Investing in nuclear technology is presented by philanthropist billionaire Bill Gates as a means to combatting global warming and CO2 emissions. What nonsense.
The Bill Gates project is generously funded by the US Department of Energy.
Let us be under no illusion, the so-called civilian use of nuclear technology does not contribute to “clean energy”. Moreover the development of “advanced” reactors (for civilian uses) is related (indirectly) to the Biden administration’s nuclear weapons program.
Bill Gates is investing in so-called advanced nuclear reactors. His company TerraPower LLC’s most recent project is in Wyoming:
TerraPower, founded by Gates about 15 years ago, and power company PacifiCorp, owned by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, said the exact site of the Natrium reactor demonstration plant is expected to be announced by the end of the year. Small advanced reactors, which run on different fuels than traditional reactors, are regarded by some as a critical carbon-free technology than can supplement intermittent power sources like wind and solar as states strive to cut emissions that cause climate change.
“This is our fastest and clearest course to becoming carbon negative,” Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon said. “Nuclear power is clearly a part of my all-of-the-above strategy for energy” in Wyoming, the country’s top coal-producing state.
The project features a 345 megawatt sodium-cooled fast reactor with molten salt-based energy storage that could boost the system’s power output to 500 MW during peak power demand. TerraPower said last year that the plants would cost about $1 billion.
Late last year the U.S. Department of Energy awarded TerraPower $80 million in initial funding to demonstrate Natrium technology, and the department has committed additional funding in coming years subject to congressional appropriations. (Business Today)
Gates calls these “advanced nuclear reactors”. They are tagged as “Carbon free technology”.
Scientific evidence confirms that the Bill Gates advanced reactors are more dangerous than conventional nuclear reactors. According to the Union of Concerned Scientists
… newly built reactors must be demonstrably safer and more secure than current generation reactors. Unfortunately, most “advanced” nuclear reactors are anything but.
The Union of Concerned Scientists undertook a comprehensive analysis of the most prominent and well-funded non-light-water reactor (NLWR) designs. …Based on the available evidence, we found that the NLWR designs we analyzed are not likely to be significantly safer than today’s nuclear plants. In fact, certain alternative reactor designs pose even more safety, proliferation, and environmental risks than the current fleet.