you need a long time to be i fully sure that the worst case scenario is no longer a nuclear reaction that scales up - in a massive meltdown. thank you. and henry, i have to briefly dive out to you because i know you used to formerly well, you still identify as a physicist, albeit recently you ve seen the light and come over to engineering. what do you think about nuclear? why did you go for solar physics rather than nuclear physics? well, on a personal note, i considered nuclear fusion, i considered working in fusion rather than solar at the outset, but itjust seemed too much of a long term challenge, still too far off really mainstream use, and it remains today. nuclear fission works, works well. the big challenge is actually one of economics. it doesn t compete on cost. they have to be massive
and henry, i have to briefly dive out to you because i know you used to formerly well, you still identify as a physicist, albeit recently you ve seen the light and come over to engineering. what do you think about nuclear? why did you go for solar physics rather than nuclear physics? well, on a personal note, i considered nuclear fusion, i considered working in fusion rather than solar at the outset, but itjust seemed too much of a long term challenge, still too far off really mainstream use, and it remains today. nuclear fission works, works well. the big challenge is actually one of economics. it doesn t compete on cost. they have to be massive national projects firstly have to be done at scale, you can t do a small nuclear plant, it s gotta be a large one, what do you think about nuclear? why did you go for solar physics rather than nuclear physics? well, on a personal note, i considered nuclear fusion, i considered working in fusion rather than solar at the outset, but itjust s
works, works well. the big challenge is actually one of economics. it doesn t compete on cost. they have to be massive national projects firstly have to be done at scale, you can t do a small nuclear plant, it s gotta be a large one, they re big long term projects and they don t compete on cost. the cost of electricity from nuclear is the only technology that keeps going up, so the plants are getting safer and safer, but with that, the cost is actually increasing, so it will cost a lot. then you can ask the question, well, even though it costs a lot, do you still need it? because we can do it. another challenge with nuclear is it produces constant power very well so doesn t actually do so well at offsetting peaks and troughs of solar and wind. so, my slightly biased opinion is we need to generate most of our power from solar and wind certainly hydro where it s in existence and then use production of hydrogen or fuels and power gas fired turbines if we need them. if they can fill
thank you. and henry, i have to briefly dive out to you because i know you used to formerly well, you still identify as a physicist, albeit recently you ve seen the light and come over to engineering. what do you think about nuclear? why did you go for solar physics rather than nuclear physics? well, on a personal note, i considered nuclear fusion, i considered working in fusion rather than solar at the outset, but itjust seemed too much of a long term challenge, still too far off really mainstream use, and it remains today. nuclear fission works, works well. the big challenge is actually one of economics. it doesn t compete on cost. they have to be massive national projects firstly have to be done at scale, you can t do a small nuclear plant, it s got to be a large one, they re big long term projects and they don t compete on cost.
to take a long time. you need a long time to be i fully sure that the worst case scenario is no longer a nuclear reaction that scales up - in a massive meltdown. thank you. and henry, i have to briefly dive out to you because i know you used to formerly well, you still identify as a physicist, albeit recently you ve seen the light and come over to engineering. what do you think about nuclear? why did you go for solar physics rather than nuclear physics? well, on a personal note, i considered nuclear fusion, i considered working in fusion rather than solar at the outset, but itjust seemed too much of a long term challenge, still too far off really mainstream use, and it remains today. nuclear fission works, works well. the big challenge is actually one of economics. it doesn t compete on cost.