Jai Hinduja. The governments must really go down to the Shidao Bay nuclear plant in Shidaowan, China to get the most updated data on the benefits of running 4th generation triso pebble reactors.
@@00Tenrai00 Did you watch the video? You can't have a meltdown with this design. It's 2024 and not 1954. We are more than capable of designing reactors that won't have a meltdown issue.
@@zombieshoot4318 you also have no idea what you're on about. Only types of gas cooled reactors, generally known as high-temperature gas-cooled reactors, such as the Japanese High Temperature Test Reactor and the United States' Very High Temperature Reactor, are inherently safe. Meaning that meltdowns and/or other types of core damage are physically impossible. Also whose "we"? Lol you ain't designing fuel rods.
@@shadydealz I’m sure he just meant humans in general and engineers to be specific. I think Nuclear power is safe and efficient enough to use anywhere. Even the earth made its own nuclear reactor billions of years ago in Oklo in Africa. How micro can you go? I’d like one in my backyard for upcoming events.
I saw this in a paper years ago. It was developed by a German university years ago but then nothing heard about it until now! They had developed a micro nuclear reactor that theoretically could be placed in an individuals home or scaled up to produce power for a factory. The ceramic coating of the fuel allows it to be self regulating preventing it from entering a runaway reaction.
Western utilities companies will not allow SMRs to develop and installed commercially. But the fact of the matter is China, Russia and India see a potential market and opportunity to make problems for the West. Upcoming players will be Iran, North Korea, Pakistan and Turkey will thrown in the scenario. I predict whomever comes up a micro nuclear reactor or battery technology first will be driver's seat for modernization for years if not decades to come!!! Hahahaha
I am a enthusiast of nuclear energy and it is a pity that this wonderful technology is so bad understood by the population in general, considering it unsafe and dangerous, while today there is a really mature and safe technology.
the pretend Greenies that are led by the nose by vested interests in the solar industry - receiving billions in grants to force roll out solar panels - these uneducated types are still parroting the solar not nuclear mantra from the 70s.
No ,its not about oil companies Its about people. if people still used oil ,oil companies don't need to stop this project but im certainly many oil investor Will investor their money for this project to replace oil energy sector in the future Sorry if my English was bad
Not at all. Oil is made into liquid fuels, and just about every single thing you use in daily life. No amount of wind turbines, solar panels, or nuclear reactors will change that. Those things only produce electricity, whereas oil produces actual physical products and low cost fuels that run the world. No matter what the talking heads say, oil will be produced for the next hundred years or more. There are too many products made from it that can't be obtained otherwise. Fuel, plastics, resins, ceramics, medications, fertilizers, solvents, cosmetics, personal care products, food additives, tangible physical things are made from oil. The world as we know it would not exist if we didn't have oil. So no, oil companies don't really care, power generation is not their primary product target.
Indeed. So how many have they made? (not sold, but actually constructed) We have loads of theoretical designs. Even scores of research reactors. But none have made it to the point of actual - legal - viability. NuScale apparently got there, and then went bankrupt or something.
@@jfbeam Yes the idea of financing the cost of not only a SMR but actually a factory to build SMR"s, and then start building SMR's means there is something like a 15-30 year pay back period, where in most finance things it is like 5-10 years. Sadly, I would love more people willing to fund the idea, to get it going. I think once they can turn one out per month, they will have a very efficient and inexpensive system. Otherwise I would love to suggest that perhaps the Saudi Family Fund could pay for it to be built, but I don't know if that would fly because of the NRC might not like the fact that it is a non-domestic funding source.
@@eriklondon2946 you're right. it's quite the valley of death. we are undeterred. keep up the support! We've been to UAE for fundraising and projects. Incredible ambition and success with their 4 new reactors. They are cautious on new tech.
These are the kind of nuclear power units we were "sold" back in the 1950s and 60s when I was a kid. We thought everything, including cars and aircraft would be nuclear back then. But all the implementation mistakes in the ensuing decades almost screwed it out of existence. Maybe this will get nuclear back into the game. It would be PERFECT for a Lunar or Mars base!
Those original plants were conflicted and corrupted by corporate greed. The bigger they made them the more government kickback money got involved and the harder it was to trace. Not to mention huge amounts of electricity to profit on. Every risk and responsibility was subsidized by not being regulated safely if regulated at all. Those people involved have squandered our futures, have squandered the great promises of nuclear energy. They’re criminals against humanity of the highest order and deserve prosecution.
we hope so. our ceramic fuels resolve many of the accident consequence issues and our micro reactors unlock factory fabrication and safety. This is for all mankind!
@@ultrasafenuclear I think municipalities can be convinced to vote in tax levies for generators in which the citizens receive the electricity back as return on their investment. A kind of socialized energy.
Silicon Carbide is really neat stuff used in many advanced applications in other industries. I’ve worked with it, and while it was more costly than the alternatives it was a beautiful fit for a lot of applications.
@@rgbcolor6450 Which invalidates nothing I said. The material is a good fit for many advanced applications, like diesel particulate filters, and other types of advanced filtration.
@@waynesworldofsci-tech I wasn't trying to invalidate your statement.. just pointing out that silicon carbide is a common material, not some special nuclear invention.
I graduated with my engineering degree 50 years ago. At that time nuclear was the bright future, but for a lot of reasons it has never fully achieved the potential we predicted. Just think about 70 years ago they were putting nuclear power plants safely into submarines. This type of development seemed right around the corner at that time.
Sadly the anti-nuclear groups pressurised governments, who switched spending to other things, plus the media still open any discussion on nuclear power with a mushroom cloud, reinforcing deep seated fears. However, with alternatives energies now proving how difficult it is to build reliable 24/7/365 grid with intermittent power input, nuclear is now the obvious choice.
@@cs7th The reactors on submarines use weapons grade fuel - enriched to 20%. The US civilian nuclear industry uses fuel with a lower enrichment to avoid the risk of creating tons of high grade fuel that is outside the control of the military. Enriching fuel to 20% is 90% of the enrichment process, so it would be a much more tempting target for someone who wants steal themselves a nuclear bomb. And one of the byproducts of civilian nuc plants is plutonium and that became the feedstock for our weapons programs. Another reason the navy uses high grade fuel is because it's not prone to xenon poisoning. Radioactive xenon builds up in a reactor as it runs. During normal operation it's just burned up as part of the normal process. But when you shut down a civilian plant that xenon is not burned up as power drops. The left over xenon prevents the reactor from being restarted until it falls below a certain threshold. A military vessel can't afford to shut down a reactor and then have to just wait around before starting it back up again. Someone might be shooting at them.
@@12pentaborane No, they're not. Using highly enriched fuel, Navy reactors can be built small enough to fit inside a submarine hull. Where space is not a consideration, such in a power plant, the fuel is not enriched nearly as much. A significant portion of a large reactor's energy is derived from fast neutrons.
для зелёного перехода нужен безопасный реактор который будет работать полгода, чтобы снизить риск аварии аэс. Многие пост советские страны используют реакторы на 200% из-за этого допустили чаэс.
I chuckled at the point about dissipating heat by glowing, because that's quite literally a thing: all objects lose heat via electromagnetic radiation. Fun fact: this is also how the James Webb space telescope is able to keep cool in deep space, even without anything else to conduct heat away.
@Based_transition_Clocker "Glowing" implies light, usually visible light, but in this case infrared. Infrared radiation is harmless as long as it gets absorbed by something which can be heated without damage, i.e. concrete in this case. Even the radiation from (thermo)nuclear weapon detonations is mostly thermal. Radiation is a very general term and can refer to the entire electromagnetic spectrum. Look up ionizing vs non-ionizing radiation. The latter does not cause DNA damage, only heating at most.
@Based_transition_Clocker What is confusing about my reply? In any case, all radiation from nuclear reactors is shielded with thick steel and concrete. Whether you're talking about the ionizing radiation, non-ionizing radiation, or neutrons, all of it is extensively monitored and none of it escapes the containment building.
@Based_transition_Clocker yea trying to speak to as many people as possible. The point is the reactor temperatures remain safe and with plenty of margin without any active cooling. that's what is special.
There is also Molten Salt Reactors, which can be used in replacement of the Helium in this situation. I personally would love to see a Small Modular Reactor (where you could have up to say 10 of them) next to each other all using a Molten Salt Reactor, so they could build up energy for large power draws from 2pm-9pm, especially during summer heat. I think it is the best and most efficient way.
I've been watching SMR presentations for years. Until this point, I'd only seen one viable candidate, Moltex Energy. Now I've seen two, congratulations.
Although one big question is use of nuclear approved materials, is there existing approval for all the materials? Nuclear steels, etc. What about the silicon carbide fuel matrix, will it need approval before it can be used? That's often a death trap for new nuclear.
@@MostlyPennyCat Great points. The TRISO specification we are using has been approved, and used in multiple reactors, even some operating today. The steels, graphite, etc are all conventional nuclear materials used in reactors today.
@@ultrasafenuclear I know TRISO pebbles has been approved, but the TRISO & Silicon Carbide matrix is also approved for nuclear use? That's excellent. All but one of the Molten Salt Reactor Designs have pumped molten nuclear fuel. They require new nuclear steels. Only Moltex Energy uses Approved Nuclear Steels, they get around this by having static molten salt fuel tubes. They're currently building one in Canada. To my eyes, only yourselves and Moltex have a dog in this race. Best of Luck, you've got some serious competition in Moltex!
I wouldn’t be surprised if there are some negatives associated with this design not covered in the video but overall it looks exciting and promising. If climate change really is existential, it baffles me why we aren’t pushing hard to implement this technology.
We need all the support we can get. Everyone can help by talking about it, going to their local utility meetings, even just sending emails to your elected officials or the utility folks.
We have the ability already to have safe nuclear energy and reactors that use spent fuel from the old reactors. It just takes investment to change out current infrastructure
Similar to HTGR pellets. The people from ornl brought a bottle of these to pass around and someond dropped and broke it. We all took turns using a ludlum counter to find them. Could imagine the chaos that would happen today despite being told that in theory we could eat a few with zero ill effects. They were about the size of very fine bird shot and made of uranium coated in graphite and SiC. Fun times ❤
They were the beads that went inside of the "pebble",and yup you are right the pebbles themselves tended to break up and fall apart leading to them abandoning the idea.
How about "Star Light Energy"? I read a number of articles years ago about mini nuclear reactors some years back and have been fascinated by the concept ever since and I wish you all the success in the world.
Neat idea, but I notice you did not mention one of these likely expensive reactors has the output of *3 wind turbines* (15 MW max). I'm very pro-nuclear, but holy hell that is a really piss-poor fuel density, you'd practically be coating large portions of the landscape, or large areas of underground space, in these reactors. It'd be possible yeah, but it just seems unfeasible compared to constructing a single, centralized plant that produces gigawatts of power, and possibly for less money vs energy output.
@@00Tenrai00 Nuclear waste gets sealed into heavy, thick casks. Compared to coal and natural gas, nuclear is much safer. A grand total of 50 people have ever died to anything related to nuclear energy.
@@nauticalfish2008 but, but, but all the scary news stories. All the hubub around the water cooler. Are you telling me it's been blown out of proportion to an urban legend like story?
Howdy folks! Come on down to Farmer Drew's Happy Hot Springs! Why worry about fickle geothermal heat and the potential for super caldera eruption? I've got a safe nuclear reactor under my land, it keeps the water toasty.
The micro nuclear reactor is the future of nuclear power, these miniature systems could power an entire city block by block. The efficiency of these is several magnitudes better than the older systems, and they are so very much betterthan the older systems as well, three of these would power the whole town i live in, and be able to supply not just power but heat as well. This is also the exact type if system thatbydenis completely opposed to at every turn.
@ultrasafenuclear I have read quite a bit about these miniature systems, and for the power out put of one of these, you get a lot of power. From what I understand they can also utilize fuel rods that are partially spent. The rods just need to be recast.
This look great !!! Definitely i will invest and buy share but is a privately held company 😮💨 Haw time this reactor will generate energy whit out replace or add new FCM fuel pellets ???
Calling your company an "ultra safe" nuclear will focus peoples attention at the aspect of safety and people will assume you are trying to convince them it is safe... because it is not.
Haven't stated how much power it generates. The fact is nuclear is only efficient with multiple large reactors and even then its quite expensive such that we haven't been building that many plants. Something like this may work for a space base or in antartica where budgets are infinite but for mass consumer use it's likely that a plant with 5 reactors costs the same as 20 of these small ones but produces 10x more power than those 20. Being able to be cooled passively is beautiful, but to make lots of power cheaply we need big reactors that produce lots of heat. There's a reason we build buses and planes to fit in multiple passengers.
Just curious, has anyone every advertised their reactor design as NOT safe? I feel like every reactor that has had a catastrophic event had some marketing materials just like this that preceded it.
TBF, of all failed power reactors, AFAIK, only RBMK was a "fly-by-wire" one, relying almost entirely on SKALA's PRISMA program to remain stable, due to positive void coefficient. This one seems to lack such a dangerous peculiarity.
I'm so tired of waiting for my charcoal grill to heat up. I need this so it's always ready. Yes and I would also like to buy the huge lead oven mitts to replace the fuel.
Sounds like they’ve modified the Triga reactor design to To produce amplified power output over a test reactor will significantly over a test reactor if they incorporate boron directly into the uranium fuel, that would give it inherent built-in negative reactivity so, even if it went into a super critical phase, it would not go into a prompt criticality face, because if the moment it started burning up, that boron boron would start absorbing neutrons in collapse it, and I think that’s what they’ve created here that’s why the reactor could inherently be safe because the laws of physics itself literally Prevents prompt criticality
OK but how like I don’t want you to reveal any trade secrets, but put it this way if you put boron in the uranium fuel, you get an inherently negative coefficient negative void coefficient, which is what shuts down the Traeger reactor to prevent prompt criticality, so how does ceramic do that and here’s the thing it’s been proven scientifically but you could make Triga fuel rides they could produce commercial scale, electrical power if I was the President of the United States I would’ve passed along ages ago, but said by the year 2020 FCI was the president in the year, 1994 All new nuclear reactors be they can do or light water, reactor’s or heavy water reactors would utilize boron, mixed inherently in the fuel just like a Triga reactor so how does this ceramic do the same job at the element boron dose?
We are designing the power plant for 40-year project lifetime, but fully expect that the civil works and much of the power plant will last 60-80 years and beyond. A gift for the future. the $/kWh are acceptable for many users looking for zero carbon power on-demand.
taking it out there and constructing it is one of the big limiting factors of doing such thing, there are a few other issues that i'm not gonna get into cus im lazy lol
Investors elite, invest now! The next product available will be the Fusion Core®, which we cannot talk about right now, but it is sure to revolutionize the way we work and live!
@@ultrasafenuclear Not a very good thing to admit, ultrasafe. From your responses you seem very unproffesional and that you don't care that much about the questions in the comments. For example whats the physical size of the unit? An another person in this comment section asked this along with many other questions. You linked them to your website which only answers some, and not the physical size one. It would be very good for you to publicise this since many people here are curious about putting this in their backyard. (Sorry if the size is confidential, if yes then it's fine if you don't publish it.) Because whenever you google the size, it only gives the electricity output. I had to figure it out myself using MS paint and the fact that the railing is 106 cm tall. Then the reactor itself would be 13.5 meters tall.
Hi. This seems very interesting, but how does it generate heat to boil water? i didnt see any water exept the flooding scenario in the animation. Thank you
The reactor vessel should not be fotted with pipes at bottom, it should be at top, so that, even when there is no power, water stays inside the reactor
So essentially the reactor containment vessel, is it's own vessel for when it is decommissioned and sent to bed for disposal in a radioactive repository?
no. we remove the graphite fuel blocks and stick them in dry cask storage. The vessel is reused for the next batch of fuel. It's pretty thick steel vessel (4-5cm thick) so good to keep using. like reusable rockets
Your solutions can work for base load and demand generation like a natural gas plant, so that will be your main competition. According to news sources covering the new Cascade power plant in Alberta, a modern combined-cycle natural gas plant can produce 900 MW on about 128 acres of land, at a build cost of $1.2 Billion US. Your site states a land use of 5 acres to produce 3.5-15 MW of electricity. Optimistically, your solution can produce 42% of the power that a natural gas plant can with the same amount of land. That's not a dealbreaker per se, so it's all going to come down to cost.
That is one of the most impressive and least advertised technologies i have ever seen in my 72 years on this planet. Bravo!!
We won`t see shit if it does not benefit governments directly :(
Jai Hinduja. The governments must really go down to the Shidao Bay nuclear plant in Shidaowan, China to get the most updated data on the benefits of running 4th generation triso pebble reactors.
@@TheBBoyPainJai Hinduja. South Africa will be trying to put up their design by the end of the decade.
This is 1960’s tech. Look up HTGR. Peach Bottom unit 1, Ft St. Vrain, Dragon, and AVR
IS A LIE Give Nuclear Your Money & Your Life For 24k Years No Nuclear Melt Down HAS EVER STOPPED @ 41 CPM
I'll be honest- It would be pretty cool to have a nuclear reactor underneath a substation and have localized nuclear energy.
@@00Tenrai00 not how that works, at all.
@@00Tenrai00 Did you watch the video? You can't have a meltdown with this design. It's 2024 and not 1954. We are more than capable of designing reactors that won't have a meltdown issue.
@@zombieshoot4318 you also have no idea what you're on about. Only types of gas cooled reactors, generally known as high-temperature gas-cooled reactors, such as the Japanese High Temperature Test Reactor and the United States' Very High Temperature Reactor, are inherently safe. Meaning that meltdowns and/or other types of core damage are physically impossible.
Also whose "we"? Lol you ain't designing fuel rods.
@@shadydealz
I’m sure he just meant humans in general and engineers to be specific.
I think Nuclear power is safe and efficient enough to use anywhere.
Even the earth made its own nuclear reactor billions of years ago in Oklo in Africa.
How micro can you go? I’d like one in my backyard for upcoming events.
@@shadydealz A google search does not make you an expert in anything.
I saw this in a paper years ago. It was developed by a German university years ago but then nothing heard about it until now! They had developed a micro nuclear reactor that theoretically could be placed in an individuals home or scaled up to produce power for a factory. The ceramic coating of the fuel allows it to be self regulating preventing it from entering a runaway reaction.
poor germans.
with but one big drawback: you could be INDEPENDENT !
@@bruceg1845 need self-reliance.
Western utilities companies will not allow SMRs to develop and installed commercially. But the fact of the matter is China, Russia and India see a potential market and opportunity to make problems for the West. Upcoming players will be Iran, North Korea, Pakistan and Turkey will thrown in the scenario. I predict whomever comes up a micro nuclear reactor or battery technology first will be driver's seat for modernization for years if not decades to come!!! Hahahaha
Sounds like something straight out of Fallout!
I am a enthusiast of nuclear energy and it is a pity that this wonderful technology is so bad understood by the population in general, considering it unsafe and dangerous, while today there is a really mature and safe technology.
the pretend Greenies that are led by the nose by vested interests in the solar industry - receiving billions in grants to force roll out solar panels - these uneducated types are still parroting the solar not nuclear mantra from the 70s.
This is what we need. I have a strong feeling oil companies will do whatever they can to stop it though.
No ,its not about oil companies
Its about people. if people still used oil ,oil companies don't need to stop this project
but im certainly many oil investor Will investor their money for this project to replace oil energy sector in the future
Sorry if my English was bad
Not at all. Oil is made into liquid fuels, and just about every single thing you use in daily life. No amount of wind turbines, solar panels, or nuclear reactors will change that. Those things only produce electricity, whereas oil produces actual physical products and low cost fuels that run the world. No matter what the talking heads say, oil will be produced for the next hundred years or more. There are too many products made from it that can't be obtained otherwise. Fuel, plastics, resins, ceramics, medications, fertilizers, solvents, cosmetics, personal care products, food additives, tangible physical things are made from oil. The world as we know it would not exist if we didn't have oil. So no, oil companies don't really care, power generation is not their primary product target.
Remember, these guys do NOT have suicidal tendencies
It seems almost too good to be true. Excellent sales pitch. I'd buy one.
Indeed. So how many have they made? (not sold, but actually constructed) We have loads of theoretical designs. Even scores of research reactors. But none have made it to the point of actual - legal - viability. NuScale apparently got there, and then went bankrupt or something.
@@jfbeam Don’t you think that the power that be have blocked most or all of these? ijs
@@jfbeam Yes the idea of financing the cost of not only a SMR but actually a factory to build SMR"s, and then start building SMR's means there is something like a 15-30 year pay back period, where in most finance things it is like 5-10 years. Sadly, I would love more people willing to fund the idea, to get it going. I think once they can turn one out per month, they will have a very efficient and inexpensive system.
Otherwise I would love to suggest that perhaps the Saudi Family Fund could pay for it to be built, but I don't know if that would fly because of the NRC might not like the fact that it is a non-domestic funding source.
@@jfbeam 0 made. 2 projects to break ground soon. this stuff takes time, alignment, and partnerships. Hope you wish us well!
@@eriklondon2946 you're right. it's quite the valley of death. we are undeterred. keep up the support! We've been to UAE for fundraising and projects. Incredible ambition and success with their 4 new reactors. They are cautious on new tech.
These are the kind of nuclear power units we were "sold" back in the 1950s and 60s when I was a kid. We thought everything, including cars and aircraft would be nuclear back then. But all the implementation mistakes in the ensuing decades almost screwed it out of existence. Maybe this will get nuclear back into the game. It would be PERFECT for a Lunar or Mars base!
Those original plants were conflicted and corrupted by corporate greed. The bigger they made them the more government kickback money got involved and the harder it was to trace. Not to mention huge amounts of electricity to profit on. Every risk and responsibility was subsidized by not being regulated safely if regulated at all. Those people involved have squandered our futures, have squandered the great promises of nuclear energy. They’re criminals against humanity of the highest order and deserve prosecution.
we hope so. our ceramic fuels resolve many of the accident consequence issues and our micro reactors unlock factory fabrication and safety. This is for all mankind!
@@ultrasafenuclear I think municipalities can be convinced to vote in tax levies for generators in which the citizens receive the electricity back as return on their investment. A kind of socialized energy.
Or the North Pole...... like a Canadian military base up there maybe?
Didn't the Soviets have little nuclear generators that they abandoned?
Silicon Carbide is really neat stuff used in many advanced applications in other industries. I’ve worked with it, and while it was more costly than the alternatives it was a beautiful fit for a lot of applications.
Silicon Carbine, otherwise known as sandpaper, grinding wheels, etc. It isn't a new material nor is it special.
@@rgbcolor6450
Which invalidates nothing I said. The material is a good fit for many advanced applications, like diesel particulate filters, and other types of advanced filtration.
@@waynesworldofsci-tech I wasn't trying to invalidate your statement.. just pointing out that silicon carbide is a common material, not some special nuclear invention.
@@rgbcolor6450
Agreed. It’s old, but oh man are the new applications exciting!
@@rgbcolor6450 Which is even better! Since we don't have to allocate additional funds to invent some new wonder material.
Nuclear energy is making a big comeback, uranium is at an all time high; great for commodity traders.
I graduated with my engineering degree 50 years ago. At that time nuclear was the bright future, but for a lot of reasons it has never fully achieved the potential we predicted. Just think about 70 years ago they were putting nuclear power plants safely into submarines. This type of development seemed right around the corner at that time.
Sadly the anti-nuclear groups pressurised governments, who switched spending to other things, plus the media still open any discussion on nuclear power with a mushroom cloud, reinforcing deep seated fears. However, with alternatives energies now proving how difficult it is to build reliable 24/7/365 grid with intermittent power input, nuclear is now the obvious choice.
From what I've understood of naval reactors, they operate differently from power reactors. For the most part I think they are fast reactors.
@@cs7th The reactors on submarines use weapons grade fuel - enriched to 20%. The US civilian nuclear industry uses fuel with a lower enrichment to avoid the risk of creating tons of high grade fuel that is outside the control of the military. Enriching fuel to 20% is 90% of the enrichment process, so it would be a much more tempting target for someone who wants steal themselves a nuclear bomb. And one of the byproducts of civilian nuc plants is plutonium and that became the feedstock for our weapons programs.
Another reason the navy uses high grade fuel is because it's not prone to xenon poisoning. Radioactive xenon builds up in a reactor as it runs. During normal operation it's just burned up as part of the normal process. But when you shut down a civilian plant that xenon is not burned up as power drops. The left over xenon prevents the reactor from being restarted until it falls below a certain threshold. A military vessel can't afford to shut down a reactor and then have to just wait around before starting it back up again. Someone might be shooting at them.
@@12pentaborane No, they're not. Using highly enriched fuel, Navy reactors can be built small enough to fit inside a submarine hull. Where space is not a consideration, such in a power plant, the fuel is not enriched nearly as much. A significant portion of a large reactor's energy is derived from fast neutrons.
Very informative I went ahead and purchased one for my home.
an ethusiast of Nuclear Energy here, this is a clear explanation of your reactors, good work!
A mini earth’s core generator. Magnificent
Congrats on the design. I'm looking forward to hearing about a success in the news, and safe Nuclear energy for all!
Wow... until the end I thought it was small enough to put in my old transistor radio.
This sounds very promising. I wish you success with the development.
для зелёного перехода нужен безопасный реактор который будет работать полгода, чтобы снизить риск аварии аэс. Многие пост советские страны используют реакторы на 200% из-за этого допустили чаэс.
The world need your voice
I chuckled at the point about dissipating heat by glowing, because that's quite literally a thing: all objects lose heat via electromagnetic radiation. Fun fact: this is also how the James Webb space telescope is able to keep cool in deep space, even without anything else to conduct heat away.
@Based_transition_Clocker "Glowing" implies light, usually visible light, but in this case infrared. Infrared radiation is harmless as long as it gets absorbed by something which can be heated without damage, i.e. concrete in this case.
Even the radiation from (thermo)nuclear weapon detonations is mostly thermal. Radiation is a very general term and can refer to the entire electromagnetic spectrum. Look up ionizing vs non-ionizing radiation. The latter does not cause DNA damage, only heating at most.
@Based_transition_Clocker What is confusing about my reply? In any case, all radiation from nuclear reactors is shielded with thick steel and concrete. Whether you're talking about the ionizing radiation, non-ionizing radiation, or neutrons, all of it is extensively monitored and none of it escapes the containment building.
@Based_transition_Clocker Tell me how I'm wrong then.
@Based_transition_Clocker yea trying to speak to as many people as possible. The point is the reactor temperatures remain safe and with plenty of margin without any active cooling. that's what is special.
@@jlp1528non ionising radiation can still cause damage… also, how is nuclear fuel disposed off? Nuclear reactors are ticking time bombs! Never ever!!!
There is also Molten Salt Reactors, which can be used in replacement of the Helium in this situation. I personally would love to see a Small Modular Reactor (where you could have up to say 10 of them) next to each other all using a Molten Salt Reactor, so they could build up energy for large power draws from 2pm-9pm, especially during summer heat. I think it is the best and most efficient way.
I've been watching SMR presentations for years.
Until this point, I'd only seen one viable candidate, Moltex Energy.
Now I've seen two, congratulations.
Although one big question is use of nuclear approved materials, is there existing approval for all the materials?
Nuclear steels, etc.
What about the silicon carbide fuel matrix, will it need approval before it can be used?
That's often a death trap for new nuclear.
@@MostlyPennyCat Great points. The TRISO specification we are using has been approved, and used in multiple reactors, even some operating today.
The steels, graphite, etc are all conventional nuclear materials used in reactors today.
@@ultrasafenuclear
I know TRISO pebbles has been approved, but the TRISO & Silicon Carbide matrix is also approved for nuclear use?
That's excellent.
All but one of the Molten Salt Reactor Designs have pumped molten nuclear fuel. They require new nuclear steels.
Only Moltex Energy uses Approved Nuclear Steels, they get around this by having static molten salt fuel tubes.
They're currently building one in Canada.
To my eyes, only yourselves and Moltex have a dog in this race.
Best of Luck, you've got some serious competition in Moltex!
I want to see more of that.
I'll take one, I'm sure it'll fit in my backyard.
That is so amazingly cool!
each home should have 1 pellet reactor to power our houses. This way it would be soooo much easier to control any runaway heat.
Finally a reactor for the common man to offgrid with.
Its around the size of a 3 story building.
Unless you have a situation where you have some sort of catastrophic event where the rods don't get pulled out before the disaster occurs.
I wouldn’t be surprised if there are some negatives associated with this design not covered in the video but overall it looks exciting and promising. If climate change really is existential, it baffles me why we aren’t pushing hard to implement this technology.
honestly this tech has potental. I hope to see a physically reactor going online soon
We need all the support we can get. Everyone can help by talking about it, going to their local utility meetings, even just sending emails to your elected officials or the utility folks.
We have the ability already to have safe nuclear energy and reactors that use spent fuel from the old reactors. It just takes investment to change out current infrastructure
Thank you for developing such promising technology🎉
I have envisioned this for 5 years and finally they pulled it off :)
this has to be the best advertisement of all times
how can it be everyone in the comments sounds tempted to buy their own nuclear reactors now😂
The Philippines and usnc just signed a deal after the 123 agreement
Killing EARTH
@@FixItStupid its safe and is actually going to save earth
@@Beeman2892false
This same nuclear reactor has the power footprint of a 1600-acre solar panel farm.
Best idea to have the reactor underground
That is impressive, i feel like nuclear is the only option we really have to keep are civilization growing. Hope you get all the funding you need.
safe nuclear energy for stability of the grid is inevitable
this is beyond science
Yes! I have been waiting for these things so that my soup thermos always has steamy delicious chicken noodle soup on those chilly autumn days.
Take good care of your engineers. You know, energy companies and stuff.
👍 we do our best.
Looking forward to having one in my backyard
Must have a giant property
@MKBHD has been testing this to power his studio for the last year!
Similar to HTGR pellets. The people from ornl brought a bottle of these to pass around and someond dropped and broke it. We all took turns using a ludlum counter to find them. Could imagine the chaos that would happen today despite being told that in theory we could eat a few with zero ill effects. They were about the size of very fine bird shot and made of uranium coated in graphite and SiC. Fun times ❤
ceramics are brittle. that was probably a graphite pebble. Those are crap.
They were the beads that went inside of the "pebble",and yup you are right the pebbles themselves tended to break up and fall apart leading to them abandoning the idea.
2000 liters of diesel ? Seems like it would be alot more than that. I think it would be more like 20,000 liters of diesel.
Energy density of nuclear fuel as used in this reactor is about 100,000 to 200,000 x larger than diesel.
If it works as well as you say it does, then job well done.
The name "Ultra Safe" is tempting fate.
do you have some ideas for a better name?
@@ultrasafenuclear Right off the top of my head?
I think "Eligius" sounds cool, and he's the patron saint of power. I'll think of more.
How about "Star Light Energy"?
I read a number of articles years ago about mini nuclear reactors some years back and have been fascinated by the concept ever since and I wish you all the success in the world.
@@Boppinabe that's more fusion related though. How about "Old Star Energy"
@@Boppinabe had never thought of that one. thanks
Neat idea, but I notice you did not mention one of these likely expensive reactors has the output of *3 wind turbines* (15 MW max).
I'm very pro-nuclear, but holy hell that is a really piss-poor fuel density, you'd practically be coating large portions of the landscape, or large areas of underground space, in these reactors. It'd be possible yeah, but it just seems unfeasible compared to constructing a single, centralized plant that produces gigawatts of power, and possibly for less money vs energy output.
So they're like Beta-M generators but actually safe to be around? Dope!
Sounds too good to be true... but I never thought I would have a 5nm chip and now have a 3nm chip in my latest macbook.
great analogy. amazing things are possible. And this project is actually down to earth in the world of nuclear.
Where has one of these been built, tested, and operated? Anywhere? Or is it still just tenuous promises to investors at this stage?
It's another scam, just like NuScale. 👍
Nuclear can never be safe… they simply left “nuclear waste disposal” ambiguous. Where do you store nuclear waste! Some poor third world country ?
@@00Tenrai00 Actually you can store it right next to the power plant. Which is where all the waste is right now.
@@00Tenrai00 Nuclear waste gets sealed into heavy, thick casks. Compared to coal and natural gas, nuclear is much safer. A grand total of 50 people have ever died to anything related to nuclear energy.
@@nauticalfish2008 but, but, but all the scary news stories. All the hubub around the water cooler. Are you telling me it's been blown out of proportion to an urban legend like story?
I have been thinking of this for quite some time. Congratulations. Would appreciate a touch-base so I can learn more.
At least we're trying to look into mini nuclear reactors again.
The SL-1 reactor put an end to our interest in it for almost 70 years though.
Excellent work, i need this in my basement
Miniaturize one for your house. Turn it on for a few minutes each week.
Sounds good, if they can actually make it work.
We are trying very hard. Our team is extremely motivated. Our partners are incredible. We need as much support as possible from users and customers!
Howdy folks! Come on down to Farmer Drew's Happy Hot Springs! Why worry about fickle geothermal heat and the potential for super caldera eruption? I've got a safe nuclear reactor under my land, it keeps the water toasty.
Yeah this actually is a good idea!
The micro nuclear reactor is the future of nuclear power, these miniature systems could power an entire city block by block. The efficiency of these is several magnitudes better than the older systems, and they are so very much betterthan the older systems as well, three of these would power the whole town i live in, and be able to supply not just power but heat as well. This is also the exact type if system thatbydenis completely opposed to at every turn.
Thanks. Keep up the support. Need every bit we can get.
@ultrasafenuclear I have read quite a bit about these miniature systems, and for the power out put of one of these, you get a lot of power. From what I understand they can also utilize fuel rods that are partially spent. The rods just need to be recast.
Hoping that this or similar becomes an acceptable way of providing all our power needs.
This look great !!! Definitely i will invest and buy share but is a privately held company 😮💨
Haw time this reactor will generate energy whit out replace or add new FCM fuel pellets ???
Calling your company an "ultra safe" nuclear will focus peoples attention at the aspect of safety and people will assume you are trying to convince them it is safe... because it is not.
we're considering chaining the name. Any ideas?
I feel this should come with the rest of a Vault-Tec installation.
question... civilian market when?
civilian market 1st. if there's no built reactors before 2030 - we will have failed to help humanity
This is what we are going to use in our project in Washington when designing off grid zero impact living. The future looks amazing.
I hope it's everything it's stated to be. Sounds promising!
Flipping sweet technology.
Haven't stated how much power it generates. The fact is nuclear is only efficient with multiple large reactors and even then its quite expensive such that we haven't been building that many plants. Something like this may work for a space base or in antartica where budgets are infinite but for mass consumer use it's likely that a plant with 5 reactors costs the same as 20 of these small ones but produces 10x more power than those 20.
Being able to be cooled passively is beautiful, but to make lots of power cheaply we need big reactors that produce lots of heat.
There's a reason we build buses and planes to fit in multiple passengers.
Please adjust the bass in your audio.
Hows Biden working out for you?
@@ZoomerEtc1 expensive
Free energy for all ❌
Power armor ✅✅✅
If i have the money to get this i will schedule site inspection for installation immediately
or... CANDU... still perfectly safe as it always has been.
Just curious, has anyone every advertised their reactor design as NOT safe? I feel like every reactor that has had a catastrophic event had some marketing materials just like this that preceded it.
TBF, of all failed power reactors, AFAIK, only RBMK was a "fly-by-wire" one, relying almost entirely on SKALA's PRISMA program to remain stable, due to positive void coefficient.
This one seems to lack such a dangerous peculiarity.
How many reactors have had a catastrophic event?
I'm so tired of waiting for my charcoal grill to heat up. I need this so it's always ready. Yes and I would also like to buy the huge lead oven mitts to replace the fuel.
This is suitable here in my island province with energy demand of around 20MW
I don’t need it but I want it
Sounds like they’ve modified the Triga reactor design to To produce amplified power output over a test reactor will significantly over a test reactor if they incorporate boron directly into the uranium fuel, that would give it inherent built-in negative reactivity so, even if it went into a super critical phase, it would not go into a prompt criticality face, because if the moment it started burning up, that boron boron would start absorbing neutrons in collapse it, and I think that’s what they’ve created here that’s why the reactor could inherently be safe because the laws of physics itself literally Prevents prompt criticality
TRIGA uses metal Uranium hydride fuel. Not our things. We only use high temperature ceramics in the core. But the general safety idea is similar.
OK but how like I don’t want you to reveal any trade secrets, but put it this way if you put boron in the uranium fuel, you get an inherently negative coefficient negative void coefficient, which is what shuts down the Traeger reactor to prevent prompt criticality, so how does ceramic do that and here’s the thing it’s been proven scientifically but you could make Triga fuel rides they could produce commercial scale, electrical power if I was the President of the United States I would’ve passed along ages ago, but said by the year 2020 FCI was the president in the year, 1994 All new nuclear reactors be they can do or light water, reactor’s or heavy water reactors would utilize boron, mixed inherently in the fuel just like a Triga reactor so how does this ceramic do the same job at the element boron dose?
Nah, I will just wait until MR Fusion is available at a big box store.
I'd love for this to become a reality!
What is the cost per KWH for manufacturing and maintenance? what is the lifespan?
We are designing the power plant for 40-year project lifetime, but fully expect that the civil works and much of the power plant will last 60-80 years and beyond. A gift for the future.
the $/kWh are acceptable for many users looking for zero carbon power on-demand.
The Philippines is getting this tech. soon. Mabuhay
Nuclear is what we should all have focused rather than the react js
will it work in space? that instead of solar panels there'll be this reactor? and will it ever be possible to make one that will fit a backpack?
taking it out there and constructing it is one of the big limiting factors of doing such thing, there are a few other issues that i'm not gonna get into cus im lazy lol
Thermal diffusion... As part of the "coolant mechanism".
No moving parts, no emergencies cooling and pumps. Big advantage.
Simply Amazing stuff. What is that ticker symbol? :)
Amazing but my only concern is the scarcity of helium. There was a massive shortage in 2021. Would any other alternatives work at safe levels?
These are the classic ads before the fallout :)
in that case, you'll definitely want an MMR to power your community. Control your source of power!
Yea, but will it charge my phone and laptop at the same time?
You need to sell this to the Australian government
we have team in Australia. Support needs to come from the bottom. Customers need to want it!
But uranium needs to be strictly regulated...
not unlike other toxic materials. but it's not been an issue in the last 60 years of nuclear reactor operations.
How large is the package? Power output? Lifespan? Maintenance? How is it handled at end of life?
Is this the same as Small Modular Reactor(SMR)?
Check out website for details: www.usnc.com/mmr/
why not name yourself "Ultra Nuclear Safe Corporation" then you would be UNSC
nice.
Something like this is just been installed at an Air Force Base in Alaska.
This is the future.
They're making a lot of bold statements...
better bold than timid. it's an amazing technology. we have a lot to prove in the practical implementation.
@@ultrasafenuclearwhat happens when you experience a melt down. Lives lost, locale ruined! For hundreds and thousands of years!
@@00Tenrai00 Few decades at most, really. The area around chernobyl is almost back to normal background levels of radiation
Investors elite, invest now! The next product available will be the Fusion Core®, which we cannot talk about right now, but it is sure to revolutionize the way we work and live!
The only way this is ever going to make it to the market, is if some politicians figure out how to get rich on it.
hope not. because we have the worst lobbyists and the worst connections in government. We suck at politics
@@ultrasafenuclear Not a very good thing to admit, ultrasafe. From your responses you seem very unproffesional and that you don't care that much about the questions in the comments. For example whats the physical size of the unit? An another person in this comment section asked this along with many other questions. You linked them to your website which only answers some, and not the physical size one. It would be very good for you to publicise this since many people here are curious about putting this in their backyard. (Sorry if the size is confidential, if yes then it's fine if you don't publish it.) Because whenever you google the size, it only gives the electricity output. I had to figure it out myself using MS paint and the fact that the railing is 106 cm tall. Then the reactor itself would be 13.5 meters tall.
Hi. This seems very interesting, but how does it generate heat to boil water? i didnt see any water exept the flooding scenario in the animation. Thank you
The reactor vessel should not be fotted with pipes at bottom, it should be at top, so that, even when there is no power, water stays inside the reactor
There is no water in this system. in fact the pipes are at the bottom precisely so that any water that does get in will drain out.
Wow 😮
So essentially the reactor containment vessel, is it's own vessel for when it is decommissioned and sent to bed for disposal in a radioactive repository?
no. we remove the graphite fuel blocks and stick them in dry cask storage. The vessel is reused for the next batch of fuel. It's pretty thick steel vessel (4-5cm thick) so good to keep using. like reusable rockets
Your solutions can work for base load and demand generation like a natural gas plant, so that will be your main competition. According to news sources covering the new Cascade power plant in Alberta, a modern combined-cycle natural gas plant can produce 900 MW on about 128 acres of land, at a build cost of $1.2 Billion US. Your site states a land use of 5 acres to produce 3.5-15 MW of electricity. Optimistically, your solution can produce 42% of the power that a natural gas plant can with the same amount of land. That's not a dealbreaker per se, so it's all going to come down to cost.
I’ll take a dozen. Thank you
How naive are you!?
Yes!