Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Welcome to the nationally syndicated Energy Mix radio show produced
by the Energy Network Media Group. The Energy Mix Radio
Show will give you an inside look at the energy
industry and how it affects you by talking with industry leaders, experts,
and government officials on the Energy Mix Radio Show.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Hi, I'm Robert ray Pierre, editor in chief of Shale Magazine.
Welcome to the Energy Mix Radio Show. Although the oil
and gas sector is the core of our coverage, we've
always covered the entire energy sector. Today, we're going to
dive into what I believe will become one of our
most important energy sources in coming decades, and that is
nuclear power. This week's guest is James Walker, CEO of
(00:38):
Nano Nuclear Energy. If you thought AI stocks had been
on a roll, you should check out the action of
some of the companies involved in nuclear power. Nano trades
on the Nasdaq, and shares are up nearly four hundred
and fifty percent of the past year, and market capitalization
is currently just over one billion dollars, so investors are
taking the company seriously. We're going to get into what
Nano Nuclear Energy does, but this show is going to
(00:59):
be a deep dive in a nuclear power, with an
emphasis on how the Trump administration may help push the
industry forward. Welcome to the show, James, Thank you, Robert.
Speaker 3 (01:09):
Very pleased to be on Yes So.
Speaker 2 (01:11):
In this first segment, I'd like to start out by
having you tell readers a bit about yourself, your background,
and about what Nano Nuclear Energy does before we dive
in Absolutely So.
Speaker 3 (01:21):
I'm James Walker. I'm the CEO of Known in Nuclear Energy.
My background was as a nuclear physicist and nuclear engineer.
I got my start on submarines, involved in the manufacturer
of reactor cause for naval vessels, and I also worked
in nuclear fuel reclamation, the construction of reactor core manufacturing
(01:43):
facilities and got to College of Rolls Royces for a
while where I worked in react to physics and thermal
hydraulics as well. I got when I moved to North America,
I was more involved in like building facilities for manufacturing,
and through that network I met the founder Ju of
Nano and we began the company a few years ago.
Speaker 4 (02:07):
Principally we were.
Speaker 3 (02:08):
We took a very business orientation approach to the nuclear
industry and looked where we could fit in, and we
realized that the in advance in the advanced reactor space.
There was a lot of progress being made in small
modular reactors, but these were typically very much larger systems,
and then we saw that if we focused on more
microreactor systems, which were which are really classified as anything
(02:34):
from about twenty megawad electric and below, we could target
all sorts of areas within the within the world, essentially
where diesel generators reigned supreme without much competition because you
still need optimal conditions for wind, solar, geotherm or hydro
and gas. Gas pipelines and transmission lines still need to
(02:55):
be able to can't be run out to these remote locations.
It's just not economic. So we began on that route.
But since we've started down the microactor ute, we've branched
out and we've been involved in looking at fuel transportation.
We've been involved in looking at the fuel supply chain
of the industry and developing technologies that we know would
(03:15):
assist everybody within the industry of developing advanced reactors systems
as well. So we've become a very diversified company and
a very short amount of time because the opportunity has
been there to expand into these different areas.
Speaker 2 (03:28):
So where are you located?
Speaker 3 (03:30):
So the corporate head office is in New York, but
we do have a technical headquarters as well in Oakridge, Tennessee,
which is kind of the epicenter of the sort of
revival of the nuclear industry at the moment.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
Okay, can you provide listeners a brief overview of the
current state of the nuclear power industry in the US
and the world.
Speaker 3 (03:51):
Yeah, absolutely so. I would say one thing that is
very key at the moment is that the infrastructure within
the US needs to be built back substantially. And I
would say the reason why MID atrophied in the first
place was because there was a reliance on the importation
of highly enriched uranium from Russia principally, and I think
(04:13):
that a lot of that supply was the result of
Russia decommissioning a lot of its nuclear weapons from the
Cold War, but that basically flooded the market with cheap
uranium that allowed the uranium price to sink to a
point where uranium minds weren't being developed and capabilities such
(04:33):
as enrichment, deconversion, fabrication weren't being domestically developed either. So
the Department of Energy is currently in a position where
it's investing a huge amount of money industry to help
with the build back a lot of this domestic capability.
And I would say that's a principal importance to all
the advanced reactor companies at the moment because they need
(04:56):
a lot of fuel to be manufactured for to enable
these systems. And that's principally also why we also got
involved in the fuel supply chain too, is that that
is the bottomneck essentially, not the tech. Not that not
the tech related to the reactor systems. I think everyone's
very reasonably confident all of that will be okay because
it's it's worked in the past. But the there's a
(05:19):
there's a big push at the moment in nuclear coming
from the tech industry that needs a lot of base
load power, consistent and consistent.
Speaker 4 (05:26):
And a lot of a lot of it.
Speaker 3 (05:28):
The reindustrialization of the US and the electrification of the
US also requires an enormous amount of power, so they're
also going to nuclear to be the solution.
Speaker 4 (05:36):
But it's still reliant.
Speaker 3 (05:38):
On this this fuel supply chain which needs to be
built back domestically first.
Speaker 2 (05:46):
So what are the key benefits and challenges of nuclear power.
Speaker 3 (05:51):
So the one key benefit I think, and why there's
been so much interest in nuclear very recently, is that
it's it's the highest base load power, so really sort
of a measure of consistency, and even for that reason,
it beats out even gas and coal. And the benefit
there is for some of these big tech centers, AI centers,
(06:14):
data centers, the downtime that these things can tolerate per
year at minutes. So when you have something like nuclear,
you can ensure that the power required to actually meet
the power demands on these facilities is there.
Speaker 4 (06:29):
But the other big.
Speaker 3 (06:30):
Advantage here is that these systems can be put anywhere,
and so you don't need to develop the grid further
because the issue is that even even if you factor
into account all of the energy required for the projected
demands for the America, it might be one hundred and
sixty percent of what current output is, but around that
(06:51):
you also need to rebuild a lot of the transmission
lines and the infrastructure capable of actually outputting that power.
With these advanced systems, you can put these anywhere. It
can be the middle of Alaska, it can be the
middle of the desert, and they can just start outputting power,
and you know that they will be able to output
power for I mean some of these larger system of
twenty thirty years and then they can just be refueled
(07:13):
at sight. Now you can't say the same for wind
or solar, or geothermal or hydro. These are very locationally
dependent sites either optimal conditions or need the resource to
be present there. So nuclear has that benefit too. And
the other thing is scaling too.
Speaker 4 (07:31):
So if you have.
Speaker 3 (07:32):
An initial need for say a few hundred megawats, you
can install that system. If it's if your projected usage
is going to be gigawatts, you can just install concurrent
systems alongside those operating ones.
Speaker 4 (07:45):
And ramp up.
Speaker 3 (07:46):
So there's a number of advantages that come out of nuclear,
which is why industry and the deary has sort of
been so bullish on building back a lot of this capability.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
You know, the price stability too, is a big attraction
for me. I know, I'm sitting here in Phoenix, Arizona,
and I was in a conversation with some people the
other day about their electric bills skyrocketing because gas prices
right now are skyrocketing, and I said, I'd noticed nothing.
I've got a nuclear plant sitting right outside of Phoenix,
and my electric bills are the same as they always
were and they're never all that high. And that is
(08:21):
a big bonus there.
Speaker 3 (08:24):
That's a big thing because with nuclear, obviously you've got
all your fuel upfront, and so you know what your
projected cost is going to be because it's not going
to change. You're not refueling, which even you know, even
gas and coal, I mean, they're going to fluctuate depending
on market. Whereas that upfront, that upfront sunk capital cost
(08:45):
is going to determine that the price of the of
the electricity for the next few decades.
Speaker 2 (08:52):
So how do you feel the perception of nuclear power
has changed over the since the industry began. I plotted
some of this before and I can mention my finding.
So I'd like to hear you.
Speaker 3 (09:02):
Yeah, it's a good question. It's a good question because
I would say you, I would say, you still need
to deal with the big difference between the reality of
nuclear and the public perception of nuclear, and these are
very divergent things. If I if I, if I was
to say nuclear is the safest form of energy that's
ever been developed by man, I would probably be met.
Speaker 4 (09:22):
With a bit of incredulity.
Speaker 3 (09:24):
But if you if you just measured in terms of
say death per gig or what hour, then nuclear would
beat out even you know, wind or solar on that
front in terms of deaths. So it's already been the
safest form of power we've developed, and these small modulor reactors,
in my correctors are safer still because they're they have
inherent safety mechanisms built into them that stop a lot
(09:46):
of the risk associated with the bigger systems like meltdown.
But even then you still need to contend with a
public perception that is very off from the reality, and
that's something that's that's come up repeatedly. I think because
we've tried to develop these systems, there does need to
be a continuous public engagement about this. And you can
(10:07):
wonder why it is the way it is. I mean,
nuclear nuclear did begin with weapons and then energy came second.
That could be one factor. It's also I think psychologically
intimidating because you can't see the risk associated with.
Speaker 4 (10:23):
Nuclear because it's a radiation.
Speaker 3 (10:25):
But it's put worth pointing out that the worst accident
scenario that ever happened in the US three Mile Island
nobody died in that event, and even the most recent
large accident that occurred with Fukushima, nobody died there either.
So in the worst case scenarios for nuclear ordinarily people
(10:45):
are not going to die. In those cases, you just
have a reactor that is essentially melted down and not
usable anymore and just needs.
Speaker 4 (10:52):
To be cleaned up.
Speaker 3 (10:53):
But I think if you can, if you can continue
to communicate the reality of nuclear then it might it
might perpetuate a bit more. But the sentiment has begun
to shift, and I think public support has been shown
to have been positively increasing, especially over the last few years.
Speaker 2 (11:10):
Yeah, nuclear, I mean, the radiation is invisible and people
are scared of it, and so I spend a lot
of time trying to explain to people, you know, the
banana you ate for breakfast is radioactive, and it's just
a matter of levels of radiation, and you know, the
risk is not as much as people think it is.
(11:30):
I've plotted nuclear power the trends over the last you know,
since the industry began, and it was on a really
nice uptrend in the eighties until you know, until Chernobyl happened,
and then it did and it was recovering by the
time Fukushima happened, and then again it went flat. So
I think the thing is, and I tell people, you know,
we can build fail safe plants. You'll never build a
(11:53):
fail proof plant. But if you can build fail safe
plants that fail in a safe condition, that's really what
you need. That's really and you've got to show people
that you can do that, because you know, I think
people are fearful that they will have to leave their
house on a almost notice and never come back, like
you know, in Chernobyl. And it doesn't have to be
(12:13):
that way.
Speaker 3 (12:14):
No, it doesn't have to be that way. And I
would there's a bit of a joke in the nuclear industry,
maybe not that funny, but that the stress of moving
house is worse than being located next and next to
a natural nuclear disaster, because they when you had to
look at the life expectancy of people that stayed in
Chernobyl versus the people that left, the people that stayed
(12:35):
in Chernobyl actually live longer than the people who left,
and so you could make the argument that the stress
of moving house is worse than living next to the
worst nuclear disaster that's ever been recorded in human history.
Speaker 2 (12:46):
Oh that's crazy, okay, So we need to take a
quick commercial break rut there, and then after the break,
I want to dig deeper into recent trans.
Speaker 4 (12:53):
In nuclear power.
Speaker 2 (12:54):
We'll be right back. I am Robert ray Pier on
the Energy Next Radio show. Welcome back to the Energy Mix.
I'm Robert ray Pure with this week's guest James Walker. James,
let's talk about challenges and opportunities in the nuclear sector.
What are some of the most significant technological advancements in
nuclear power in recent years.
Speaker 3 (13:14):
So what I would say here is that if you
think of a traditional nuclear power station, you're thinking of
a very large plant, and those have all been sort
of light water reactor plants, so you're using water as
a coolant system with conventional fuels. What's very different about
the new reactors that are being developed is that they're
using different fuel types and they're using different coolants that
(13:36):
massively improve the inherent safety of.
Speaker 4 (13:38):
The reactor system.
Speaker 3 (13:38):
And what I mean by that is, if you think
about water as a coolant. Everyone knows the boiling temperature
of water is one hundred degrees centigrade, which is actually
quite low considering the himm amount of heat that uranium generates,
so you need a highly pressurized system and then effectively,
if you get if the depressurized system, you can get
(13:59):
the water boiling over and then you're not removing as
much heat and you get that meltdown. With some of
these more advanced reactors, you have a cool and with
a much much higher boiling temperature, so several hundred degrees higher.
And for that reason, it's it's harder even to get
the boiler to get those temperature those coolings to boil over.
So the removal of the heat can be sustained a
(14:21):
lot more easily, and and it's called it's essentially called
heat sinc. But that means that the inherent safety of
the reactor is automatically made more robust and more comprehensive
by just that.
Speaker 4 (14:31):
Cool and alone.
Speaker 3 (14:32):
But the industry has gone further than that too. There's
there's fuel that has been developed like Triso fuel, which
essentially is pelletized uranium, that is that is contained within
its own shielding and containerized vessels. So say, for instance,
you would have fire a missile of the reactor and
you would to blow it up. Essentially, the reactor actually
becomes less critical, which means it's less it's less radioactive,
(14:56):
but all of the uranium fuel is self contained, so
you just need to basically sweep up the fuel that
has been distributed around the place, and the fuel is
not amalgamated all in one area where it can melt
down and it would be a much worse radiological hazard
to retrieve that fuel.
Speaker 4 (15:16):
So the fuel.
Speaker 3 (15:17):
Systems and the cools are amongst two principal technological differences
that have been installed just to improve that have inherent
safety that reacted. So as we said just before the
break react nuclear already the safest form of power. After
these sort of technological implementations, it gets even safer.
Speaker 4 (15:37):
Still.
Speaker 2 (15:38):
Yeah, the example I always use with people is an
all electrical fuse. Say, an electrical fuse is a fail
safe design. So if you get too much electricity going
across the fudcause it melts, electricity stops, you had shut
down in a safe state. You can never have fail proof,
you know, I've been many many plants. Things are always
going to happen. You just have to make sure that
(16:00):
when it fails, it fails in a safe way. And
that can be done so on.
Speaker 3 (16:05):
Undred percent, and that's what people have to remember is
that nuclear is held or higher standard than everything else
like it's and you're right, there's no such thing as
guaranteed save anything. But I think in terms of most
safety systems, you're looking at, say an accident every one
to ten thousand years. In nuclear you need to get
(16:27):
the safety to a level where you can expect accidents
every one hundred thousand years, just to give it an
idea of the sort of order of magnitude difference that
you are held to in terms of safety standard.
Speaker 2 (16:36):
Right, so, or small scale or small modular reactors SMR
is expected to change the landscape and nuclear energy in
coming decades.
Speaker 3 (16:46):
Yes, And the interesting part is that the States is
it's the oldest nuclear energy power in the world, and
it was incredibly innovative at one point. And even there
were a couple dozen microactors that were distributed around the
country that went universities, and a lot of those are
still still in operation now, and some of them are
even bigger than the microactors we're developing out the one
(17:08):
of MIT.
Speaker 4 (17:09):
It's still running.
Speaker 3 (17:10):
And people will walking, people walk past these things on
a daily basis and don't even know they're there. But
it's never been done commercially. But the interesting part here
is that if it's done commercially, this could open up
enormous amounts of opportunities. So mining deposits, a lot of
these things are not economic just because of where they are.
Like the cost of moving say diesel fuel to a
(17:32):
lot of these locations is prohibitively expensive and kills the
economics of the mining. It's certainly if you have these
systems and you can move these out there, you can
open up a lot of rare earth mineral sites and resources.
But it also means that you can make economic communities
which previously were not economic. So any remote community like
(17:53):
island community or just remote generally where you need to
bring in everything for that community, so fuel, food, clothes,
if you to provide them actually with their own power,
they then have industrial heat. They could have vertical farms
for making their own food, desalation for their own water,
and they can then suddenly have industrial heat to make
(18:15):
manufacturing operations possible. So you could increase the general wealth
of the planet quite considerably. And this could have internationally
a real benefit in places like Africa where you have
huge maybe even up to six hundred million people that
are not connected to regular power. So for a start,
you could open up that human capital enormously to industry,
(18:37):
but also even Southeast Asia, hundreds of millions of people
across hundreds of islands that subsist off regular importation of
diesel to sustain them, and then you can unlock all
of that too. Obviously, the States would benefit hugely, the
Canada would benefit hugely from these sort of these systems,
but on a global scale, it could be incredibly transformative.
Speaker 2 (18:57):
Yeah, that's something I've beaten that drama a lot, that
the rising carbon emissions around the world are primarily being
driven by Asia and it's Asian coal, and if we
could get them to start swapping over the nuclear and
building more nuclear plants, that to me, that's the lowest
tanging fruit and being able to ran in carbon emissions exactly.
Speaker 3 (19:17):
And they do have decarbonizing mandates, but a lot of
the time, a lot of these countries are in positions
where they don't have that option. I mean, and Germany
I think served as a bit of an example here,
like they did decommission a lot of their nuclear power
stations with the intention of actually substituting it out for
wind and solar, and what ended up happening is that
(19:39):
wind and solar could never make up that difference from
decommissioning those reactive system so ironically they ended up buying
Polish coal, which was obviously dirtier, and even more ironically,
power from France, which is nuclear generated, so their carbon
footprint went up in their power co went up as well.
(20:01):
So that's sort of the world as an example that
you can't do without nuclear if you're serious about decobonizing, right,
So we'll take a.
Speaker 2 (20:09):
Quick break out there, and then I want to get
into where nuclear power is headed from here. We'll be
right back with James Walker on the energy tanks.
Speaker 5 (20:20):
The Texas Oil and Gas Association Safety Group is your
pipeline to discounts, dividends and industry expertise. It's a value
added benefit from Texas Mutual Insurance Company, the state's leading
workers comprovider. At Texas Mutual, they know the oil and
gas industry, which means you'll have access to expert resources
and information that make your business better. As a Safety
(20:42):
Group member, you'll also save about twelve percent on your
workers comp premium, and that's just the beginning. While Texas
Mutual policy holders can earn an annual dividend for keeping
their workers safe. Safety Group members can get something even better,
a second dividend that's up to two dividends every year.
Plus you'll get served focused coverage from Texas Mutual, a
workers comp partner you know and trust. The Texas Oil
(21:06):
and Gas Association Safety Group is tailor made for your business.
Talk to your agents or learn more at Texas Mutual
dot com slash t x o g A. Dividends are
based on performance and not guaranteed.
Speaker 2 (21:22):
Welcome back to the Energy Mix. I'm Robert Rapier with
a Sweet's guest James Walker. James, before the break, you
mentioned the decommissioned power plants in Germany. I used to
live close to one of those. I worked in Germany
and I actually got to tour one of those decommissioned
plants and it was something else. It was like a
not fun theme park. I guess you're walking through. It's
just a giant complex, a ghost town, and h yeah.
(21:44):
I think Germany made a really big mistake. I think
Fukushima scared them badly and they said, you know, I mean,
I know. Angela Merkle was a nuclear physicist or a physicist,
and she knew all about nuclear power, but she said
she was not aware that something like that could happened.
So I think for Kashima even scared people badly who
should have known better.
Speaker 3 (22:05):
Yes, look at it did have a global impact in effect,
like even Japan I think began to try and move
away from nuclear power, and that that's a country that
doesn't have its own natural resources when gas, call or
anything like that, and so its obviously has to import everything.
I think they even they've got to a point now
where they were trying to move away from it, realize
that it is essential, and then now they're looking at
(22:27):
trying to they're re examining bringing it back in the
same way that Germany is pushed into a situation where
it has to re examine bringing that nuclear power back
to be able to self support itself. Because one of
the big things is that if you aren't able to
power yourself, if you're not a sovereign country, you are
reliant on foreign powers to support you.
Speaker 4 (22:45):
Right.
Speaker 2 (22:47):
So I've written a lot about the growing AI data
centers and the power demand that's growing. Is that going
to be the biggest driver going forward? Where do you
see things going from here and what is going to
be the demand drivers that causes us to race or
nuclear power.
Speaker 3 (23:01):
So it's definitely where a lot of attention is being
drawn towards nuclear at the moment, and it's generating that interest.
I would say it's not going to be the biggest
contributed to the desire for nuclear power, but it's certainly
going to be significant portion, and that's because the data
centers and AI centers are becoming increasing. The energy hungry
and the projected demands of these things mean that the
(23:23):
tech business knows that it's going to reach a plateau
in terms of what energy it can get, and that
means essentially a secession of sophistication of its models. And
the worry there is that say China, which is mass
producing nuclear power plants at the moment, I think it
has more nuclear power plants in the pipeline than anyone
else might even be in a position to catch up
(23:44):
the US tech industry in terms of sophistication because it
has that power to put into these systems. So it's
obviously a huge point of contention as driving that tech
industry interest in it.
Speaker 4 (23:55):
But it's also.
Speaker 3 (23:56):
Combined with the fact that there is going to be
an increase in power requirements in the country in general,
just from the reindustrialization of the country. I mean, the
US is bringing a lot of industry back domestically. A
lot of that was shipped overseas because it was more,
it was cheaper to do it. That was obviously a
(24:16):
short term size and in terms of giving countries control
over the US essentially, and that desire to bring that back.
So reindustrialization is going to be a big factor in
the drive for more power within the country. But also
the electrification of the country too is going to require
enormous amounts more power, and I think that California demonstrated
(24:37):
that to a certain degree as well, where it was
very bullish on electrifying things as much as it could,
but that lawso led to enormous power outages, electric vehicles
that could not get enough power in time. And so
you can see how infrastructure is a key component of
electrification processes too, and without that you can't sustain that
electrification drive. So it's it's coming at it from a
(25:01):
lot of different angles, but certainly tech is a big
driver at the moment.
Speaker 2 (25:05):
So what are your projections for nuclear power capaccy in
the US and globally over the next twenty five years.
Is anybody going to catch the US in the next
twenty five years, So I would.
Speaker 3 (25:13):
Say the US at the moment. My interpretation is that
in terms of these next generation systems, the US.
Speaker 4 (25:18):
Is in the lead.
Speaker 3 (25:20):
It's certainly been the most innovative, and it actually has
the political will to push a lot of these things forward.
I don't see Europe rivaling is. I think even China
is what it's trying to do it currently is stick
to very proven technologies like essentially modified AP one thousand systems,
which are very well known about. So there's I don't
(25:43):
see it making huge inroads into the SMR market it
the same way that the US will. The only thing
the US has to catch up on is it has
to get that domestic supply chain rebuilt. Because Russia and
China can enrich and deconvert and fabricate. The US currently
can't do that. But once it does that, it will
it will be in the lead in terms of that
novel technologies, and that'll give it when it does get
(26:06):
into that position, it'll be it'll be able to basically
command the global market because nobody's going to outcompete the US,
I think in terms of these new systems, and the
rest of the world is very hungry for them. It's
not just like we talked about Southeast Asia and Africa,
but all over the globe there is a desire for
these systems to replace diesel generators.
Speaker 2 (26:26):
Okay, we're going to take a quick break right there,
and then after the break, I want to get into
what the Trump administration is doing and how they may
push this industry forward. We'll be right back on the
Energy Mix with James Walker. I'm robert A Pierre.
Speaker 6 (26:41):
It's the Better in Boots gala and Sporting Clay fundraiser
presented by J. D. Fielch joined sky High for Kids
in Houston March twenty seventh and twenty eighth for two
unforgettable days of fund and fundraising. On March twenty seventh,
head to the Greater Houston Sporting Club for the Sporting
Clay Tournament. Then on March twenty eight join us at
(27:01):
the Rivere for the Vivie Reception, silent auction, and a
night to remember as we honor Danny and Iris Shaftel
of Shaftill Diamonds. All proceeds benefit sky High for Kids
mission to end childhood cancer. Get involved today at sky
High for Kids dot org.
Speaker 2 (27:22):
Welcome back to the Energy Mix. I'm Robert Rapier with
this week's guest, James Walker. James, how has the Trump
Administration's energy policy influenced the nuclear power industry so far?
Speaker 3 (27:33):
So? The good part here is that the incoming administration
has voiced enormous support for the small modular actor space
and look it started, I think principally last year there
was an enormous number of DARY grants and wards that
went out to build back the infrastructure. The administration has
already voiced its support for continuing with those efforts to
(27:54):
rebuild back. I think principally as well, there is a drive,
there is a desire from the DoD IS even to
build back the domestic capability to produce this fuel because
it still needs us to be able to produce this
for submarines and aircraft carriers so we can project international strength.
So the continuation of certainly very very bullish previous administrations
(28:21):
attitude and nuclear has been voiced. The Trump administration has
signed has made it a support for the one two
three Agreement, which will allow for more technology sharing around
the world, which allows for more nuclear cooperation and the
export of future technology and materials, including.
Speaker 4 (28:37):
Reactor systems as well.
Speaker 3 (28:40):
So, and I think that the principal thing that the
new administration is very concerned with is sort of any
energy dominance agenda are essentially where it doesn't just want
to be able to make sure that the US is
an independent energy country, it also wants to command and
a large market share of the international market when it
(29:03):
comes to these novel technologies. And so they voiced support
for carrying on with some reforms that are being targeted
towards the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to allow for expedited licensing processes,
and already actually the NRC has announced a fifty percent
cut in licensing fees for reactors, and that's actually was
(29:24):
announced under the new administration as well. And that is
enormously important because if you think about nuclear it's an
upfront capital cost essentially and then low op X cost
going forward. That that hike upfront capital costs a lot
of the time is related to a lengthy licensing process
(29:44):
which really substantially adds to the capital cost. And if
you think that when a nuclear power plant is built
seventy percent of the entire project costs are financing costs,
not construction or anything like that or materials. That's just
the financing cost related to financing that huge upfront capital cost.
By reducing that those licensing fees and reducing the time
(30:09):
that you're going through the licensing process, you reduce that
up front capital costs, which significantly reduces your your financing costs,
and that brings the entire power per killer WAT down considerably.
So that the new administration is very aware of the
challenges and it looks like they're putting pressure on the
NRC to continue with some of the reformers.
Speaker 4 (30:30):
They're going to enable this nuclear this nuclear power.
Speaker 2 (30:34):
So what are some changes you would like to see?
I mean, if you could sit down with President Trump,
what would you ask for?
Speaker 3 (30:39):
So the big thing I think that if I was
sit down with President Trump is that I would I
would certainly like to talk about the supply the supply
chain within the US, and that would probably mean as well,
reinvigorating the uranian mining industry. Now that's happening a little
bit now because the uranium price is picked up, which
has made it economic to mine again. But the after
(31:02):
enrichment is solved. One of the big bottlenecks that's going
to hit the industry with the conversion process, so taking
the mill product from the mine and turning it into
uranium hexafluoride, which then goes into the enrichment facility. Currently,
I think the capacity is way under what it needs
to be and that's not just that's not just America.
(31:23):
I would say that's an international problem because there's only
five licensed facilities in the whole world that they are
able to do that conversion process.
Speaker 4 (31:32):
So that's that's a big one.
Speaker 3 (31:34):
If the US can fund support for the build back
of conversion capabilities, then it would be really position itself,
I think at the center to supply the whole world
with uranium hexafluoride or a rich material essentially if they
could the power this sort of nuclear renaissance. So that
is being coined at currently. So there's If we solve
(31:56):
conversion enrichment, I think the technology side of things will
get a lot easier. One thing that I would I
would very much like to do is talk to about
licensing reforms to allow for with a microrector, if you
get a licensed reactor system, provided it's deployment side meets
certain criteria like seismic conditions, temperature conditions, flood risks, things
(32:20):
like that it could be deployed there, which would mean
you could eliminate specific site licensing requirements for each site
it's deployed to, and that that would that would facilitate
the role out of these things, you know, very expeditiously,
because then you have a system that can be deployed
anywhere at any one time. And also to allow for
minimal staffing requirements because these these systems will be able
(32:42):
to be remotely operated, they will not require nuclear engineers
a lot of these microrectors to be with them.
Speaker 4 (32:48):
When they are deployed.
Speaker 3 (32:49):
So suddenly having a mechanic that's able to go out
there that they can remove a tree that's fallen off
it or a bear that's got in there would obviously
be very useful. But certainly allowing for these sort of
regulatory changes to be adapted for these new types of technology,
I think would be incredibly important.
Speaker 2 (33:08):
So things tend not to happen very quickly in this industry.
What is a realistic expectation over the next four years?
What does it look like four years from now relative today?
Realistically under best scenario.
Speaker 3 (33:19):
It's a very good question because I don't want the
industry to be damaged by people making claims that can't
be backed up by reality. So when when some of
these deployment timelines of reactor systems have been put out there,
like twenty twenty nine, I know what's happening there. They're
making predictions based on their own technology and when it
(33:39):
will be possible and when it'll be available to go out,
But that doesn't factor in the considerations around that supply chain.
Speaker 4 (33:46):
So I would say in the.
Speaker 3 (33:47):
Next five years that I mean that takes you towards
the twenty thirty, it's definitely possible at that point that
enrichment capability has been built back sufficiently to allow for
some of these small montuor reactors to be deployed. But
I think within the next few years, what you're definitely
going to see is a lot of prototypes being constructed
our companies included. You're going to see these systems being
(34:10):
licensed and they're going to be essentially being made ready
to go to market, and then they'll just be waiting
on that missing fuel supply chain to be completed to
supply the fuel.
Speaker 4 (34:21):
Then they need to be mass deployed.
Speaker 3 (34:22):
But you'll see a lot of contracts being signed, especially
with big data centers. I mean we're even examining a
lot of those two international contracts with countries like the
Philippines that have the most expensive power in Southeast Asia.
They're desperate for these kinds of systems to bring those
costs down. I think positioning within the next five years
(34:42):
will be the key, and early twenty thirties will be
the mass roll out of these systems.
Speaker 4 (34:46):
Such.
Speaker 2 (34:48):
Okay, we'll take a quick breaker out there, and then
after the break, I want to talk about your company
and what you guys are doing and what you're involved in.
So I'm Oberate Pier be right back with the Swiss
guest Jink Walker on the energy mix.
Speaker 7 (35:03):
Remember this name oil Field Experts to locate any part,
anytime for your automotive or oil field equipment needs. Oilfield
Experts specialty is those hard to find oil field parts
for your fleet maintenance needs. And we've been providing those
parts and accessories to keep your tools turning since nineteen
sixty five. From the auto repair shop to the pump jack.
Call us for the right part right now, write down
(35:25):
this number oil Field Experts two ten four seven one
nineteen twenty three. Again that's two ten four seven one
one nine two three and visit us on the web
at the Oilfieldexperts dot com.
Speaker 8 (35:40):
Farmers and ranchers are the hardest working people on Earth
and deserve a side by side vehicle that works just
as hard. That's why Yamaha mixed the Viking and all
new Viking six, the world's first true three and six
person UTVs assembled in America. Ranked number one in drive
train durability, Viking outworks and outclasses the competition and features
(36:01):
comfort and off road capability. For more, visit Yamaha Viking
dot com. Most of pedable claim based on a twenty
thirteen Yamaha source side by side on our study.
Speaker 2 (36:12):
Welcome back to the Energy Mix. I'm Robert Rapier with
this week's guest, James Walker. This week we've been doing
a deep dive in a nuclear power. James, let's talk
about your company a little bit. Can you tell us
about Nano Nuclear Energy's current projects and how they align
with energy industry trends and future projections. What are you
guys working on?
Speaker 3 (36:30):
Absolutely so, we're working on a couple of microactors, and
that's how the company actually got started. We were targeting
mining sites, oil and gas sites, island communities, remote industry anyway,
we see diesel generators being deployed and there was no
competition for power there. And also because we're really competing
with the costs of remote diesel, which is ordinarily very expensive.
(36:55):
But as we as we develop these microactor systems, other
opportunities have arisen and we've we've spoken a lot on
the podcast about the supply chain when we when we
foresaw that bottleneck, we actually heavily invested into an enrichment
company called List Technologies, and we've now partnered with them
with an agreement that will help incubate them and grow
(37:17):
them up so they can start enriching fuel and Nano
is looking at providing deconversion of fabrication services alongside that,
so we can ensure that there's not just fuel ferraur reactors.
But we want to supply fuel to the whole industry
because this is going to be a big market and
we and essentially we want to we want everyone to
win here, the other sm R companies included, because if
(37:40):
they win, we will win essentially out of this and
we believe we have one of the solutions to combat
some of the bottlenecks that we perceive in the industry.
So the fuel supply chain is a big one. We're
also looking at the transportation element, how this how these
materials get moved around, how the reactors get moved around,
and so we're even examined acquisitions in the transportation industry.
(38:02):
We've been examining tech of how we how we house
commercial quantities of this new hal in fuel and how
we move it around around the country in quantities that
but then fuel entire reactor systems in one load. So
we've we've branched out into those two areas as well.
But as we've as we've developed as well, we've also
(38:22):
developed certain key technologies we know will be very useful
for a lot of these reactor systms because they could
simplify and make smaller a lot of these advanced reactor systems.
So we're developing that too. And and one one very
big development very recently is that we were very close
with another company called us n C. They were developing
(38:44):
some some larger systems like the Kronos reactor.
Speaker 4 (38:48):
We've we've actually.
Speaker 3 (38:49):
Bought out their assets, and that put us, I think,
in to be one of the leading contenders to produce
a commercial prototype.
Speaker 4 (38:59):
Or as an SMR.
Speaker 3 (39:01):
And these these reactor systems as well, that they're almost
a couple of years ahead of our own reactor systems,
so it sort of accelerated our own timeline for when
we're deploying and these systems that puts us in the
in the race to power data centers, in AI centers
and all those kind of things, because they the Chronos
reactor is significantly more powerful. So even though we started
(39:22):
my correctors, we have now branched and jumped ahead into
the race to produce a commercial SMR as well.
Speaker 2 (39:30):
I know I mentioned earlier the investment community is taking
your company seriously, having bid it up to a billion dollars,
so they are they are paying attention. You know, what
are some of your key goals and milestones you see
in the next few years? I mean, what kind of
things do you want to check off as you're going through.
Speaker 3 (39:48):
So the important thing I think for us on the
technology front is that this year we've already got agreements
in place with say, University of Illinois to build a
prototype Chronos reactor. There we want to get the geological
characterization of the site done this year, so the drilling
work done, and put in a permit to construct with
the NRC either later this year or early next year
(40:10):
as well. That'll be huge, I think that'll I think
we will be the first micro actor company to submit
for one of those licenses, so that'll that'll be a
big element to what we're doing. I think, as far
as a company goes, I want to put the company
into revenue as quickly as possible, just to make a
more robust system. And that'll be partly done through acquisitions,
(40:31):
but we're also being approached for a lot of work
currently as well, so we will establish our own consultancy business.
We will that will allow us to profit out engineering services,
and we'll build the company up substantially that way too,
so we are more internally robust, and while we also
seek to commercially develop certain technologies, we have to create
(40:54):
that additional revenue stream, so we have multiple revenue streams
coming into the company. The company was very strategically taken
into an IPO early and it's in its development and
that was strategic because we we wanted to grow with them,
grow with the development of the company and give people
a chance to actually invest in nuclear, because it was
(41:15):
quite difficult to if you were interested in this space
to invest there. There was there was one other publicly
traded company at the time we listed, which was New Scale,
and I think since we listed, OCO has since listed
as a SPAC. But we wanted to be a tight
share structure with small float that would allow people to
(41:36):
invest and then grow with us.
Speaker 4 (41:37):
As we develop here.
Speaker 3 (41:38):
And and that's principally also why we went to a
billion dollars is that there weren't many avenues to invest
and they still are not, even though this is a
massive space, and we were one of the best structured
companies to invest into to not guarantee but hedge your
bets for long term appreciation the share price. And so obviously,
(41:59):
well we'll continue to do that and be stewards of capital.
But growing the company out here is going to be
very rapid because of the this massive interest in nuclear
and and in the whole sector.
Speaker 2 (42:13):
Really, yeah, I know what you mean. I mean, I
write investment articles for Investing Daily. I cover energy and
I cover utilities, and people are always asking about nuclear
and I said, well, there aren't a lot of choices here,
and you don't have a lot of options, So it's
a lot of money chasing into a field and you
know that that happens. Can you talk about some of
(42:33):
the potential economic impacts of expanding nuclear power infrastructure? How
will that benefit the overall economy?
Speaker 3 (42:39):
So the interesting part here, I think is that nuclear
it should nuclear in the States, I think is the
is the most expensive nuclear power in the world, and like, obviously,
by the laws of physics, it should be exactly the
same wherever you go in the entire world, but like
it's it's been principally made more expensive by long regular
(43:00):
who timelines, expensive licensing processes, and then that's sort of
that sort of burden has has pushed into that sort
of category.
Speaker 2 (43:09):
A lot of that can be.
Speaker 3 (43:10):
Reformed, and there's actually the NRC, to its credit, is
making massive efforts now to reform a lot of these
systems that will have a massive impact on the price here,
and then you will have nuclear that theoretically should be
Nuclear should be the cheapest forward power mankind has because
of the energy density of uranium. It's tens of millions
(43:33):
of times more dense than coal or oil. So for
that reason, like you, you should be it should be
incredibly economic. The price will come down considerably as you
build back that supply chain, you will not be reliant
on the foreign important materials. And then as that as
it comes down, you will to be looking at things
(43:54):
like chemical plants sexually utilizing nuclear because it will it
will be more offfective to have your own power station
then take from grid. And the problem with the grid
is that the infrastructure expenditure required to build that up
to the necessary levels that are projected is going to
be enormous endeavor and I don't think a lot of
(44:15):
industry can wait on that. So you're going to see
nuclear going out for mining projects, chemical companies, tech industry,
all of those different areas, and that will be incredibly transformative.
Speaker 2 (44:27):
Well, James, I really appreciate this. We're running out of
time now, so I'm going to not be able to
get to a few of my questions, but this was
very enlightening. I'm very excited about the future of nuclear power,
and I'm glad we could have you on the show
to sort of, you know, kind of give us an
idea about where things are headed. So I want to
thank the sweet guest James Walker on being for being
(44:47):
on the Energy Mix and educating us all this week
on nuclear power.
Speaker 3 (44:51):
Thank you, James, Thank you, Robert.
Speaker 1 (44:53):
Good to be on The Energy Mix radio show is
where we explore topics that affect us all in the
oil and gas industry. Every week, our host will interview
the movers and shakers in this fast paced industry. You'll
hear from industry experts, elected officials, and many more on
the Energy Mix Radio Show.
Welcome to the nationally syndicated Energy Mix radio show produced
by the Energy Network Media Group. The Energy Mix Radio
Show will give you an inside look at the energy
industry and how it affects you by talking with industry leaders, experts,
and government officials on the Energy Mix Radio Show.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Hi, I'm Robert ray Pierre, editor in chief of Shale Magazine.
Welcome to the Energy Mix Radio Show. Although the oil
and gas sector is the core of our coverage, we've
always covered the entire energy sector. Today, we're going to
dive into what I believe will become one of our
most important energy sources in coming decades, and that is
nuclear power. This week's guest is James Walker, CEO of
(00:38):
Nano Nuclear Energy. If you thought AI stocks had been
on a roll, you should check out the action of
some of the companies involved in nuclear power. Nano trades
on the Nasdaq, and shares are up nearly four hundred
and fifty percent of the past year, and market capitalization
is currently just over one billion dollars, so investors are
taking the company seriously. We're going to get into what
Nano Nuclear Energy does, but this show is going to
(00:59):
be a deep dive in a nuclear power, with an
emphasis on how the Trump administration may help push the
industry forward. Welcome to the show, James, Thank you, Robert.
Speaker 3 (01:09):
Very pleased to be on Yes So.
Speaker 2 (01:11):
In this first segment, I'd like to start out by
having you tell readers a bit about yourself, your background,
and about what Nano Nuclear Energy does before we dive
in Absolutely So.
Speaker 3 (01:21):
I'm James Walker. I'm the CEO of Known in Nuclear Energy.
My background was as a nuclear physicist and nuclear engineer.
I got my start on submarines, involved in the manufacturer
of reactor cause for naval vessels, and I also worked
in nuclear fuel reclamation, the construction of reactor core manufacturing
(01:43):
facilities and got to College of Rolls Royces for a
while where I worked in react to physics and thermal
hydraulics as well. I got when I moved to North America,
I was more involved in like building facilities for manufacturing,
and through that network I met the founder Ju of
Nano and we began the company a few years ago.
Speaker 4 (02:07):
Principally we were.
Speaker 3 (02:08):
We took a very business orientation approach to the nuclear
industry and looked where we could fit in, and we
realized that the in advance in the advanced reactor space.
There was a lot of progress being made in small
modular reactors, but these were typically very much larger systems,
and then we saw that if we focused on more
microreactor systems, which were which are really classified as anything
(02:34):
from about twenty megawad electric and below, we could target
all sorts of areas within the within the world, essentially
where diesel generators reigned supreme without much competition because you
still need optimal conditions for wind, solar, geotherm or hydro
and gas. Gas pipelines and transmission lines still need to
(02:55):
be able to can't be run out to these remote locations.
It's just not economic. So we began on that route.
But since we've started down the microactor ute, we've branched
out and we've been involved in looking at fuel transportation.
We've been involved in looking at the fuel supply chain
of the industry and developing technologies that we know would
(03:15):
assist everybody within the industry of developing advanced reactors systems
as well. So we've become a very diversified company and
a very short amount of time because the opportunity has
been there to expand into these different areas.
Speaker 2 (03:28):
So where are you located?
Speaker 3 (03:30):
So the corporate head office is in New York, but
we do have a technical headquarters as well in Oakridge, Tennessee,
which is kind of the epicenter of the sort of
revival of the nuclear industry at the moment.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
Okay, can you provide listeners a brief overview of the
current state of the nuclear power industry in the US
and the world.
Speaker 3 (03:51):
Yeah, absolutely so. I would say one thing that is
very key at the moment is that the infrastructure within
the US needs to be built back substantially. And I
would say the reason why MID atrophied in the first
place was because there was a reliance on the importation
of highly enriched uranium from Russia principally, and I think
(04:13):
that a lot of that supply was the result of
Russia decommissioning a lot of its nuclear weapons from the
Cold War, but that basically flooded the market with cheap
uranium that allowed the uranium price to sink to a
point where uranium minds weren't being developed and capabilities such
(04:33):
as enrichment, deconversion, fabrication weren't being domestically developed either. So
the Department of Energy is currently in a position where
it's investing a huge amount of money industry to help
with the build back a lot of this domestic capability.
And I would say that's a principal importance to all
the advanced reactor companies at the moment because they need
(04:56):
a lot of fuel to be manufactured for to enable
these systems. And that's principally also why we also got
involved in the fuel supply chain too, is that that
is the bottomneck essentially, not the tech. Not that not
the tech related to the reactor systems. I think everyone's
very reasonably confident all of that will be okay because
it's it's worked in the past. But the there's a
(05:19):
there's a big push at the moment in nuclear coming
from the tech industry that needs a lot of base
load power, consistent and consistent.
Speaker 4 (05:26):
And a lot of a lot of it.
Speaker 3 (05:28):
The reindustrialization of the US and the electrification of the
US also requires an enormous amount of power, so they're
also going to nuclear to be the solution.
Speaker 4 (05:36):
But it's still reliant.
Speaker 3 (05:38):
On this this fuel supply chain which needs to be
built back domestically first.
Speaker 2 (05:46):
So what are the key benefits and challenges of nuclear power.
Speaker 3 (05:51):
So the one key benefit I think, and why there's
been so much interest in nuclear very recently, is that
it's it's the highest base load power, so really sort
of a measure of consistency, and even for that reason,
it beats out even gas and coal. And the benefit
there is for some of these big tech centers, AI centers,
(06:14):
data centers, the downtime that these things can tolerate per
year at minutes. So when you have something like nuclear,
you can ensure that the power required to actually meet
the power demands on these facilities is there.
Speaker 4 (06:29):
But the other big.
Speaker 3 (06:30):
Advantage here is that these systems can be put anywhere,
and so you don't need to develop the grid further
because the issue is that even even if you factor
into account all of the energy required for the projected
demands for the America, it might be one hundred and
sixty percent of what current output is, but around that
(06:51):
you also need to rebuild a lot of the transmission
lines and the infrastructure capable of actually outputting that power.
With these advanced systems, you can put these anywhere. It
can be the middle of Alaska, it can be the
middle of the desert, and they can just start outputting power,
and you know that they will be able to output
power for I mean some of these larger system of
twenty thirty years and then they can just be refueled
(07:13):
at sight. Now you can't say the same for wind
or solar, or geothermal or hydro. These are very locationally
dependent sites either optimal conditions or need the resource to
be present there. So nuclear has that benefit too. And
the other thing is scaling too.
Speaker 4 (07:31):
So if you have.
Speaker 3 (07:32):
An initial need for say a few hundred megawats, you
can install that system. If it's if your projected usage
is going to be gigawatts, you can just install concurrent
systems alongside those operating ones.
Speaker 4 (07:45):
And ramp up.
Speaker 3 (07:46):
So there's a number of advantages that come out of nuclear,
which is why industry and the deary has sort of
been so bullish on building back a lot of this capability.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
You know, the price stability too, is a big attraction
for me. I know, I'm sitting here in Phoenix, Arizona,
and I was in a conversation with some people the
other day about their electric bills skyrocketing because gas prices
right now are skyrocketing, and I said, I'd noticed nothing.
I've got a nuclear plant sitting right outside of Phoenix,
and my electric bills are the same as they always
were and they're never all that high. And that is
(08:21):
a big bonus there.
Speaker 3 (08:24):
That's a big thing because with nuclear, obviously you've got
all your fuel upfront, and so you know what your
projected cost is going to be because it's not going
to change. You're not refueling, which even you know, even
gas and coal, I mean, they're going to fluctuate depending
on market. Whereas that upfront, that upfront sunk capital cost
(08:45):
is going to determine that the price of the of
the electricity for the next few decades.
Speaker 2 (08:52):
So how do you feel the perception of nuclear power
has changed over the since the industry began. I plotted
some of this before and I can mention my finding.
So I'd like to hear you.
Speaker 3 (09:02):
Yeah, it's a good question. It's a good question because
I would say you, I would say, you still need
to deal with the big difference between the reality of
nuclear and the public perception of nuclear, and these are
very divergent things. If I if I, if I was
to say nuclear is the safest form of energy that's
ever been developed by man, I would probably be met.
Speaker 4 (09:22):
With a bit of incredulity.
Speaker 3 (09:24):
But if you if you just measured in terms of
say death per gig or what hour, then nuclear would
beat out even you know, wind or solar on that
front in terms of deaths. So it's already been the
safest form of power we've developed, and these small modulor reactors,
in my correctors are safer still because they're they have
inherent safety mechanisms built into them that stop a lot
(09:46):
of the risk associated with the bigger systems like meltdown.
But even then you still need to contend with a
public perception that is very off from the reality, and
that's something that's that's come up repeatedly. I think because
we've tried to develop these systems, there does need to
be a continuous public engagement about this. And you can
(10:07):
wonder why it is the way it is. I mean,
nuclear nuclear did begin with weapons and then energy came second.
That could be one factor. It's also I think psychologically
intimidating because you can't see the risk associated with.
Speaker 4 (10:23):
Nuclear because it's a radiation.
Speaker 3 (10:25):
But it's put worth pointing out that the worst accident
scenario that ever happened in the US three Mile Island
nobody died in that event, and even the most recent
large accident that occurred with Fukushima, nobody died there either.
So in the worst case scenarios for nuclear ordinarily people
(10:45):
are not going to die. In those cases, you just
have a reactor that is essentially melted down and not
usable anymore and just needs.
Speaker 4 (10:52):
To be cleaned up.
Speaker 3 (10:53):
But I think if you can, if you can continue
to communicate the reality of nuclear then it might it
might perpetuate a bit more. But the sentiment has begun
to shift, and I think public support has been shown
to have been positively increasing, especially over the last few years.
Speaker 2 (11:10):
Yeah, nuclear, I mean, the radiation is invisible and people
are scared of it, and so I spend a lot
of time trying to explain to people, you know, the
banana you ate for breakfast is radioactive, and it's just
a matter of levels of radiation, and you know, the
risk is not as much as people think it is.
(11:30):
I've plotted nuclear power the trends over the last you know,
since the industry began, and it was on a really
nice uptrend in the eighties until you know, until Chernobyl happened,
and then it did and it was recovering by the
time Fukushima happened, and then again it went flat. So
I think the thing is, and I tell people, you know,
we can build fail safe plants. You'll never build a
(11:53):
fail proof plant. But if you can build fail safe
plants that fail in a safe condition, that's really what
you need. That's really and you've got to show people
that you can do that, because you know, I think
people are fearful that they will have to leave their
house on a almost notice and never come back, like
you know, in Chernobyl. And it doesn't have to be
(12:13):
that way.
Speaker 3 (12:14):
No, it doesn't have to be that way. And I
would there's a bit of a joke in the nuclear industry,
maybe not that funny, but that the stress of moving
house is worse than being located next and next to
a natural nuclear disaster, because they when you had to
look at the life expectancy of people that stayed in
Chernobyl versus the people that left, the people that stayed
(12:35):
in Chernobyl actually live longer than the people who left,
and so you could make the argument that the stress
of moving house is worse than living next to the
worst nuclear disaster that's ever been recorded in human history.
Speaker 2 (12:46):
Oh that's crazy, okay, So we need to take a
quick commercial break rut there, and then after the break,
I want to dig deeper into recent trans.
Speaker 4 (12:53):
In nuclear power.
Speaker 2 (12:54):
We'll be right back. I am Robert ray Pier on
the Energy Next Radio show. Welcome back to the Energy Mix.
I'm Robert ray Pure with this week's guest James Walker. James,
let's talk about challenges and opportunities in the nuclear sector.
What are some of the most significant technological advancements in
nuclear power in recent years.
Speaker 3 (13:14):
So what I would say here is that if you
think of a traditional nuclear power station, you're thinking of
a very large plant, and those have all been sort
of light water reactor plants, so you're using water as
a coolant system with conventional fuels. What's very different about
the new reactors that are being developed is that they're
using different fuel types and they're using different coolants that
(13:36):
massively improve the inherent safety of.
Speaker 4 (13:38):
The reactor system.
Speaker 3 (13:38):
And what I mean by that is, if you think
about water as a coolant. Everyone knows the boiling temperature
of water is one hundred degrees centigrade, which is actually
quite low considering the himm amount of heat that uranium generates,
so you need a highly pressurized system and then effectively,
if you get if the depressurized system, you can get
(13:59):
the water boiling over and then you're not removing as
much heat and you get that meltdown. With some of
these more advanced reactors, you have a cool and with
a much much higher boiling temperature, so several hundred degrees higher.
And for that reason, it's it's harder even to get
the boiler to get those temperature those coolings to boil over.
So the removal of the heat can be sustained a
(14:21):
lot more easily, and and it's called it's essentially called
heat sinc. But that means that the inherent safety of
the reactor is automatically made more robust and more comprehensive
by just that.
Speaker 4 (14:31):
Cool and alone.
Speaker 3 (14:32):
But the industry has gone further than that too. There's
there's fuel that has been developed like Triso fuel, which
essentially is pelletized uranium, that is that is contained within
its own shielding and containerized vessels. So say, for instance,
you would have fire a missile of the reactor and
you would to blow it up. Essentially, the reactor actually
becomes less critical, which means it's less it's less radioactive,
(14:56):
but all of the uranium fuel is self contained, so
you just need to basically sweep up the fuel that
has been distributed around the place, and the fuel is
not amalgamated all in one area where it can melt
down and it would be a much worse radiological hazard
to retrieve that fuel.
Speaker 4 (15:16):
So the fuel.
Speaker 3 (15:17):
Systems and the cools are amongst two principal technological differences
that have been installed just to improve that have inherent
safety that reacted. So as we said just before the
break react nuclear already the safest form of power. After
these sort of technological implementations, it gets even safer.
Speaker 4 (15:37):
Still.
Speaker 2 (15:38):
Yeah, the example I always use with people is an
all electrical fuse. Say, an electrical fuse is a fail
safe design. So if you get too much electricity going
across the fudcause it melts, electricity stops, you had shut
down in a safe state. You can never have fail proof,
you know, I've been many many plants. Things are always
going to happen. You just have to make sure that
(16:00):
when it fails, it fails in a safe way. And
that can be done so on.
Speaker 3 (16:05):
Undred percent, and that's what people have to remember is
that nuclear is held or higher standard than everything else
like it's and you're right, there's no such thing as
guaranteed save anything. But I think in terms of most
safety systems, you're looking at, say an accident every one
to ten thousand years. In nuclear you need to get
(16:27):
the safety to a level where you can expect accidents
every one hundred thousand years, just to give it an
idea of the sort of order of magnitude difference that
you are held to in terms of safety standard.
Speaker 2 (16:36):
Right, so, or small scale or small modular reactors SMR
is expected to change the landscape and nuclear energy in
coming decades.
Speaker 3 (16:46):
Yes, And the interesting part is that the States is
it's the oldest nuclear energy power in the world, and
it was incredibly innovative at one point. And even there
were a couple dozen microactors that were distributed around the
country that went universities, and a lot of those are
still still in operation now, and some of them are
even bigger than the microactors we're developing out the one
(17:08):
of MIT.
Speaker 4 (17:09):
It's still running.
Speaker 3 (17:10):
And people will walking, people walk past these things on
a daily basis and don't even know they're there. But
it's never been done commercially. But the interesting part here
is that if it's done commercially, this could open up
enormous amounts of opportunities. So mining deposits, a lot of
these things are not economic just because of where they are.
Like the cost of moving say diesel fuel to a
(17:32):
lot of these locations is prohibitively expensive and kills the
economics of the mining. It's certainly if you have these
systems and you can move these out there, you can
open up a lot of rare earth mineral sites and resources.
But it also means that you can make economic communities
which previously were not economic. So any remote community like
(17:53):
island community or just remote generally where you need to
bring in everything for that community, so fuel, food, clothes,
if you to provide them actually with their own power,
they then have industrial heat. They could have vertical farms
for making their own food, desalation for their own water,
and they can then suddenly have industrial heat to make
(18:15):
manufacturing operations possible. So you could increase the general wealth
of the planet quite considerably. And this could have internationally
a real benefit in places like Africa where you have
huge maybe even up to six hundred million people that
are not connected to regular power. So for a start,
you could open up that human capital enormously to industry,
(18:37):
but also even Southeast Asia, hundreds of millions of people
across hundreds of islands that subsist off regular importation of
diesel to sustain them, and then you can unlock all
of that too. Obviously, the States would benefit hugely, the
Canada would benefit hugely from these sort of these systems,
but on a global scale, it could be incredibly transformative.
Speaker 2 (18:57):
Yeah, that's something I've beaten that drama a lot, that
the rising carbon emissions around the world are primarily being
driven by Asia and it's Asian coal, and if we
could get them to start swapping over the nuclear and
building more nuclear plants, that to me, that's the lowest
tanging fruit and being able to ran in carbon emissions exactly.
Speaker 3 (19:17):
And they do have decarbonizing mandates, but a lot of
the time, a lot of these countries are in positions
where they don't have that option. I mean, and Germany
I think served as a bit of an example here,
like they did decommission a lot of their nuclear power
stations with the intention of actually substituting it out for
wind and solar, and what ended up happening is that
(19:39):
wind and solar could never make up that difference from
decommissioning those reactive system so ironically they ended up buying
Polish coal, which was obviously dirtier, and even more ironically,
power from France, which is nuclear generated, so their carbon
footprint went up in their power co went up as well.
(20:01):
So that's sort of the world as an example that
you can't do without nuclear if you're serious about decobonizing, right,
So we'll take a.
Speaker 2 (20:09):
Quick break out there, and then I want to get
into where nuclear power is headed from here. We'll be
right back with James Walker on the energy tanks.
Speaker 5 (20:20):
The Texas Oil and Gas Association Safety Group is your
pipeline to discounts, dividends and industry expertise. It's a value
added benefit from Texas Mutual Insurance Company, the state's leading
workers comprovider. At Texas Mutual, they know the oil and
gas industry, which means you'll have access to expert resources
and information that make your business better. As a Safety
(20:42):
Group member, you'll also save about twelve percent on your
workers comp premium, and that's just the beginning. While Texas
Mutual policy holders can earn an annual dividend for keeping
their workers safe. Safety Group members can get something even better,
a second dividend that's up to two dividends every year.
Plus you'll get served focused coverage from Texas Mutual, a
workers comp partner you know and trust. The Texas Oil
(21:06):
and Gas Association Safety Group is tailor made for your business.
Talk to your agents or learn more at Texas Mutual
dot com slash t x o g A. Dividends are
based on performance and not guaranteed.
Speaker 2 (21:22):
Welcome back to the Energy Mix. I'm Robert Rapier with
a Sweet's guest James Walker. James, before the break, you
mentioned the decommissioned power plants in Germany. I used to
live close to one of those. I worked in Germany
and I actually got to tour one of those decommissioned
plants and it was something else. It was like a
not fun theme park. I guess you're walking through. It's
just a giant complex, a ghost town, and h yeah.
(21:44):
I think Germany made a really big mistake. I think
Fukushima scared them badly and they said, you know, I mean,
I know. Angela Merkle was a nuclear physicist or a physicist,
and she knew all about nuclear power, but she said
she was not aware that something like that could happened.
So I think for Kashima even scared people badly who
should have known better.
Speaker 3 (22:05):
Yes, look at it did have a global impact in effect,
like even Japan I think began to try and move
away from nuclear power, and that that's a country that
doesn't have its own natural resources when gas, call or
anything like that, and so its obviously has to import everything.
I think they even they've got to a point now
where they were trying to move away from it, realize
that it is essential, and then now they're looking at
(22:27):
trying to they're re examining bringing it back in the
same way that Germany is pushed into a situation where
it has to re examine bringing that nuclear power back
to be able to self support itself. Because one of
the big things is that if you aren't able to
power yourself, if you're not a sovereign country, you are
reliant on foreign powers to support you.
Speaker 4 (22:45):
Right.
Speaker 2 (22:47):
So I've written a lot about the growing AI data
centers and the power demand that's growing. Is that going
to be the biggest driver going forward? Where do you
see things going from here and what is going to
be the demand drivers that causes us to race or
nuclear power.
Speaker 3 (23:01):
So it's definitely where a lot of attention is being
drawn towards nuclear at the moment, and it's generating that interest.
I would say it's not going to be the biggest
contributed to the desire for nuclear power, but it's certainly
going to be significant portion, and that's because the data
centers and AI centers are becoming increasing. The energy hungry
and the projected demands of these things mean that the
(23:23):
tech business knows that it's going to reach a plateau
in terms of what energy it can get, and that
means essentially a secession of sophistication of its models. And
the worry there is that say China, which is mass
producing nuclear power plants at the moment, I think it
has more nuclear power plants in the pipeline than anyone
else might even be in a position to catch up
(23:44):
the US tech industry in terms of sophistication because it
has that power to put into these systems. So it's
obviously a huge point of contention as driving that tech
industry interest in it.
Speaker 4 (23:55):
But it's also.
Speaker 3 (23:56):
Combined with the fact that there is going to be
an increase in power requirements in the country in general,
just from the reindustrialization of the country. I mean, the
US is bringing a lot of industry back domestically. A
lot of that was shipped overseas because it was more,
it was cheaper to do it. That was obviously a
(24:16):
short term size and in terms of giving countries control
over the US essentially, and that desire to bring that back.
So reindustrialization is going to be a big factor in
the drive for more power within the country. But also
the electrification of the country too is going to require
enormous amounts more power, and I think that California demonstrated
(24:37):
that to a certain degree as well, where it was
very bullish on electrifying things as much as it could,
but that lawso led to enormous power outages, electric vehicles
that could not get enough power in time. And so
you can see how infrastructure is a key component of
electrification processes too, and without that you can't sustain that
electrification drive. So it's it's coming at it from a
(25:01):
lot of different angles, but certainly tech is a big
driver at the moment.
Speaker 2 (25:05):
So what are your projections for nuclear power capaccy in
the US and globally over the next twenty five years.
Is anybody going to catch the US in the next
twenty five years, So I would.
Speaker 3 (25:13):
Say the US at the moment. My interpretation is that
in terms of these next generation systems, the US.
Speaker 4 (25:18):
Is in the lead.
Speaker 3 (25:20):
It's certainly been the most innovative, and it actually has
the political will to push a lot of these things forward.
I don't see Europe rivaling is. I think even China
is what it's trying to do it currently is stick
to very proven technologies like essentially modified AP one thousand systems,
which are very well known about. So there's I don't
(25:43):
see it making huge inroads into the SMR market it
the same way that the US will. The only thing
the US has to catch up on is it has
to get that domestic supply chain rebuilt. Because Russia and
China can enrich and deconvert and fabricate. The US currently
can't do that. But once it does that, it will
it will be in the lead in terms of that
novel technologies, and that'll give it when it does get
(26:06):
into that position, it'll be it'll be able to basically
command the global market because nobody's going to outcompete the US,
I think in terms of these new systems, and the
rest of the world is very hungry for them. It's
not just like we talked about Southeast Asia and Africa,
but all over the globe there is a desire for
these systems to replace diesel generators.
Speaker 2 (26:26):
Okay, we're going to take a quick break right there,
and then after the break, I want to get into
what the Trump administration is doing and how they may
push this industry forward. We'll be right back on the
Energy Mix with James Walker. I'm robert A Pierre.
Speaker 6 (26:41):
It's the Better in Boots gala and Sporting Clay fundraiser
presented by J. D. Fielch joined sky High for Kids
in Houston March twenty seventh and twenty eighth for two
unforgettable days of fund and fundraising. On March twenty seventh,
head to the Greater Houston Sporting Club for the Sporting
Clay Tournament. Then on March twenty eight join us at
(27:01):
the Rivere for the Vivie Reception, silent auction, and a
night to remember as we honor Danny and Iris Shaftel
of Shaftill Diamonds. All proceeds benefit sky High for Kids
mission to end childhood cancer. Get involved today at sky
High for Kids dot org.
Speaker 2 (27:22):
Welcome back to the Energy Mix. I'm Robert Rapier with
this week's guest, James Walker. James, how has the Trump
Administration's energy policy influenced the nuclear power industry so far?
Speaker 3 (27:33):
So? The good part here is that the incoming administration
has voiced enormous support for the small modular actor space
and look it started, I think principally last year there
was an enormous number of DARY grants and wards that
went out to build back the infrastructure. The administration has
already voiced its support for continuing with those efforts to
(27:54):
rebuild back. I think principally as well, there is a drive,
there is a desire from the DoD IS even to
build back the domestic capability to produce this fuel because
it still needs us to be able to produce this
for submarines and aircraft carriers so we can project international strength.
So the continuation of certainly very very bullish previous administrations
(28:21):
attitude and nuclear has been voiced. The Trump administration has
signed has made it a support for the one two
three Agreement, which will allow for more technology sharing around
the world, which allows for more nuclear cooperation and the
export of future technology and materials, including.
Speaker 4 (28:37):
Reactor systems as well.
Speaker 3 (28:40):
So, and I think that the principal thing that the
new administration is very concerned with is sort of any
energy dominance agenda are essentially where it doesn't just want
to be able to make sure that the US is
an independent energy country, it also wants to command and
a large market share of the international market when it
(29:03):
comes to these novel technologies. And so they voiced support
for carrying on with some reforms that are being targeted
towards the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to allow for expedited licensing processes,
and already actually the NRC has announced a fifty percent
cut in licensing fees for reactors, and that's actually was
(29:24):
announced under the new administration as well. And that is
enormously important because if you think about nuclear it's an
upfront capital cost essentially and then low op X cost
going forward. That that hike upfront capital costs a lot
of the time is related to a lengthy licensing process
(29:44):
which really substantially adds to the capital cost. And if
you think that when a nuclear power plant is built
seventy percent of the entire project costs are financing costs,
not construction or anything like that or materials. That's just
the financing cost related to financing that huge upfront capital cost.
By reducing that those licensing fees and reducing the time
(30:09):
that you're going through the licensing process, you reduce that
up front capital costs, which significantly reduces your your financing costs,
and that brings the entire power per killer WAT down considerably.
So that the new administration is very aware of the
challenges and it looks like they're putting pressure on the
NRC to continue with some of the reformers.
Speaker 4 (30:30):
They're going to enable this nuclear this nuclear power.
Speaker 2 (30:34):
So what are some changes you would like to see?
I mean, if you could sit down with President Trump,
what would you ask for?
Speaker 3 (30:39):
So the big thing I think that if I was
sit down with President Trump is that I would I
would certainly like to talk about the supply the supply
chain within the US, and that would probably mean as well,
reinvigorating the uranian mining industry. Now that's happening a little
bit now because the uranium price is picked up, which
has made it economic to mine again. But the after
(31:02):
enrichment is solved. One of the big bottlenecks that's going
to hit the industry with the conversion process, so taking
the mill product from the mine and turning it into
uranium hexafluoride, which then goes into the enrichment facility. Currently,
I think the capacity is way under what it needs
to be and that's not just that's not just America.
(31:23):
I would say that's an international problem because there's only
five licensed facilities in the whole world that they are
able to do that conversion process.
Speaker 4 (31:32):
So that's that's a big one.
Speaker 3 (31:34):
If the US can fund support for the build back
of conversion capabilities, then it would be really position itself,
I think at the center to supply the whole world
with uranium hexafluoride or a rich material essentially if they
could the power this sort of nuclear renaissance. So that
is being coined at currently. So there's If we solve
(31:56):
conversion enrichment, I think the technology side of things will
get a lot easier. One thing that I would I
would very much like to do is talk to about
licensing reforms to allow for with a microrector, if you
get a licensed reactor system, provided it's deployment side meets
certain criteria like seismic conditions, temperature conditions, flood risks, things
(32:20):
like that it could be deployed there, which would mean
you could eliminate specific site licensing requirements for each site
it's deployed to, and that that would that would facilitate
the role out of these things, you know, very expeditiously,
because then you have a system that can be deployed
anywhere at any one time. And also to allow for
minimal staffing requirements because these these systems will be able
(32:42):
to be remotely operated, they will not require nuclear engineers
a lot of these microrectors to be with them.
Speaker 4 (32:48):
When they are deployed.
Speaker 3 (32:49):
So suddenly having a mechanic that's able to go out
there that they can remove a tree that's fallen off
it or a bear that's got in there would obviously
be very useful. But certainly allowing for these sort of
regulatory changes to be adapted for these new types of technology,
I think would be incredibly important.
Speaker 2 (33:08):
So things tend not to happen very quickly in this industry.
What is a realistic expectation over the next four years?
What does it look like four years from now relative today?
Realistically under best scenario.
Speaker 3 (33:19):
It's a very good question because I don't want the
industry to be damaged by people making claims that can't
be backed up by reality. So when when some of
these deployment timelines of reactor systems have been put out there,
like twenty twenty nine, I know what's happening there. They're
making predictions based on their own technology and when it
(33:39):
will be possible and when it'll be available to go out,
But that doesn't factor in the considerations around that supply chain.
Speaker 4 (33:46):
So I would say in the.
Speaker 3 (33:47):
Next five years that I mean that takes you towards
the twenty thirty, it's definitely possible at that point that
enrichment capability has been built back sufficiently to allow for
some of these small montuor reactors to be deployed. But
I think within the next few years, what you're definitely
going to see is a lot of prototypes being constructed
our companies included. You're going to see these systems being
(34:10):
licensed and they're going to be essentially being made ready
to go to market, and then they'll just be waiting
on that missing fuel supply chain to be completed to
supply the fuel.
Speaker 4 (34:21):
Then they need to be mass deployed.
Speaker 3 (34:22):
But you'll see a lot of contracts being signed, especially
with big data centers. I mean we're even examining a
lot of those two international contracts with countries like the
Philippines that have the most expensive power in Southeast Asia.
They're desperate for these kinds of systems to bring those
costs down. I think positioning within the next five years
(34:42):
will be the key, and early twenty thirties will be
the mass roll out of these systems.
Speaker 4 (34:46):
Such.
Speaker 2 (34:48):
Okay, we'll take a quick breaker out there, and then
after the break, I want to talk about your company
and what you guys are doing and what you're involved in.
So I'm Oberate Pier be right back with the Swiss
guest Jink Walker on the energy mix.
Speaker 7 (35:03):
Remember this name oil Field Experts to locate any part,
anytime for your automotive or oil field equipment needs. Oilfield
Experts specialty is those hard to find oil field parts
for your fleet maintenance needs. And we've been providing those
parts and accessories to keep your tools turning since nineteen
sixty five. From the auto repair shop to the pump jack.
Call us for the right part right now, write down
(35:25):
this number oil Field Experts two ten four seven one
nineteen twenty three. Again that's two ten four seven one
one nine two three and visit us on the web
at the Oilfieldexperts dot com.
Speaker 8 (35:40):
Farmers and ranchers are the hardest working people on Earth
and deserve a side by side vehicle that works just
as hard. That's why Yamaha mixed the Viking and all
new Viking six, the world's first true three and six
person UTVs assembled in America. Ranked number one in drive
train durability, Viking outworks and outclasses the competition and features
(36:01):
comfort and off road capability. For more, visit Yamaha Viking
dot com. Most of pedable claim based on a twenty
thirteen Yamaha source side by side on our study.
Speaker 2 (36:12):
Welcome back to the Energy Mix. I'm Robert Rapier with
this week's guest, James Walker. This week we've been doing
a deep dive in a nuclear power. James, let's talk
about your company a little bit. Can you tell us
about Nano Nuclear Energy's current projects and how they align
with energy industry trends and future projections. What are you
guys working on?
Speaker 3 (36:30):
Absolutely so, we're working on a couple of microactors, and
that's how the company actually got started. We were targeting
mining sites, oil and gas sites, island communities, remote industry anyway,
we see diesel generators being deployed and there was no
competition for power there. And also because we're really competing
with the costs of remote diesel, which is ordinarily very expensive.
(36:55):
But as we as we develop these microactor systems, other
opportunities have arisen and we've we've spoken a lot on
the podcast about the supply chain when we when we
foresaw that bottleneck, we actually heavily invested into an enrichment
company called List Technologies, and we've now partnered with them
with an agreement that will help incubate them and grow
(37:17):
them up so they can start enriching fuel and Nano
is looking at providing deconversion of fabrication services alongside that,
so we can ensure that there's not just fuel ferraur reactors.
But we want to supply fuel to the whole industry
because this is going to be a big market and
we and essentially we want to we want everyone to
win here, the other sm R companies included, because if
(37:40):
they win, we will win essentially out of this and
we believe we have one of the solutions to combat
some of the bottlenecks that we perceive in the industry.
So the fuel supply chain is a big one. We're
also looking at the transportation element, how this how these
materials get moved around, how the reactors get moved around,
and so we're even examined acquisitions in the transportation industry.
(38:02):
We've been examining tech of how we how we house
commercial quantities of this new hal in fuel and how
we move it around around the country in quantities that
but then fuel entire reactor systems in one load. So
we've we've branched out into those two areas as well.
But as we've as we've developed as well, we've also
(38:22):
developed certain key technologies we know will be very useful
for a lot of these reactor systms because they could
simplify and make smaller a lot of these advanced reactor systems.
So we're developing that too. And and one one very
big development very recently is that we were very close
with another company called us n C. They were developing
(38:44):
some some larger systems like the Kronos reactor.
Speaker 4 (38:48):
We've we've actually.
Speaker 3 (38:49):
Bought out their assets, and that put us, I think,
in to be one of the leading contenders to produce
a commercial prototype.
Speaker 4 (38:59):
Or as an SMR.
Speaker 3 (39:01):
And these these reactor systems as well, that they're almost
a couple of years ahead of our own reactor systems,
so it sort of accelerated our own timeline for when
we're deploying and these systems that puts us in the
in the race to power data centers, in AI centers
and all those kind of things, because they the Chronos
reactor is significantly more powerful. So even though we started
(39:22):
my correctors, we have now branched and jumped ahead into
the race to produce a commercial SMR as well.
Speaker 2 (39:30):
I know I mentioned earlier the investment community is taking
your company seriously, having bid it up to a billion dollars,
so they are they are paying attention. You know, what
are some of your key goals and milestones you see
in the next few years? I mean, what kind of
things do you want to check off as you're going through.
Speaker 3 (39:48):
So the important thing I think for us on the
technology front is that this year we've already got agreements
in place with say, University of Illinois to build a
prototype Chronos reactor. There we want to get the geological
characterization of the site done this year, so the drilling
work done, and put in a permit to construct with
the NRC either later this year or early next year
(40:10):
as well. That'll be huge, I think that'll I think
we will be the first micro actor company to submit
for one of those licenses, so that'll that'll be a
big element to what we're doing. I think, as far
as a company goes, I want to put the company
into revenue as quickly as possible, just to make a
more robust system. And that'll be partly done through acquisitions,
(40:31):
but we're also being approached for a lot of work
currently as well, so we will establish our own consultancy business.
We will that will allow us to profit out engineering services,
and we'll build the company up substantially that way too,
so we are more internally robust, and while we also
seek to commercially develop certain technologies, we have to create
(40:54):
that additional revenue stream, so we have multiple revenue streams
coming into the company. The company was very strategically taken
into an IPO early and it's in its development and
that was strategic because we we wanted to grow with them,
grow with the development of the company and give people
a chance to actually invest in nuclear, because it was
(41:15):
quite difficult to if you were interested in this space
to invest there. There was there was one other publicly
traded company at the time we listed, which was New Scale,
and I think since we listed, OCO has since listed
as a SPAC. But we wanted to be a tight
share structure with small float that would allow people to
(41:36):
invest and then grow with us.
Speaker 4 (41:37):
As we develop here.
Speaker 3 (41:38):
And and that's principally also why we went to a
billion dollars is that there weren't many avenues to invest
and they still are not, even though this is a
massive space, and we were one of the best structured
companies to invest into to not guarantee but hedge your
bets for long term appreciation the share price. And so obviously,
(41:59):
well we'll continue to do that and be stewards of capital.
But growing the company out here is going to be
very rapid because of the this massive interest in nuclear
and and in the whole sector.
Speaker 2 (42:13):
Really, yeah, I know what you mean. I mean, I
write investment articles for Investing Daily. I cover energy and
I cover utilities, and people are always asking about nuclear
and I said, well, there aren't a lot of choices here,
and you don't have a lot of options, So it's
a lot of money chasing into a field and you
know that that happens. Can you talk about some of
(42:33):
the potential economic impacts of expanding nuclear power infrastructure? How
will that benefit the overall economy?
Speaker 3 (42:39):
So the interesting part here, I think is that nuclear
it should nuclear in the States, I think is the
is the most expensive nuclear power in the world, and like, obviously,
by the laws of physics, it should be exactly the
same wherever you go in the entire world, but like
it's it's been principally made more expensive by long regular
(43:00):
who timelines, expensive licensing processes, and then that's sort of
that sort of burden has has pushed into that sort
of category.
Speaker 2 (43:09):
A lot of that can be.
Speaker 3 (43:10):
Reformed, and there's actually the NRC, to its credit, is
making massive efforts now to reform a lot of these
systems that will have a massive impact on the price here,
and then you will have nuclear that theoretically should be
Nuclear should be the cheapest forward power mankind has because
of the energy density of uranium. It's tens of millions
(43:33):
of times more dense than coal or oil. So for
that reason, like you, you should be it should be
incredibly economic. The price will come down considerably as you
build back that supply chain, you will not be reliant
on the foreign important materials. And then as that as
it comes down, you will to be looking at things
(43:54):
like chemical plants sexually utilizing nuclear because it will it
will be more offfective to have your own power station
then take from grid. And the problem with the grid
is that the infrastructure expenditure required to build that up
to the necessary levels that are projected is going to
be enormous endeavor and I don't think a lot of
(44:15):
industry can wait on that. So you're going to see
nuclear going out for mining projects, chemical companies, tech industry,
all of those different areas, and that will be incredibly transformative.
Speaker 2 (44:27):
Well, James, I really appreciate this. We're running out of
time now, so I'm going to not be able to
get to a few of my questions, but this was
very enlightening. I'm very excited about the future of nuclear power,
and I'm glad we could have you on the show
to sort of, you know, kind of give us an
idea about where things are headed. So I want to
thank the sweet guest James Walker on being for being
(44:47):
on the Energy Mix and educating us all this week
on nuclear power.
Speaker 3 (44:51):
Thank you, James, Thank you, Robert.
Speaker 1 (44:53):
Good to be on The Energy Mix radio show is
where we explore topics that affect us all in the
oil and gas industry. Every week, our host will interview
the movers and shakers in this fast paced industry. You'll
hear from industry experts, elected officials, and many more on
the Energy Mix Radio Show.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!