3 thoughts on “Under construction

  1. Good thoughts.

    Would it be fair to say we must advance to three areas: public acceptance, cost, and policy?

    I believe a long term public advertising campaign, mostly TV, would be effective.

    I believe designing nuclear plants with regularly replaced reactor packages would lead to less expensive and better reactor packages. See ThorCon and Terrestial.

    I believe I really don’t understand Gi = g × Xi × P.

    • I believe designing nuclear plants with regularly replaced reactor packages would lead to less expensive and better reactor packages. See ThorCon and Terrestial.

      Thanks for your comments. I suspect you are correct. A send-to-factory-design for refueling and refurbishment should allow choosing materials more from the “industrial catalog” and less from the “nuclear non-obtainium catalog”. Which in a rational world would greatly accelerate both the licensing process and the engineering for production.

      The impact on innovation could be significant. Compare the improvement cycle of Google to traditional 60-yr reactors. Just as a thought experiment, Google will do 100 discover-improve cycles while Westinghouse is doing one cycle. It’s not that simple, but we do know that innovation happens faster with shorter product cycles. Compare Tesla to the old GM cycle.

      My apologies for pulling the content of this page – I decided it needed a total rewrite.

Comments are closed.