SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Bill Gates thinks he has a key part of the answer for combating climate change: a return to nuclear power. The Microsoft co-founder is making the rounds on Capitol Hill to persuade Congress to spend billions of dollars over the next decade for pilot projects to test new designs for nuclear power reactors.
Gates, who founded TerraPower in 2006, is telling lawmakers that he personally would invest $1 billion and raise $1 billion more in private capital to go along with federal funds for a pilot of his company’s never-before-used technology, according to congressional staffers.
“Nuclear is ideal for dealing with climate change, because it is the only carbon-free, scalable energy source that’s available 24 hours a day,” Gates said in his year-end public letter. “The problems with today’s reactors, such as the risk of accidents, can be solved through innovation.”
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 28 2019, @02:39AM (7 children)
Is that the reactor that uses already discarded fuel rods? The one that was in the news about 5 years ago supposedly can reuse spent rods that could produce power until only 5% radioactivity remains. It seemed to disappear or got shelved.
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Monday January 28 2019, @02:53AM (6 children)
Known tech but Carter made breeder reactors illegal. Repeal the ban and we are good to go.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday January 28 2019, @04:37AM (5 children)
Yeah well, Carter has some experience [jt.org] cleaning up a mess.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Monday January 28 2019, @05:40AM (4 children)
A mess caused by a different reactor type than he banned? The ban was part of the non-proliferation treaty that stopped the production of weapons grade plutonium, a biproduct of breeder reactors. So instead of just re-burning that plutonium in a reactor for power we have to deal with storing toxic waste.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday January 28 2019, @05:54AM (3 children)
Yeah? How would YOU like to be turned into a giant colossal man, huh?
Lighten up, ok? Just ask who benefits from this stuff. Every bit of the public data is entirely superficial, and the politics entirely irrelevant. It was a business decision. And there is no reason to believe there are no breeder reactors running somewhere right now.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2, Informative) by Sulla on Monday January 28 2019, @08:01AM (2 children)
Not an issue because the TMR situation showed that backup safety measures prevented a meltdown
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/3mile-isle.html [nrc.gov]
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste/ [scientificamerican.com]
Rather have TMI in my backyard than a coal plant
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 0, Troll) by realDonaldTrump on Monday January 28 2019, @11:35AM
Three Mile Island, lot of coverage about that one. And so much negative coverage! They let the Fake News get totally out of control. But they did something right, they didn't say meltdown. They didn't call it meltdown. They said partial meltdown. So true -- it wasn't 100%. It was partial. We've had so many meltdowns, much worse than that one. The biggest being out in L.A., you don't hear about those others. You always hear, "oh, Three Mile Island, so horrible!" What was horrible was the press, they let the press run wild and it turned into a DISASTER. Not a lot of radiation coming out of that one. Hundreds of times less. Because it's a well built building. And they built it in two parts -- very smart. The other side, other part -- no damage. PERFECTO. And they kept that one running. Very bravely, very proudly, it's still running. In spite of so many horrible profit-killing regulations. And the Company says, we're closing this one down. Closing down the other side of the Island. Because, no profit in it. I put my guys on F. E. R. C., I thought they were very solid, very loyal. And I said, "guys, we need the subsidy." We need to keep our coal & nuclear running. So we have NO MORE PORTO RICOS. We need our Energy Grid to be 100%. So when the wind stops blowing -- energy. When the sun goes down -- energy. When horrible hurricanes come through, very wet -- energy. The coal, the nuclear can run for 90 days. They can keep 90 days of fuel right there on their property. So important to our National Security. Can't do it with wind. Can't do it with the solar. Because, where do you put the fuel, right? And my F. E. R. C., very foolishly, told me "no." Big mistake. But I'm still working very hard on the subsidy. And possibly I can put some smarter guys on F. E. R. C., whether that's by making it bigger, or by the old ones dieing or resigning. Maybe a lot of those guys will die, or quit all at once. Who knows? Anything can happen. All options are on the table -- military and everything else. We'll make the subsidy happen. And we're cutting a tremendous amount of Red Tape -- the regulations that were killing our Energy Industry. I promised to cut 2 regulations for every new one. But it's been much more than that, we've cut like 22 for each new one. And the new regulations are the ones we need for our Economy. For our Industry. For Jobs. And to keep our Nation very very safe. MAGA!!! pic.twitter.com/sFXrTLsLLC [t.co]
(Score: 2, Interesting) by fustakrakich on Monday January 28 2019, @05:40PM
Rather have TMI in my backyard than a coal plant
We don't disagree there, but the contamination is irrelevant to these people. It's not on the spreadsheet, (well it is, as a line on the tax form, maybe). Coal is "cheap and easy", even with the lobbying expenses. Whatever bickering there is, it's always over how to split the reward. The politics we see on camera is just a smoke screen.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..