Wood and Water techniques are fundamentally low powered versions of Universal coherence-cohesion bonding proportioning/quantization chemistry, the POV of Singularity-point Lensing Partitioning holography, (for Oxford Math-Physics beginning-ending analysis), which should be combined with the Institute of Art and Ideas sense-in-common of self-defining time-timing sync-duration identification conglomerations in/of log-antilog perspectives. Ie making a broad sweep of available intellectual aptitude for holographic analysis of QM superposition logic of the absolute infinity/infinitesimal coordination-identification positioning system.., flash-recognition of Actuality.
The default bio-logical re-evolution POV is preoccupied with the Forever War mentality of Arms Race type metastable proportioning of ecological/economic development and balancing the power requirements of protecting health and welfare of, by, for people in compliance with Actuality. If RR can't do this, no one will.., appropriately?
some things are missing here. Whats the cost of a KWh of electricity generated by this reactor? How will you factor in the waste storage and disiposal costs for the used fuel for this, without other gen4 reactor designs to burn it for you? Sharpen your pencils RR!
A well built and maintained reactor should provide power for 100 years. the reactor and spent fuel will be dangerous for 200,000 years. Is it moral to use a device whose problems will outlast its benefits 2000 times?
@@jacquelinepaul9731 Don't worry. Although what he said is formally true, in fact everything is far from so scary. Firstly, the total amount of highly radioactive waste accumulated over half a century of use is about 280,000 tons. These are mostly spent fuel rods. It seems like a lot, but if you calculate the volume of this waste taking into account the density of uranium, you get 14,000 cubic meters. This is a cube with dimensions of 24*24*24 meters. In fact, of course, more, since no one breaks old rods and puts them in one pile, but in any case, this is an insignificant amount that can be easily controlled. Secondly, of this waste, only 5 percent is actually waste. The rest can be separated and reused. And this is already being done in France and Russia. That is, the amount of waste is further reduced by 20 times. Thirdly, such a quantity can be turned into something like glass, which does not react with anything, and buried somewhere deep in the mountain, where no tectonic activity is expected. Regarding the 200,000 years of radioactivity, again it is formally true, only environmental activists do not like to say that it is decreasing very quickly. And in 1000 years their radioactivity will not be nearly as strong. Well, that is, if in a thousand years a meteorite hits the burial ground directly and disperses all this waste, then there will still be no global catastrophe. And the meteorite example is almost the most realistic version of what could go wrong. =) Well, there is also “fourthly”. These highly radioactive substances (called minor actinides) can literally be transmuted into much less dangerous substances in fast reactors. Such reactors are more complex than slow neutron reactors. In connection with this (and also due to the decrease in interest in atomic energy in recent decades), they have not become widespread. So far no one country has developed them enought for commercial use. However, technologies have been developed in all countries related to nuclear energy. Currently, Russia is closest to the commercial implementation of sodium-cooled fast reactors. It has been operating two sodium-cooled fast neutron reactors (BN-600 and BN-800) for several decades. Moreover, regarding waste, three fuel elements with the addition of minior actinides should be loaded into the BN-800 reactor this spring. P.S. I got a little carried away. =)
Still safer and better for the environment than burning coal and gas, or producing solar panels in China (where the environmental regulations are almost non-existent). All methods of power generation have a problem. For renewables, it's the materials required, and the difficulty in reclamation of materials. In coal and gas, it's the release of significant carbon emissions and toxic gases. For nuclear, it's the waste, and as @cougar4ik said so well, the waste production is actually much better than realised. Not to mention also the Synroc technology coming out of Australia for use in waste encapsulation.
dont worry, this generation of reactors waste is just fuel for the next generation of molten salt reactors that the chinese is busily building as well as turning one on this year, waste is also a source of fission products that are extremly useful for two types of generators/nuclear batteries that use the decay heat from strontium 90 [ look up russian lighthouse thermo-electric generators abandonded and harmed several people who cut them open] and ionic emissions from other things in fission products like krypton gas ect. that can emit radiation for years captured and converted directly to electricity in a battery for decades without recharging, more like a fuel cell that runs out of fuel , so waste is a big mis-nomer for this valueable resource...
The question I have is how large a 'production run' does RR believe is necessary for the SMR to become viable?
Whoever chose the thumbnail image urgently needs to go to electrical engineering class.
Excellent talk
Can the Rolls Royce SMR be built underground?
Wood and Water techniques are fundamentally low powered versions of Universal coherence-cohesion bonding proportioning/quantization chemistry, the POV of Singularity-point Lensing Partitioning holography, (for Oxford Math-Physics beginning-ending analysis), which should be combined with the Institute of Art and Ideas sense-in-common of self-defining time-timing sync-duration identification conglomerations in/of log-antilog perspectives.
Ie making a broad sweep of available intellectual aptitude for holographic analysis of QM superposition logic of the absolute infinity/infinitesimal coordination-identification positioning system.., flash-recognition of Actuality.
The default bio-logical re-evolution POV is preoccupied with the Forever War mentality of Arms Race type metastable proportioning of ecological/economic development and balancing the power requirements of protecting health and welfare of, by, for people in compliance with Actuality.
If RR can't do this, no one will.., appropriately?
some things are missing here. Whats the cost of a KWh of electricity generated by this reactor? How will you factor in the waste storage and disiposal costs for the used fuel for this, without other gen4 reactor designs to burn it for you? Sharpen your pencils RR!
When is all this getting the thumbs up or down ??
A well built and maintained reactor should provide power for 100 years. the reactor and spent fuel will be dangerous for 200,000 years. Is it moral to use a device whose problems will outlast its benefits 2000 times?
Is that true ?? If so that sounds terrible.
@@jacquelinepaul9731 Don't worry. Although what he said is formally true, in fact everything is far from so scary. Firstly, the total amount of highly radioactive waste accumulated over half a century of use is about 280,000 tons. These are mostly spent fuel rods. It seems like a lot, but if you calculate the volume of this waste taking into account the density of uranium, you get 14,000 cubic meters. This is a cube with dimensions of 24*24*24 meters. In fact, of course, more, since no one breaks old rods and puts them in one pile, but in any case, this is an insignificant amount that can be easily controlled. Secondly, of this waste, only 5 percent is actually waste. The rest can be separated and reused. And this is already being done in France and Russia. That is, the amount of waste is further reduced by 20 times. Thirdly, such a quantity can be turned into something like glass, which does not react with anything, and buried somewhere deep in the mountain, where no tectonic activity is expected. Regarding the 200,000 years of radioactivity, again it is formally true, only environmental activists do not like to say that it is decreasing very quickly. And in 1000 years their radioactivity will not be nearly as strong. Well, that is, if in a thousand years a meteorite hits the burial ground directly and disperses all this waste, then there will still be no global catastrophe. And the meteorite example is almost the most realistic version of what could go wrong. =) Well, there is also “fourthly”. These highly radioactive substances (called minor actinides) can literally be transmuted into much less dangerous substances in fast reactors. Such reactors are more complex than slow neutron reactors. In connection with this (and also due to the decrease in interest in atomic energy in recent decades), they have not become widespread. So far no one country has developed them enought for commercial use. However, technologies have been developed in all countries related to nuclear energy. Currently, Russia is closest to the commercial implementation of sodium-cooled fast reactors. It has been operating two sodium-cooled fast neutron reactors (BN-600 and BN-800) for several decades. Moreover, regarding waste, three fuel elements with the addition of minior actinides should be loaded into the BN-800 reactor this spring. P.S. I got a little carried away. =)
Still safer and better for the environment than burning coal and gas, or producing solar panels in China (where the environmental regulations are almost non-existent). All methods of power generation have a problem. For renewables, it's the materials required, and the difficulty in reclamation of materials. In coal and gas, it's the release of significant carbon emissions and toxic gases. For nuclear, it's the waste, and as @cougar4ik said so well, the waste production is actually much better than realised. Not to mention also the Synroc technology coming out of Australia for use in waste encapsulation.
@Cougar4ik
Very interesting but who should I be investing 💰 in !!
dont worry, this generation of reactors waste is just fuel for the next generation of molten salt reactors that the chinese is busily building as well as turning one on this year, waste is also a source of fission products that are extremly useful for two types of generators/nuclear batteries that use the decay heat from strontium 90 [ look up russian lighthouse thermo-electric generators abandonded and harmed several people who cut them open] and ionic emissions from other things in fission products like krypton gas ect. that can emit radiation for years captured and converted directly to electricity in a battery for decades without recharging, more like a fuel cell that runs out of fuel , so waste is a big mis-nomer for this valueable resource...