. To me that seems less efficient.... but I'm not an expert.
@@wheel-man5319Depends on the application I guess. I have known some people with too much money to spend who've liquid cooled their computers when they really didn't need to.
these guys need to contract with The Office of Secure Transportation (OST), it would cheaper and more secure...
contaminated water is not a problem in "central" Asia
Australia has plenty of uranium production mate sure we could sell you some. But unfortunately our government bans the use in generating electricity!
Stop using Uranium. Use Thorium.
I find it funny that there are all these technical terms and then there's yellow cake just thrown in there xD
I LOVE yellow cake!
😋
🤣😂🤣😂
@@raydurkabigot! Lol! All cake matters! 😅😊
It's delicious
It is bright yellow...
@@Ironic1950 and limes are green but we call them, ye know, limes xD 'yellow cake' in a sea of other words you have to take a class just to learn their meanings is funny.
Why did i get a matress commercial before the video?
What does it say on Dr. Peterson’s jacket?
Got it: CLEAN YOUR ROOM
Brilliant.. building new facilities when we don't even know what to do with the old ones... and call that green...
please send your hosts a microphone.
Thorium is a better fuel for SMR's .
I want one for my neighborhood. The nvidia 5090s come out this year =)
And zero point energy misses out again because there just aint enough riches to be scalped
If i win the lottery hiring Jordan just to talk to him is on my bucked list
Ask the question, let him talk.
Glory! Wonderful interview sect.