What To Know about Gen IV Power

Generation 4 nuclear reactor power plants #GreenNuclearDeal will help power the #GreenNewDeal. Show notes: www.peterwhelan.com/what-to-k...
Gen 4 includes many designs, molten salt thorium reactors (MSR), gas cooled fast reactors (GFR), lead cooled fast reactors (LFR), Sodium-cooled fast reactor (SFR), Supercritical water-cooled reactor (SCWR) a horrible name but a promising technology and Very high-temperature gas reactor (VHTR)

[@xSz300]

i remember when HBO's Chernobyl aired and i went on to reddit and 9gag. Expected lots of posts about the series. And ofcurse it was (the meme kind of saying nuclear is bad), however i had to scroll really far just to find a comment saying nuclear is bad. All the comments were, why havent we dubbled the nuclear power plants with new reactors which is safer? That brought a smile on my face. Great video, maybe just a little to long breaks sometime

[@elsiegel84]

if only we could turn ignorance into electricity, all our problems could be solved.

[@blurglide]

Lefties have figured out how to monetize that

[@savethehumanz9205]

blurglide yep it’s just the lefties... not the majority of both groups.

[@alanblanes2876]

@odegaard China and India already have a partnership to develop this technology. kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z6C8f4h8mN2BaKc

[@kennethjones7239]

It’s a sad day when the voice of ignorance is loud enough to stifle the progression of nuclear energy.

[@LinkWave290]

Nice video, your voice is relaxing lol

[@TheWhatToKnowShow]

Thank you kindly.

[@asborhen]

Great video. Keep it up.

[@TheWhatToKnowShow]

Thank you, that's encouraging

[@terminusest5902]

After Fukushima, I thought there must be better ways to produce nuclear energy. I did not know much about the options. I had some ideas about how reactors could be made safer. Such as control rods that could drop into position if power. Or a collection system built below a reactor in case of meltdowns. Where the nuclear material cannot maintain sufficient amounts of neutrons to slow a reaction. Possibly a very deep shaft below. Where nuclear material can be effectively managed. Containment that would not feed into underground water. Possibly with neutron absorbing materials. Multiple collections points to stop molten fuels from collecting together. Potentially numerous ideas could be used. When I checked the internet I found MSR and LFTR salt reactors could be collected in safe containment at any time with or without staff operation, power or pumps. Then I learned about the huge potential for salt reactors and Thorium fuel. Hundreds of years of very safe, clean, cheap and much smaller reactor plants. Of course, this was too good to be true. So I investigated Gen 4 nuclear fission technologies. While there are many poor reasons not to use Gen 4 reactors there were many good reasons for developing this technology to a prototype stage for effective evaluation. Gen 4 energy could give us vital options for low carbon energy. Something we desperately need. Green conservatives are not willing to seriously study the downsides of renewable energy. Obvious, glaring facts that show renewable energy is far from solving our problems. We need more energy options. Gen 4 technology has amazing potential that should be tested.

[@WadcaWymiaru]

In fact carbon-based energy is OK, only global warming wankers scream like a rats "fossil fuels bad, shut down the coal"...we need CO2 for life! Plants grow bigger, Earth become greener (in 95%, 5%got browner) My country (poland)is coal country. No problems with pollution or expensive energy. Only cars are big issue...

[@Puntry]

Great stuff! To be faiiiir

[@transkryption]

Very adept

[@RavensEagle]

You know I have always had a couple requirements for me to accept nuclear. 1. Triple safety, similar to military, automatic shutdown, on site shutdown by personal, manual shutdown with levers incase computers fail. 2. The amount of nuclear waste it produces needs to be so small it isn't a problem since we have enough nuclear waste problems. Or be able to recycle nuclear if that is even possible. 3. How long does fuel last, for it since it's not renewable. You answered most of my requirements, just curious where did you get the info on enough for a 1000 years. I have read estimates of 200 years of uranium left to use for nuclear power plants. So not sure which to believe or if you are talking about multiple fuel sources.

[@TheWhatToKnowShow]

Great question! The 200 year estimate is based on 2nd gen designs. www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-long-will-global-uranium-deposits-last/ With Gen 4 designs, much of the fuel could come from burning thorough the nuclear waste we have stored. No mining needed. Thorium is an alternate source that CANDU is designed to use. I rounded down to 1,000 because I figured we'd have fusion by then. Some estimates claim we could cleanly power the planet for 30 to 60 thousands years with nuclear.

[@markfabre7682]

@@TheWhatToKnowShow and don't forget, Gen IV molten salt reactors using FLiBe produce as a waste product helium 3 which could be a fuel for nuclear fusion.

[@wfpnknw32]

wanted to learn about gen 4 nuclear, only heard that it's good with only one actual line about it(its designed to automatically shut down...)

[@bfedkjwerfegregfrerg]

Probably Einstein never truly said the following quotation but it fits the subject: "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe!" Fourth Gen. fission power plants, such as the molten salt Thorium reactors may solve our dependence from fossil fuels which are the main cause of climate change as well as the accountability for millions of deaths throughout the globe every year because of the air pollution. A second thought should be spent on renewable energies too as they are not so green and environmentally friendly as we think.

[@savethehumanz9205]

Love the LetterKenny clip use

[@TheWhatToKnowShow]

Thank you kindly. I like your handle. Watch my video on LetterKenny, www.peterwhelan.com/what-to-know-about-the-crave-tv-show-letterkenny/ If you want to

[@SC-yy4sw]

The CANDU design has nothing to do with needing cooling towers or not. For instance, india's Kakrapar CANDU NPP has cooling towers.

[@thefourthgeneration4902]

The extended demonstration of Trevithick’s common road steam locomotive turned up no investors interested in supporting its further development. Trevithick's common road steam locomotive today is referred to as a "car".

[@JAGRAFX]

CANDU is a Canadian government subsidized organization while commercial reactors in the United States had to survive on a real corporate balance sheets and income statements demonstrating cost performance in real time at practically every turn. The commercial nuclear investment in the US has been hardly worth the trillions spent. Utilities now are holding the bag on contaminated nuclear sites with legacy costs going out to the twenty-second century in many cases. Viewing solar as "only when the sun shines" and wind as "only when the wind blows" is a far too pedestrian view of the renewable energy situation in North America. The State of California is currently in the process of retiring all of its commercial nuclear energy and currently is experiencing approximately forty percent of the State's daytime peak energy being met by solar, wind and other renewable sources of energy; displacing the energy from ten to twelve large coal stations or approximately 70,000 tons of coal each day. You have mistaken view of future societal needs. Electrical energy will not be the problem that people are making it out to be. Water quality will be the far more important and scarce resource on the planet. Nuclear energy got the bad press it did because of the tremendous operations, maintenance, and capital costs; all of which were fictionalized at artificially low estimated quantities so as to attract unwary investment. The same thing is ostensibly happening all over again.