Nice writeup on the various nuclear startups racing to reach criticality by July 4th, two of which have succeeded, and the reformed regulatory approach that has enabled it. Pleased to see @whatisnuclear quoted here as having made amends with one of them whose young founder's scientific claims he'd criticized. I want big lightwater reactor plants to be built but I'm glad these efforts are advancing. Some questions the article leaves me with:
1) First and foremost, aren't all of these startups working at federal labs in specific test environments that have been created for safe development of exactly this sort of thing? One has the impression they're startup guys in their garages.
2) They're not going through NRC regulatory pathway but they are indeed going through DOE pathway, right? Doesn't that still mean various safety requirements must be met?
3) Why does Union of Concerned Scientists' staff nuclear safety curmudgeon Ed Lyman get an automatic quote on damn near every national news article about nuclear? Why do the wealthy people and foundations that sustain this NGO get to keep funding his perspective and inserting it into an issue of great political importance?
FT Energy (@ftenergy)
US ‘nuclear bros’ test America’s atomic revival ft.trib.al/vC97kww
— https://nitter.net/ftenergy/status/2067457723193577863#m