• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Home
  • About
  • Podcast
  • Archives
  • Links

Atomic Insights

Atomic energy technology, politics, and perceptions from a nuclear energy insider who served as a US nuclear submarine engineer officer

RMI's Reinventing Fire is Missing at Least Three Key Elements – Uranium, Thorium, and Plutonium

June 16, 2010 By Rod Adams

The above video is inspiring, seductive and well produced. It makes a number of important points, but it is missing at least three key elements that would change it from being a vision that is as unreachable as a mirage to something that is tangible, optimistic and achievable. Those elements are uranium, thorium and plutonium – the fuels for fission, the world’s new fire. (Disclaimer – The linked video is a bit dated and does not have the pizazz or production values of the RMI video. Are there any volunteers for an effort to improve the quality and reduce the boredom while retaining the message?)

Related Posts

  • Plutonium power for the people
  • The Atomic Show #185 - Is Thorium Superior to Uranium?

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Avatar

About Rod Adams

Rod Adams is an atomic energy expert with small nuclear plant operating and design experience, now serving as a Managing Partner at Nucleation Capital, an emerging climate-focused fund. Rod, a former submarine Engineer Officer and founder of Adams Atomic Engines, Inc., one of the earliest advanced nuclear ventures, has engaged in technical, strategic, political, historic and financial discussion and analysis of the nuclear industry, its technology and policies for several decades. He is the founder of Atomic Insights and host and producer of The Atomic Show Podcast.

Please click here to subscribe to the Atomic Show RSS feed.

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. AvatarnuclearK says

    June 16, 2010 at 7:34 PM

    Energy isn’t even really addressed…this video is pure fluff!

  2. AvatarRod Adams says

    June 17, 2010 at 3:07 AM

    Agreed – that is why I called it “inspiring” and “seductive”. Fluff sells pretty well – but there is no reason why we cannot use “fluff” techniques to sell a system that has real and important improvements over more “popular” energy sources.

  3. Avatarr margolis says

    June 17, 2010 at 5:43 AM

    I noticed Amory Lovins said “ultimately” wrt to replacing natural gas. How long is ultimately?
    If you look at the history of energy, the higher power density energy source wins. During each transition lots of people start working on solar and wind, but they lose out to the higher density fuel. Folks rarely learn history. 🙂

  4. AvatarDocForesight says

    June 25, 2010 at 5:31 PM

    The more I learn about Amory Lovins and his acolytes the more I want to puke! Yes, there is an application for wind and solar ( and I hope to capitalize on it by doing good for those who would not otherwise have access to ANY electricity for 10-20-30 years), but to pretend that they can replace sources that are inherently more energy dense with any other combination is delusional. Just look at the land-use footprint of their solar farm as an example. Argh!
    These pretenders would need to change the laws of physics in order to achieve their utopian dreams. I’ll bet none of them have spent a week, much less a month, away from their comfortable, climate-controlled lifestyle where they can adjust things at the flick of a switch.

Primary Sidebar

Search Atomic Insights

Follow Atomic Insights

The Atomic Show

Atomic Insights

Recent Posts

Five Myths about the Lone Star Blackout

Atomic Show #291 – Kalev Kallemets, Fermi Energia

Preliminary lessons available to be learned from Feb 2021 extended cold spell

South Texas Project Unit 1 tripped at 0537 on Feb 15, 2021

Atomic Show #290 – Myrto Tripathi, Voices of Nuclear

  • Home
  • About Atomic Insights
  • Atomic Show
  • Contact
  • Links

Search Atomic Insights

Archives

Copyright © 2021 · Atomic Insights

Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy