It took the railroads years of experience to determine that Diesel locomotives should replace steam locomotives. Similarly, it could take a while to identify the best nuclear technology. We’ve already made a mistake by deploying only PWRs. Let us not repeat the mistake by limiting ourselves to only one nuclear technology before we have had sufficient experience to know which is the best nuclear technology.

DU is NOT radioactive.

My guess is that since uranium is pyrophoric, it starts a fire, causing secondary explosions of ammo stored in the tank.

Our sights need to be on Fusion!

Nuclear power will do nothing to phase out fossil fuels.

I suggest you research Jevons Paradox.

Even as we become many times more efficient, fossil fuel use continues apace. This is because the efficiency just goes to more growth. The same is true for nuclear. Even with our nuclear plants doubling output since the 1990s, fossil fuel use continued apace. All the nuclear did was go to more growth.

Fossil fuels are like magic, and if we use less the price collapses, like in 2009 when the economy shrank, and then the low price spurrs their use.

As long as all our politicians want more growth, nuclear won’t reduce fossil use, it will just create more growth.

Just think of the economy this way: energy in, garbage out. So, nuclear would just create more garbage. Who wants more overconsumption, more obesity, bigger homes, population growth? Who wants that?

At 3 percent economic growth, energy consumption increases by a factor of 16 in 93 years. All we can do is wait a few decades for peak oil, peak coal, peak gas, and peak uranium to put growth in its tracks, and force us to end population growth and transition to a steady-state society.

The U.S. will be using half the fossil fuels by 2025. We will be living like the Amish by 2040, which is when we can start rolling out the fast reactors and return to growth, and rebuild civilization. Trust me, this is the only way.

The peaks means that global warming can’t exceed 450 ppm, so the planet won’t become uninhabitable, and we will avoid the worst of climate change.

We can’t rely on our politicians to do the right thing, and they are forcing all this population growth and economic growth upon us, and will do everything they can to keep the status quo.

Only a couple of decades of steadily increasing economic contraction and job loss will teach people that there are limits to growth, and teach people to live within population and economic limits.

We already have 313 million in the U.S., do you want to see it reach a billion? That is where we’re heading, and this must come to an end.

Admiral Hyman G. Rickover gave a speech in 1957 about how only the breeder would work,

but then he became very antinuclear in the 1980s,

If we went with the IFR now, it would kill us all,

just a billion people going on hundred mile a day commutes, living in mcmansions out in the middle of nowhere,

I think that by 2040 the U.S. population will be 250 million,

and we will be living in villages, and growing our own food, and living without electricity, and be happier as a result.

Trust me, nature will solve itself. The situation is non-negotiable, and the infinite growth paradigm that has been killing us all is coming to an end, non-negotiabally. I suggest you pick up a copy of the new “End of Growth” books by Heinberg and Rubin, or check out Chris Martenson and Al Bartlett. Regards, Zachary