Similar Posts

Recent Comments from our Readers

  1. Avatar
  2. Avatar
  3. Avatar
  4. Avatar
  5. Avatar

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe to Comments:

17 Comments

  1. I always check for it several time a week. It provides me with ideas and concepts I can explore further from other sources. My web site would be a lot less rich without it.

    Thanks for what you’ve already done. Hope you keep going but understand if you don’t. It’s a lot of work. I recorded local classical music for about 10 years as a community service after retiring in 1996 and it eventually became not worth the effort. I then drifted back into engineering.

    Regards,

    Jim Holm

    James P. Holm, P.E., Retired

  2. I’m among those who would be happy to hear more episodes of the Atomic Show. You’re one of the few people I know of who not only has a good inside knowledge of the nuclear industry, but is willing to share what you know through this medium, and I was happy each time I learned something new through one of your podcasts.

  3. Absolutely I miss the show! Sorry to see Shane go… sorry I don’t have any great thoughts as to what directions you could now consider… But I always really enjoyed the topics, and the format

    I believe energy will become increasingly forefront and costly in the coming years. I think as a society we are in for some surprises, and some changes. I take very seriously the geological and political peaking of oil production, and all its implications. Nuclear power seems destined to become the shining star that wins the blue ribbon, after all the other seemingly bright ideas finally don’t meet expectations

    Thanks

    Kim

  4. Thank you all for noticing so quickly. Sometimes one just needs to feel a little “love” from listeners. There will be more shows coming.

    (Aside: – As you can see, I got your second message.)

  5. Rod,

    You have always done a terrific job, and yes I would miss the show. Ditto about Shane. Glad to know more shows are under consideration after reading your reply.

  6. Thank you for the wonderful show. It has been constantly refreshing to hear a level-headed discussion on nuclear power.

    One area I think you could add a substantially to is education about nuclear physics and nuclear power. I was once again frustrated yesterday and today listening to the uninformed reactionaries on Capitol Hill talking about the NRC and their licensing a group to handle Americium. The tying this license to building a “Dirty Bomb” highlight as how little people understand about all things nuclear.

    That, and the recurring suggestion I have mailed you directly about. Please take the time to run your .mp3 files through a normalize and compress phase before posting them. It should take a few minutes and make the podcast sound a lot more professional.

  7. Reese:

    One of the strange hobbies I have is turning cliches inside out and really thinking about their implications. I have determined that “preaching to the choir” is a very necessary activity and I am not alone in thinking that way.

    Try going to an evangelical church – you will find that the preacher often focuses his message on the most faithful members of the congregation. He knows that his job will be made easier if he fires them up and makes them remember why they are believers.

    I also have no thought that I will change anyone mind who is adamantly opposed to the use of nuclear energy. The thing that makes me a huge optimist is the fact that there are few people who even think about nuclear energy to any great extent. They are open minds waiting for us to provide them with solid reasons why they should get excited!

    It is self-defeating when pro-nuclear people start off in a defensive mode. Our favored power source is BETTER than all of the rest – it is cleaner, cheaper, more reliable, more compact, needs less supporting infrastructure, and has a much safer track record.

  8. Love the show! I’ve been a fan for the last year or so and have become quite the proponent for modern implementations of nuclear power.

    While I’ve got your ear for a moment, could you give your thoughts on the S-PRISM reactor design put forward by Allen Dubberly of GE Nuclear? His Scientific American cover article got me started in all this and I’d like to hear your learned opinion.

  9. By all means continue. Nuclear Energy is on the verge of a new renaissance and your site is one of the leading popularizers for it. Your advocacy and the honest exposition of the many strengths and few but surmountable weaknesses of Nuclear Energy production will go a long way to dispelling the mostly superstitious resistance to it.

  10. Yes, I miss it as well. After I discovered your podcast, I went back and listened to every episode. You may not be able to keep up the same pace, but I’ll listen to whatever you put out.

  11. I do miss your Atomic Shows! However I understand it takes time and effort to produce them…

    I have a tip for a future show: What about one focused on IFR with Stewart Peterson from niof.org? He seems to be knowledgeable about the IFR (see comments to your show #38).

  12. I just recently discovered the podcast and I enjoy it.

    However, I have to second Robin Holts comments about the sound quality. I have given up on trying to listen to the podcast on my iPod because the sound alternates between too loud and too soft often in the same breath. A little effort to make the sound quality as good as the content would go a long way.

  13. I missed it for a few months due to problems with the USB connection on my computer & no sound card in the computer.

    Now I’m listening to old Atomic Shows & catching up by about 1 show per day. They’re always interesting.

  14. Bloody hell yes I miss the show. It seems like you guys are the only link to anyone on this tiny threatened planet that realy cares about non polluting energy generation thats practical. Come back and help save us from greenhouse gases. More techy the better just save us please.