Comments by "Tony Wilson" (@tonywilson4713) on "Heresy Financial" channel.

  1. CORRECTION: They are planning to build modular nuclear reactors in the early 2030s. Here's a recent lecture by Rolls Royce Engineer Tom Peacock. Notice what he says at 15:22. Technically you are quite right. They are based on what's in the nuclear subs and we should be able to do this by now, but thanks to some of the accidents and how nuclear energy is portrayed there just hasn't been enough investment in the development of SMRs for non-military applications.
    3
  2.  @slightlytwistedagain  The title of the Tom Peacock presentation/lecture is CSAR lecture: Tom Peacock "An Overview of Rolls-Royce SMR"
    3
  3.  @piotrjasielski  That's a very pertinent point. Think about how many gas guzzling cars that existed before the energy crisis. Look at that graph at 0:40. You can see the massive dip in the early 1970s. Then there is a steady rise through the 80s, 90s, 2000s,.... until another dip that coincides with the GFC. You also have to consider that the biggest user of energy in America was manufacturing and that steadily declined all through the 80s, 90s,.... Most people don't realise it but there is actually more energy used making a car than there is operating one for around 20-25 years depending on the type and how its used. One of the best and most environmental ways to save the planet is make people KEEP their existing cars and just replace the drive trains with electric or hybrid systems. The overall energy requirement for getting cars off fossil fuel is massively reduced.
    2
  4. Your right, as with most of the people who talk about this stuff he's relying more on hyperbole than actual facts. I'm an engineer. Nuclear is NOT 100% Green. I have actually worked on a Uranium mine and I can tell you for a fact that it is NOT zero emissions. Its not as bad as many other things but its NOT zero emissions either. None of them are. Windmill blades and solar panels in land fill is just as ridiculous as most of the other stuff that ends in landfills. Another project I worked on removed and separated out all of the recyclables from household waste. It then put the organics fraction through a bio-digestor systems that not only produced more than enough energy to run the plant but produced high grade fertiliser at the end of the process. Depending on the time of year only around 5 -15% of house hold wasn't needs to end up in landfill. Yes we need to find ways to recycle solar panels and windmill blades just like we need to recycle an awful lot of things. The most aggravating thing in this is the claim that only nuclear can do the job. Its just as stupid as the claims that only wind or solar or hydro can do the job. I really hate that attitude of people promoting this or that energy solution. None fo them will individually solve the problem.
    1
  5. In the end this video is nothing but a very shitty paid for PR blurb for yet another company trying to raise capital for their projects.
    1
  6.  @slightlytwistedagain  I know they don't include outside links but I thought they still allowed YT links. That might explain why a lot of comments seem to be masked these days.
    1
  7.  @jimbeam4111  Australia. We have almost 1/3rd of all known Uranium reserves in one single place Olympic Dam. Its actually a copper mine that just also happens to have both gold and uranium through the deposit. As far as mines that just mine uranium we have had some of the best deposits in the world. The Canadians have some very rich deposits but they aren't as large. In 2005/06 I did a project at the ERA Ranger mine in the North of Australia. At the time it was the largest uranium mine in the world. Before we started work we had pretty good induction that covered the entire fuel cycle from in the ground to back in the ground.
    1
  8. CAN YOU CLOWNS WITH ECONOMICS and FINANCE backgrounds please *STOP PREACHING technological solutions to issues you don't understand and LEAVE it to the ENGINEERS.* As an engineer who has worked in manufacturing, mining, water treatment and other industries as a control system and automation engineer some of your points are valid and others are so egregiously wrong its barely containable. 1) DO NOT say that nuclear power has zero emissions. I spent 9 months on a Uranium mine doing a water treatment plant and Uranium mining is NOT a zero emission task. Its an idiotic trope perpetuated by ignorant clowns. Its just as idiotic as the clowns who say wind and solar have zero emissions. EVERYTHIGN has some form of emission. Its just some are worse than others. 2) Do NOT as so many others do claim that one technology or another is the ONLY SOLUTION. This is one of the most frustrating tropes engineers have to deal with. Its mostly perpetuated by greedy clowns out to raise money for their projects just like your sponsor MCF needs money to do their projects. Simple fact - some countries are great for wind, others solar, others hydro-electric, others are rich in fossil fuels and some have uranium reserves. Most countries have something in the way of energy they can tap into provided they have the expertise to do so and that expertise is more often than not a matter of their education system not anything else. Claiming that the investment in wind and solar was futile is the same argument that can be made for EVERY OTHER ENERGY OPTION. This is the one solution stupidity that too many people have claimed 3) Natural gas is NOT just used for energy. You even put up a slide showing all the everyday products that come from the petrochemical industry. BASF is not closing its German operations and moving to Louisiana because of labor its closing them because of raw material supply and their biggest raw materials are oil & gas. In the end this is nothing but a shit PR job for a company trying to raise capital. In that you are no different to so many of the other YouTube and other social media hype merchants.
    1