Discussion about this post

User's avatar
David Phillips's avatar

Last Energy is filling up their order book. They already have about 80 orders for their 20MW plants under power purchase agreements. That number of orders allows them to keep a supply chain operating. It is also the equivalent of an AP1000 ++. I am super interested to see if they can successfully build the units. They state their goal is to build thousands a year. None of these will be in the USA as long as LNT is the reigning paradigm. Chris Wright would be very open to your presentation that I suggested below your send to EPA. The DOE can sponsor research into your presentation.

Expand full comment
David Phillips's avatar

Jack, I think the most important thing you said in this article is that SNT is an engineering solution - not a biological solution. It allows us to build safe and reliable Nuclear Power Plants without constantly revising the biology. This is the advantage of the over conservative results. The engineers can get about their business and the biologists can continue to explore the exact nature of the repair mechanisms. The biological research will NOT constantly revise the engineering. As you point out LNT - by its nature - does not allow AN engineering solution. Each engineering solution is flawed by definition under LNT. SNT allows engineering solutions that can be confirmed as "SAFE." LNT cannot use the term "SAFE" no matter the solution. As long as the regulator, or insurance adjuster cannot stamp "SAFE" on a NPP we cannot build them in the USA. This is why, even with large subsidies, we don't have order books filled with new NPP builds. It is the future liability risk, which under LNT is unlimited, that makes a utility, of any size, hesitant. If the risk of exposure were known and limited, it can be accounted for, costs calculated and cost per KWH or MWH known. I think you should approach the new leaders at the EPA directly with your proposal. The approach needs to be in a Power Point or graphic format with the benefits and weaknesses of LNT, and the benefits and weakness of SNT clearly laid out. This specific post is a fantastic outline to start with. The presentation needs to be at a lay level, about 9th grade HS. Your fantastic back notes and supporting material will supply the technical depth. The simple presentation will either get them searching your notes or will go in the trash. The presentation should emphasize the difference between an engineering solution and a biological solution, and should clearly justify changing the dosage exposure by an INCREASE of 3000 times. The FAA finally dropped the regulation of cell phones in airplanes because the science just did not justify it. Individual airlines could do what they wished but they could no longer use FAA as a cover for their desire to keep people from using their phones in flight.

Expand full comment
9 more comments...

No posts