« About That Overpopulation Problem | Main | A Report on the 2010 National Profile of U.S. Nondenominational and Independent Churches »

Jan 09, 2013


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


This development helps assuage the disaster-fears around nuclear power, but it does little to do anything about the more concrete problem of nuclear waste. Excited to see what happens.

Michael W. Kruse

I'm not a scientist, but what I understand is that Generation IV nuclear power produces waste that is safe after a few centuries instead of millennia. I've read of some technologies that consume much of their own waste. This technology is probably not usable for at least twenty years. Wikipedia has a decent overview in their article "Generation IV reactor." I've linked some posts in recent months.

As with all things economic, it's opportunity costs. What are the alternatives. I'm think nuclear has to be a big piece of our energy puzzle for at least the next century.


The French example is an interesting; they doubled down on nuclear - putting aside the "black magic" danger issue and environment impact. Meanwhile Germany outlawed it.

It's hard to deny how well nuclear works. Perhaps the thorium story will lead to other countries doubling down. It will be interesting to see how that narrative interacts with the Fukushima narrative.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Your email address:

Powered by FeedBlitz

Kruse Kronicle on Kindle

Check It Out