Rob, you are coming up here, too. We are arranging ourselves. Welcome to the Wilson Center. I am jane harman, the the prest and ceo. I am a recovering politician. Happy to be a recovering politician but its not an easy job. Heading this place is an absolute joy because this place leverages Woodrow Wilson two presence, two passions which were scholarship and policy. Thats the intersection of the book were going to talk about today. And its just my pleasure to introduce this and introduce a friend of many of hours, rocket man. Ill explain why called him rocket man. And that is because theres a movie, has anyone seen the movie, the elton john movie . Dan and i sat next to each other recently at the elton john movie, which is great, recommend it. And dance at a written this book and it would want to come to the wilson sent and talk about the book. Rocket man is here and he will talk about this book. He asked as i think emily knows, you got that cheat sheet writer, you all memorized it with a nice picture of him, hes the ceo of centrist energy corp. Is a former deputy secretary of his work with them in that job, at the department of energy. He worked at the National Security council. His best get back in the past as far as im concerned is tenures with brent scowcroft, one of the elegant, beautiful, brilliant, best people whos ever serve in government in my lifetime. And hes here to describe his book and to be interviewed by Robert Litwak. This is by no who he is . Sure you do. Hes a Senior Vice President at the Wilson Center. Hes been here for a number of decades. He worked at the National Security council as well. He is a resident expert on nonproliferation and he basically overseas the programs here, and he was rocket mans roommate in some lifetime. Where was that . Harvard. Has anyone heard of harvard . Okay. So im here to learn just like the rest of you, and this is what we do here. We are the Woodrow Wilson International Center for scholars. We are the living memorial to our only phd president did you know . How many of you knew that . Most of you . Thats what we have such smart people here. And we celebrate the connection between scholarship and policy, which is why rocket man is here today, and to think i just introducing a hes going to be embarrassed by his name. I think its over to you, dan, to describe and do a few slides about this very important new addition to the literature on, as it says, combating nuclear care and climate change. Welcome, daniel poneman. [applause] thank you, jane. The rocket man movie did unite to migrate passions which are talking to smart people like jane harman and rock n roll set is a great pleasure. I have to acknowledge jane, your incredible record of Public Service and incomes as was pleasure to work with you and now in this critically important time to be in the place which is where great thoughts on policy unite the practical efforts we need to undertake to confront our greatest challenges. And i have to add a personal note. I guess ive known Robert Litwak for four years or so come Something Like. We were, not only were we roommates at harvard, we were office mates at london in the International Institute for strategic studies, and when he was working with me at the nationals could counsel, rob played a Critical Role in getting the Nuclear Nonproliferation treaty extended in 1995, without which we would not have work we are about to describe in terms of stopping the World Nuclear weapons. Because i do have a day job which is not my scholarly job, im compelled to put up im not compelled to read out loud. Im compelled to put all this think about forwardlooking statements here but the real question presented is why are we all here today and what are the greatest challenges facing humanity . It could be in another lifetime, but this is the challenge folks, lots of projections out there. But a lot of projections show a doubling of electricity consumption by midcentury. Mainly in the asian and african regions but a doubling of requirement for electricity. If you look at any of the studies, we have to determine exoplanet and the place to start is Electricity Sector d carbonized. If the prayer of getting to the two degrees centigrade, charger for levels can went to basically decarbonizing electrical sector by 2050. How do you increase consumption by 20 and reduce emissions by 100 . There will are not many ways to get there. Lets move ahead. Just to show this is not some theoretical issue. To take one small case, not so small actually look at the coral reefs of the planet. At two degrees centigrade, which is the climate target of paris, we will lose according to the panel on climate change, 99 , 99 of the worlds coral reefs by 2050. Look what happened over the course of a few months in american samoa. This happening all over the planet. There was a massive bleaching episode in the Great Barrier reef that has affected in the last instance a swap of the Great Barrier reef, equipment distance from a a state of maine to washington, d. C. The worlds coral cannot recover at the pace these bleaching episodes are happening so this is a real imminent and present danger. How did it get there . If you took all of the 187 pledges that countries made that formed the backbone of the paris climate agreement and assumed all of those pledges to build all that sold and all that wind power and all that reforestation and all those efficient measures and committed 100 of the pledges, which governments dont do and affect already offtrack, you dont get within even two degrees centigrade and we might miss it by four or 5 today on what assumptions you make him giving him study you look at it. The only way to close the gap that ive seen is by some the expansion of Nuclear Power. Dont ask me, this is what youll find in the analogies of the International Energy agency admin responsible observers. We have to give or even negative emissions because we were probably overshoot the twodegree target at the clawback we have to go to negative emissions. Lets carry on. Fortunately, theres been tremendous progress made in the area of renewables. I see my former colleague david cloud is your at the department of energy we are very proud and the 2009ten timeframe to put out 30 billion loan guarantees, which launched the Solar Photovoltaic industry in this country. We had zero at that time. The is department of energy supported the first five and commercial markets took over and so is great and its me tremendous market penetration. But theres a challenge with for which a windows is intermittency. Its really great when the sun is shining and when its a hot summer day. Its not screwed in the depth of winter when set is not shining or at nighttime. How do we deal with this challenge . Lets carry on. What youll see is that we have reduced costs dramatically for solar, but the challenge is with intermittency, if you keep getting more electricity at a time when you dont need more because youve already maxed out, you are just paying a lot at extra cost for energy you cannot use. How ice cream cones can you use in the desert . Lets go through this quickly. The more you got, you cant use unless you have some way of storing it, and storch could help you in solar space especially over the course of a couple of hours. Not so good over a of weeks or over a couple of months over a season. The challenge is and this is not just my view, this is the view of people thought deeply about Solar Photovoltaic is how to balance those intermittent sources of supply with dispatchable power which is exactly what nuclear can provide. Where are we on nuclear . Its the next picture. When it weve seen a slow and steady expansion of Nuclear Power around the world, about 50 reactors getting built around the world today. Will not get you expansion that is called for to basically doubled the fleet but at least its moving in a positive direction, slowly. Slowly the japanese reactors coming back online and with exciting designs being developed for new generation technologies that are smaller, faster, Better Business models that can be deployed on a serial basis and so theres a lot of good things happening globally. How about in the United States . We are still the global leader. We still have come were losing reactors. Were down to 98. We had 100 for operating. We did have a dramatic expansion of westinghouse going through bankruptcy but has now emerged from bankruptcy and they are completing the construction of two units in georgia, probably the last of the thirdgeneration Nuclear Reactors. Its been over budget and its been behind schedule that it is getting built. The interesting thing, and jane has been some stomach congress, we are still seeing a lot of bipartisan support not on many issues but on this issue in particular, two bills supporting Nuclear Energy that passed in congress and signed into law last session. On the other hand, everyone here knows the impact of fukushima remains profound. Basically europe took a very dim view of it and germany is getting out of nuclear and nuclear is deeply challenged spain and belgium so many of the countries if the uk has been trying to get more reactors built but theirs is a challenge as well of course in the United States weve been losing reactors, even operating reactors for a number of market anomalies. We are down from 104, the 98 and there are many more at risk. At the same time, if this is something not a lot of people understand, the United States has lost its global leadership. We were basically the alpha and omega when it came to thinks nuclear. The United States invented this technology. It was invented in the context of one or two in the manhattan project, and was intended to the kennedy commission. The United States dominate the world in reactor construction and we dominate the world and Nuclear Fuels which will bring us to the Nuclear Weapons portion and the very sensitive aspect of fuel cycles if the enrichment of uranium which is a process that can either raise the concentration of the fissile isotope uranium 235 its natural state of 0. 7 in nature when the natural uranium is mine out of the ground up to four or 5 that would be good enough to support a Nuclear Reactor and drive its turbine generates, generate electricity. But the pricing process can take it up to 90 of which point you can make naval reactor fuel or Nuclear Weapons. This is a sense of aspect of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle people focus on from a nonproliferation perspective. This is what the situation was 1985. On the right you see the United States 27 million, the measure enrichment socalled separate work units and thats rush on the left with 3000 separate work units intrinsic capacity, and france in the middle. Whats happened since 1985 in terms of use compared to its competitors . Oh, dear. Thats not rush on the left with almost 27 the United States is down to zero. We have zero Indigenous Production of enriched uranium in the United States. The only u. S. Production is actually under foreign ownership, those with a hashmark capacity that you see in the center of the slide. Here you see it. On the left use enrichment and you probably read about the uranium mining cases that are now in consideration before the administration. Use what is happened to u. S. Domestic mining of natural uranium as well. Its a story of decline. Whats going on on the reactor front . You have to realize when you export a Nuclear Reactor you talk about 100 years strategic relationship between the planning, the construction, the and ultimately the decommissioning and decontamination of the site. Its a 102 relationship which is been aspects got the four course of the project. And most countries that are in the Nuclear Export game view it in this way. The United States again used to be a dominant play when it comes to exporting Nuclear Reactors. How was it going out . Lets take a look. Who is buying from home . Whom . The United States did finish four units in china. All of the other reactors to getting built around the world, the United States is not the prime contractor. And so the influence that goes along with that is something that we are losing. And if you look at the order books, the rush order book for Nuclear Power plants globally is 130 billion. The u. S. Order book is zero. This is where we come back to the proliferation question. Theres a a possible in the 1970s for the president having to face a world in which 15 or 20 or 25 nation may have these questions. Because as the greatest possible danger and hazard. I do want to be Nuclear Energy is a fact on the world, if with 440 reactors around the world from one think we can all agree on is that we have to have the strongest nonproliferation standards possible. And the United States has the strongest standards possible. So with those other slides are allowed to continue in terms of the trends they imply of the United States falling out of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle, of the trend falling out of the Nuclear Reactor export business, we are not what of the global influence we need to continue to implement those very strong nonproliferation standards. What do we do about this . Historically, the United States has played a leading role in addressing the greatest Nuclear Proliferation challenges before us. Lets take a look the story of the role the United States has played, whats within these countries. India and pakistan although we tried very hard for longtime to stop both of them from Going Nuclear at different times in history, they are gone. They tested publicly in 1998 and its still a very important emphasis to try to restrain but that one was one that basic got away from us. On the other hand, you will remember from the bush 41 administration the early Clinton Administration a very diligent diplomatic effort resulted in concern that many people had of four Nuclear Weapon states emerging from the dissolution of the soviet union, wind up with only one, russia, having Nuclear Weapons and other three, ukraine, kazakhstan and belarus giving up those Nuclear Weapons. U. S. Diplomacy was instrumental in that. Who else . South korea and taiwan because three to use secret relationships we were able to dissuade not to go nuclear. Who else . Argentina, brazil and south africa. They had major internal political transformations but the responsibility of the United States to pursue its nonproliferation policy smith and i can tell you, for example, i was in the office of tony lake at the time the National Security adviser to president clinton when the foreign minister of argentina, may he rest in peace, said im resigning from the nonalignment movement. I want to join the npt. The United States played a Critical Role in many of these countries as well. Who else . Libya and iraq. We had Critical Roles in the integration of both those countries. I see charlie is here who played a Critical Role in iraq and thank you for your service, charlie, in that. Im sure you would agree u. S. Leadership including your personal leadership is critical to that. Of course we got the remaining issue before us iran and north korea. Lets carry on. It comes back a lot to the fuel supply. Because the reactors themselves are less of a proliferation threat than the fuel going into the reactor and enough plutonium, out of the reactor, and going back to the dates of white eyes now it is been fundamental tenet of use nonproliferation policy that we should be reliable suppliers of nuclear fuel because we will put on supply of those fuels very strong nonproliferation safeguards and protections. The question is, can we get that leadership that we frankly lost . There are some exciting developments. There is a set of whole new designs socalled fourthgeneration reactors which have intrinsically safe fuel forms in which the case example of this reactor which was briefly before you, actually can use as fuel used fuel from the existing elite of reactors which creates an infinite source of supply of fuel and also has the benefit of burning down the act of nights in the use of fuel that crate of longterm radiation hazard. This is sort of a doubly virtuous approach. Theres also a lot of interesting were going on in terms of space propulsion to Nuclear Power and ultimately the dream of many people is fusion, which would be potentially, they always say 30 years from now, whenever that happens to be, what a way to get massive amounts of carbon free electricity from the power. Lets carry on. Im going to end on one specific topic because its a place where i think the United States can really get its groove back. Socalled high asset low enriched dream. I spoke to about three to 5 in the uranium 235 isotopic thats what you need for commercial Nuclear Power plant. On the far righthand side, highly enriched uranium of over 90 purity if thats what you need for naval reactor fuel or a bomb that theres a new interest in socalled high assay low enriched uranium between five and 19 which is the fuel of choice for many of these the best past generation reactors. Once up with a look at it as like this think of light gun when income we now call on other. This would be your vintage port in between. How to deal with this challenge. We have a classic chicken and egg situation. Im in a nuclear fuel company. Its very hard to build a plant if you dont know what the demand is. And its hard to finance a a pt if you dont have a guaranteed cash flow. On the other hand, the reactor vendors who are interested in developing these new designs site its hard sales to set got a great new reactor i wish and had a fuel it. How do we break this conundrum . Well, its not a case of First Impression as a lawyer might say. We can this before and it goes back to the history of the nuclear enabler. Without the great, investment support from present eisenhower as implement to the legendary admiral rugova would not have the development of whitewater reactors it we make the transition activities have where the basic design of the naval reactor that was developed with submarine program and was converted to use for Domestic Energy production. We do that again, United States government in the form of dod is interested possibly developing microreactors that would use this hearing. That the main pulse signal could jumpstart this industry and that would become available for the advanced generation reactors. I could say more but i want to leave time for questions. The book is up there and they set picture is worth 1000 words. Well see about that wedding event its an issue that has consumed my energy and attention for psilocybin work in this business since 1975. How can we unleash the benefits of atomic fission without inadvertently unleashing that tears of a Nuclear Holocaust the book has more ideas and on that i will say thank you and look forward to my conversation rob and the rest of you. Thank you. [applause] thank you, dan. Id like to welcome all of you to todays meeting as well as of those viewing via cspans booktv. Todays event is in the Wilson Center sweet spot. We have an active nonproliferation program. We also have a global risk and rieslings program. Sherri goodman is here was involved with that activity, or macauley of the department of defense. So the nexus that you engage through your book double jeopardy is central on the agenda, public postage and in this country but also simple focus accordingly of the Wilson Center. The founder of the Wilson Center was the late Daniel Patrick moynihan who simply the will sony and ideal bridging between academy and Public Policy. Im paraphrasing but i think about the world is how you act in the world. We know in whatever realm were in whether its a private sector, Public Policy, the faulty conceptualization of the problem can have trillion dollar or horrific downstream consequences. We all come at issues from where we have come, and in some respects and i discussed with college you can view our current dilemma as a deterrent failure. Back in the cold war windows consensus about the soviet threat we wrote basically a blank check to keep a small probability event of high consequence of low through nuclear deterrence. Now we are addressing a high probability, high consequence event and as a society we cant get her act together to address it in a compelling way. We all walk around, we have smart phones, the technology that is were generated by the private sector, the way we live has been driven more by whats going on with Dynamic Companies like googles, apple, et cetera, is there hope in terms of what the private sector is doing or how does this relate partnership with government, how can we set it right to permit the steps that you advocate in your book . Okay. Great question, rob, so id make two points. Number 1, im a believer in the power of markets to be more efficient way to allocate resources and therefore that there is a strong role for the private sector in terms of supporting the future of Nuclear Power if markets operate well, the problem for nuclear in free markets has been number 1, those markets dont recognize some of the unique and values. Value the fact that no comes out of it even though that brings material benefits in terms of reduced lung cancer and nor do they recognize value of its virtue where you have hurricanes or whatever and coal plants and gas plants would shut down, people would die without Nuclear Power, if you could use markets but fix them, that hasnt been said, no energy form that hasnt benefited from government support, no fossils, not renewables and in this instance to pivot from thirdGeneration Technology to fourth generation i believe government has a Critical Role in investing in the front end as governments have traditionally done so things can come to market and the one other thing i would add on the government side, as you mentioned we had massive investment in nuclear deterrence, we still have responsibilities to the deter adversaries and support allies, treaty allies that benefit from the u. S. Nuclear deterrent as well and if we dont have a viable commercial industry to support the overall deterrent that we need to sustain our Nuclear Capacity in terms of our weapons and our naval reactors, then the whole system could collapse and not attract people into nuclear navy any longer so theres a genuine public requirement for Nuclear Energy, so that would justify in and of itself a significant investment in Nuclear Energy and leverage the National Security requirement to support the commercial side through advanced technologies and through some governmental efforts to repair the broken markets, i think thats exactly the privatepublic partnership that we need. Back in world war ii, you know, einstein famously wrote to president roosevelt about the need to develop a Nuclear Capability and when youre involved in world war ii, fighting adolf hitler, 44 of your gdp due to the war, send smartest people in the war with significant resources, in new mexico to create the bomb, we dont have the einstein moment on climate change. As a society we are gnat galvanized. Theres sort of the skeptic piece, if you will, political headwind has been the safety issue. Basically prompted the government, so you have these aspects and then you make compelling case as of others about the the role of nuclear in thank you, you just [laughter] thank you. The nuclear is the is an important, you know, essential scarable source of low carbon energy, you have headwinds, talk about the safety piece, if youre talking to lay audience and, indeed, youre reaching broad audience to book tv, how should we think of safety issue so its not a showstopper for what youre talking about . Another great question, rob, safety is critical to all forms of energy, theres a lot of misunderstanding and i think it goes back to sort of the visible of radiation and we some of us remember the movies like godzilla and the revenge of the 50foot woman and all of the things that injected [laughter] public consciousness in view of nuclear and then so theres position to anxiety, got tied up a lot with concern in the 60s about Nuclear Weapons generally, all got tangled up, and when the industry seems to get out of the rock, zero deaths although obvious unfortunate accident, turnover was a horrible accident and hiroshima, basically of tsunami and consequences and first radiation fatality recently and at the same time fossil fuels kill people in substantial numbers and thats not to excuse anything in terms of being less than ideally safe, but we have to recognize that life is full of tradeoffs and if by the way, we are just cooking the oceans, thats going to hurt a lot of people, its going to collapse entire ecosystems that are the core reefs, the fish provide protein that feed the world. We need, i think, collectively to do a better job of explaining the risks and the tradeoffs and i think in particular this new generation of reactors which have some very attractive attributes in terms of safety can help us get there. I will take one sample, particle , fuel that has 3 levels of ceramic coating around the Nuclear Field thats inside of it and so this little bead cannot melt down, its too small of an item and then you can have a whole reactor by particles thats not going to be prone to the meltdown and loss of accidents that happened before, these are the kind of new Generation Technology thats being developed, a, you need the technologies to be developed that are safe and, b, we do have to do much better job of explaining what they are and why they are safe, and c, people have to put in context of relative risk, its not a coincidence, the union of concern scientists and the number of environmental organizations that are now as they did once before, before hiroshima coming to the view that nuclear is an indispensable required to basically save the planet. I have one last question over the audience, great group here, think of your questions or comments and over to you in a minute. My last question really picks up on the issue of nuclear fuel and its relation to to proliferation and what they call long pole in the tent and i remember talking to a smart friend as yourself who had the phrase that this is not technology, you know, technology of slides rules, so that the long pole in a tent is former National Security adviser is the fuel and sort of maintained proper control over that as critical to mitigating kind to have proliferation threat, can you talk just flush out a bit more your thinking of how the ramping up of nuclear can be done confident with taking proliferation equities into account and minimizing the that nuclear fuel would be, you know, stolen or diverted to nefarious use either by state or nonstate actor . So two quick comments on this, theres two places in the fuel psych that will are dangerous, when you take the fuel out of the reactor after radiated, a lot of plutonium has been produced. Thats a problem that has some shortterm natural protection, very hard to get that plutonium separated out in the first instance but over time you have the fuel cooling down and prevent diversion to what its purposes, at the moment, there is no commercial market for plutonium that basically uranium is so cheap now economic case to be made to separate, plutonium over the long term is still quite viable, the more dangerous area is on the front, uranium enrichment side which is something if you have too many players making enriched uranium doesnt have the natural protection and if we do have a problem, something that actually late colleague canter proposed in 2004, i still think its a good idea to address that problem, what you want to put together Services Field initiative, any country that wants to build Nuclear Reactors does not have to worry about security of supply of fuel, who is going to build a 5 billiondollar reactor if they cant be sure they will get nuclear fuel at the front end and so thats been a justification that many countries have used to build their own enrichment technology, as an economic matter, its not a good idea to build a basically 5 billiondollar plant to enrich uranium unless you have 25 reactors and basically very few countries will get there. If you can put with existing capacity which is right now in overabundance in the service of supplying any new player who wants to develop Nuclear Power so they dont need to build enrichment facilities and, in fact, have gotten no reasonable justification to do so, thats the way i think you can constrain that threat, last thing i will say on that is that wont stop dedicated proliferater, so if iran says i know you can give it to me in an assured basis but im still building on my own that will not stop from doing the wrong thing but isolate motives and allow the world to say, yeah, that argument doesnt make sense, we will push back very hard against that. Large, uranium programmers that dont even exist. Comments and questions, please, microphone, just identify yourself, station identification and we have about 15 minutes or so for comments. Yes. Hi, paul sanders with Energy Innovation reform project. Im 110 with the case that youre making, but im wondering to what extent you see in the Nuclear Industry competition between the kind of past model for generating Nuclear Power and some of the exciting new things that you alluded to, you know, the smaller reactors, new design. I dont see a big competition there. I think we need to do both, we need to protect the existing fleet and prevent the premature closure of very well operating plans that are spieling out without single gram of carbon, thats a big effort of the industry. I believe and others have said including recent quote from tom fanning who is responsible for the global project, i dont think we will see more of the plants getting built. There is still interest in the Nuclear Industry in the new generation, but paul, i think there is in fact, the place where you are going to need significant Government Role because i dont see public publiclyowned utilities being willing to make those kinds of very longterm, its not so much a competition i see between them as the insufficiency of an economic case now for longterm plans and just to take it very simple statistic, nowadays if youre looking at gen3 plant, youre talking about 10, 15 years to build it and upwards of 20 billion for utilities whose market cap should be 25 billion or Something Like that, thats not going to work, at the same time they can build a combined cycle gas plant in year and a half for like 700 per installed kilowatt, so somehow if the private sector is to be interested in making investments more work to be done to slash the cost and some of that work has to come in the back of Public Investment to help get the materials tested to help get the costs reduced. Microphone here, please. Thank you, rob. Cherry goodman at the Wilson Center, thank you, dan, for youe of Public Service, thank you for taking the challenges, you and i the three of us come through the cold war and into the climate era and i do think we could be adding Inflection Point where the crisis has reached point where the opportunity is to create a broader coalition to support new Nuclear Power is possible and im surely aware of efforts to take that among your own. A couple of questions, one is to on existing fleet of Nuclear Power plants, they need to be climateproofed to withstand operating conditions of higher temperatures and warmer waters and extreme weather events. I know theyve already begun to undertake some measures, but could you share with us the extent to which you how well you think the industry is doing that, the french have gone a long way in that regard and i think part of the environmental and other community that could become greater supporters of new nuclear would also will also be in tune to climateproofing the fleet. On the new fuel requirement, the port wine, so to speak. Is that for small modular reactors and if not, can you explain the difference . And then finally on the comparison to the naval nuclearra Nuclear Reactors, what in your view would be similar that naval reactors was appropriated and whats different in the model that youre proposing . Okay, i think i will take them in i will take them in that order. On the first one i would say its working progress because the Nuclear Industry which as you know after 9 11 and after hiroshima taken a number of steps addressing different challenges, now its turning as exactly as you say cooling waters and have operating conditions and so forth and knows more about this than probably anyone on the planet, i think its fair to characterize its working progress and we will need to continue. The second thing, sherry, i want to thank you for your kind words and your record of distinguished Public Service, its been great working with you for many years, wont say how many, and so advanced reactors come in different flavors, so what is commonly called small modular reactor, girs first generation of those designs is easier transition, the one in press a lot lately is based on light water technology, that does not require the advanced fuel that we are talking about here. The ones that do are more commonly characterized as socalled fourth generation which many of them use fast spectrum neutrons and so they benefit a lot economically from having concentrated fuel source and its really that class of reactors and polls have been done among developers of reactors, almost all of this want this highly of 90. 75 and the what was the third question again . [inaudible] oh, yeah. [inaudible] so i think i think its actually less demanding this time around than the first time around. The first time around with eisenhower you basically had basically creating from scratch a whole new industry to support the development of reactors for submarines in first instance and now carriers as you know, so now its a question of us training and perpetuating that mission. The way in which that partnership, i will give you an example to work on which i think is less demanding to the taxpayer is if you took, for example,3 dod bases where its critical and 3 doe, department of energy sites, its also Mission Critical and you procure 6 to 8 small reactors, be they classic whitewater design or advance generation, then you have an ability to test the Business Model of the new generation of reactors which are converting economy of scale by getting bigger reactors and built interior production and benefiting from the price decline when you build a lot of the same thing, right, the benefit of that, sherry, number 1, you can have the reactors feed not only the pentagon bases and the reservations but they can feed the surrounding grid, what that means they can be backed by power purchasing agreement so rate payers are providing cash flow and what that means you can get banks to finance it. [inaudible] thats yeah, but it wouldnt have but, yes, essentially that kind of model and i think that could work and you could even add the last thing, theres still a lot of unexpended loan guaranty Authority Available for new Nuclear Power that could further reduce your borrowing costs. Theres ways to really leverage the public and private interest in that kind of setting. I have a question, we talked about the the proliferation and materials kind of being diverted in proliferation purposes, the flip side is terrorism piece, can you talk about with the ramping up and the new capabilities that may come online, small or, et cetera, how does the physical security piece of that play out . Well, its actually critical and, again, in terms of the new generation reactors, some of them will have very long lived cores and therefore the most vulnerable aspect in the operation of Nuclear Plant is obviously when youre fueling reduce fueling, thats why people for a long time worried about the cando design, design that you could refuel sort of on a continuous basis. Some of the designs are buried and not accessible to people, you know, basically waltzing in and the requirements are going to be critical. Classic, making sure armed guards and so you are going to need a combination of safer and proliferation resistance design and have tough police work. Deterrence by denial. Yeah, last question. Last two and then we will conclude. Yes. Hang on one second. Theres a microphone coming to you, i believe. Yeah. Right here. Identify yourself please. Im a citizen, my question, focus to nuclear, how about Renewable Energy. [inaudible] great question, Renewable Energy, how does that affect the overall argument and the equation, Renewable Energy is critical, we need as much of it as we can get. My point is you need, i believe n this, all of the above, that means all of the solar you can get, all of the wind you can get, all of the geo thermal, bio, all of the efficiency gains but if you did all of that, youd still fall way, way short of where we need to be on the climate and thats where the nuclear part comes in. Well, i mean, you could i think get to 30 or 40 renewables. If we could get nuclear to 11, up to 17 i think that could be great contribution, but even because natural gas and coal are going to continue, whatever else we say we will need and sequestration, theyll be part of the equation as well. I wanted to go back to your comment about assured Nuclear Facilities to limit the number of uranium enrichment countries but i was wondering how you propose with the fuel produced by increased uranium production and if those countries would assure Nuclear Facilities would carry the burden of temporary and permanent geological storage or repositories . Great question. This is an idea that we had that we have that has not been implemented. In its purest perfect form it absolutely would cover the back of the fuel cycle and ive worked for many years in different settings on ways to do that. The back end of the fuel cycle is an area in which there are clear Technical Solutions and you mentioned one yourself, you are going to need ultimate longterm geologic disposal. Clinic crossed a mile from sweden and in these countries you have towns competing for the opportunity to host a repository because once you put this use fuel it really is quite stable for a long period of time if you do it right and pick sites carefully, so ideally the Nuclear Field services is an issue we advocated would cover back end of the fuel cycle as well as front end and it would be, i think, highly attractive to countries that are developing Nuclear Power to be relieved of that burden as you know in korea, taiwan and japan, those have been big challenges and if we can help address the challenge it would not only help Nuclear Energy but itll help stop proliferation as well. Thank you, dan, the book double jeopardy available for purchase outside this room, for those at home, online, it addresses the two existential threats facing the planet and dan has presented analysis of our Current Situation and practical steps that would bridge gaps even though we are talking about physics, people can disagree on aspects of this, thats the nature of the Public Policy debate but its been wonderful having dan here today who has done so much in his career and now engaged in current activity on on the nuclear the commercial side to address these existential threat, thank you all for being here today, thats those watching at home, join me in thanking daniel for his presentation today. Thank you. [applause] [inaudible conversations] youre watching book tv on cspan2, book tv, television for serious readers. This weekend on Author Interview program afterwords, journalist argue that is the American Education system can be improved by making changes to the Elementary School curriculum, russell gold reports on alternative energy, one America News Network liz wheeler offers her thoughts on how to debate the left and Hillside College discusses the rise of big business in america, check your cable guide or visit booktv. Org for more schedule information. Charles postels equality examines americas social Movement Following the self bar and in the outlaw ocean, a world that exists at sea where the reports traditional policing does not exist. Also being publish evidence this week is former army ranger, matt bess memoir, thank you for my service, and the former dean of Yale Law School ways in on the current state of campus politics and argues that students are not being prepared to engage in civil discourse after graduation. And in serious secret library, bbc worlds affair correspondent Mike Thompson reports an makeshift library on the sought outskirtofdamascus. Watch for the authors on booktv on cspan2. Next, on booktvs after words, former virginia democratic Governor Terry mcauliffe recounts event that led up to the events in charlottesville. After words wore is a weekly Interview Program with relevant guest hosts interviewing top nonfiction awe authorized but their latest work. Were here talking to former governor of virginia, terry macqualify but his new book beyond charlottesville taking a stand against White Nationalism and we are marked, bracketed by were almost at the twoyear anniversary of the august 11thaugust 12th august 11thaugust 12th alt right marchs in charlottesville that he commemorates and a few days out from another set of really horrifying murder sprees in america. Its a sobering