The headline should probably be, “Meta invests in nuclear startup” and leave it there. My guess is this deal is quietly swept under the rug when the first reactor fails to go fully online by 2032.
And they have received NRC approval.
https://thebreakthrough.org/press/release-the-nrc-issues-con...
So not sure what additional regulatory hurdles you see. Can you enlighten us?
> TerraPower must still complete construction, submit an operating license application, and satisfy all applicable safety and regulatory requirements before loading fuel and beginning operations.
There used to be separate construction and operating permits, and sometimes you got the building permit, built the plant and then never got the operating license.
This has now been streamlined with a combined construction/operating license. If you built what you promised to build, you get to operate it.
The only recent nuclear buildouts that I personally have knowledge of are expansions to existing plants and thus have a lower barrier to get going.
I like the idea of a network of thorium reactors. I don't want to see any part of that network owned or controlled by people that we already know place their own selfish interests above everything else.
Therefore I guess I am suggesting that high net worth individuals should be prohibited from all investments in or operations involving weapons production.
Maybe I just don't trust that guy and think that he would gladly offload the responsibility of waste disposal or processing on anyone in a backroom deal that we don't learn about until he has been providing materials to refine and construct weapons to individuals who will gladly employ them in attacks.
I'm not paranoid, I just hate assholes.
Yes, I'm also for solar, and wind, and geothermal, and nat gas, and way out there fusion. It's hard to exaggerate how much cheap, abundant, reliable energy helps civilization.
The wording there implies some upfront money from Meta, and that this isn’t just a PPA like we normally see.
But with no numbers attached it’s hard to know if it’s a serious investment or just PR fluff.
Then they generate unique copy and images for each user (or hyper-targeted bucket of users), tailored to what would make them click. All continuously A/B tested.
For energy storage, is it storing the hot water, or using batteries to store generated electricity?
Given that they haven’t actually built one, asserting the performance seems inappropriate, _especially_ the uptime which IIRC is far, far higher than is typical for proven designs, let alone a new one.
And even if a reactor goes offline, a power plant usually operates 2 to 4 reactors, so the entire plant continues operating.
I was hoping the Thorium molten salt ones with atmospheric pressure vessels would pick up pace thanks to this boom in power demand or Helion would arrive on the scene right on time for this.
They plan to use molten salt for energy storage, but the reactor itself is liquid metal cooled.
Meta should be a good buy somewhere in $150-$200 area. I guess.
PBS Space Time explainer
Discussion on this and related Meta nuclear moves at the time:
Meta announces nuclear energy projects
[0] https://c.tenor.com/wuKJbik2LcEAAAAM/anchorman-ron-burgundy....
But it is a very real concern that there seems to be a total lack of technology investment and innovation across Europe.
I wouldn’t be concerned, because this is obviously false.
Because why somebody else should bear the risk of a nuclear disaster.
This is nonsense. State/society is the last backstop, the last resort insurer in nuclear risk. Why shall we insure nuclear risks so Mark gets richer with more clicks ? again socializing the costs and privatizing de profits.
Not in my backyard.
(Disclaimer: most of my life I lived closer than 50 miles to various major nuclear plants.)
