Slashdot Mirror


Bill Gates May Build Small Nuclear Reactor

Hugh Pickens writes "TerraPower, an energy start-up backed by Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, is in discussions with Toshiba Corp. to develop a small-scale nuclear reactor that would represent a long-term bet to make nuclear power safer and cheaper. Toshiba confirmed it is in preliminary discussions with TerraPower, a unit of Intellectual Ventures, a patent-holding concern partially funded by Gates. Toshiba spokesman Keisuke Ohmori says the two sides are talking about how they could collaborate on nuclear technology, although discussions are still in early stages and that nothing has been decided on investment or development. TerraPower has publicly said its Traveling Wave Reactor could run for decades on depleted uranium without refueling (PDF) or removing spent fuel from the device. The reactor, the company has said, could be safer, cheaper and more socially acceptable than today's reactors. Gates's recent focus on nuclear power has been fueled by an interest in developing new power systems for developing countries where he says that new energy solutions are needed to combat climate change. Terrapower faces a lengthy, multi-year process to get its "traveling wave" reactor concept reviewed by regulators but if TerraPower succeeds in advancing its plans, it could provide an alternative blueprint for the nuclear industry at a time when new reactors may be coming online."

53 of 347 comments (clear)

  1. The blue screen of death... by gzipped_tar · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...finally.

    --
    Colorless green Cthulhu waits dreaming furiously.
    1. Re:The blue screen of death... by sharkey · · Score: 5, Funny
      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  2. Non story by Nuskrad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bill Gates invests in a company. He's not personally building a reactor like some kind of comic book super villain.

    1. Re:Non story by Leraika · · Score: 5, Funny

      Awwwww.

    2. Re:Non story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      ... or is he?

      Tune in next week for the continuation of this exciting episode!

    3. Re:Non story by balbord · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's just something a loyal minion would say to cover his/her/its boss evil doings.
      I'm stockpiling twinkies.

      --
      "If I have been able to see so far, It is because I went out and bought a damn binoculars" - Ze da Esquina
    4. Re:Non story by eclectro · · Score: 4, Funny

      He's not personally building a reactor like some kind of comic book super villain.

      No. That's what the underlings are for. Steve Balmer goes nuclear quite often.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    5. Re:Non story by NonUniqueNickname · · Score: 5, Funny

      Of course he's not going to build it personally. He's going to take someone else's work, put a few 8.3mm screws into it, and say he built it himself.

    6. Re:Non story by drachenfyre · · Score: 3

      Why do they always have to be villains? Tony Stark wasn't a villain.

    7. Re:Non story by AndrewNeo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, but you think Slashdot is going to portray Gates as the hero?

    8. Re:Non story by Idarubicin · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Troll much?

      Gates' actual quote:

      “if we do a really great job on vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that [his initial 2050 global population projection of 9-billion] by perhaps about 10 to 15 percent.”

      Sure, I suppose that could mean that he advocates surreptitiously sterilizing Third-World women under the guise of providing health services.

      But what it probably means is that he believes societies with better access to health care have a greater fraction of children survive to adulthood and see far, far, far fewer of their women die in childbirth. Access to birth control permits women to space out their children more, with benefits to the health of mother and child. Those societies (like, say, the villianous dystopias of Canada and Switzerland) tend to have lower overall birth rates and stable populations.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    9. Re:Non story by IICV · · Score: 4, Funny

      You can't mod people down for being stupid.

      I just did!

      Oh wait...

  3. Re:Oh man by binarylarry · · Score: 3, Funny

    The bad part is it'll be like japan where his neighbors all have "An error has been detected with your computer and it has been shutdown for your safety...." burned into their skin.

    --
    Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
  4. And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I have been waiting for years for Bill Gates to start using his money for something in the mad scientist realm we all knew it was coming. . .

  5. Nuclear-powered Bill Gates? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 5, Funny

    If there was ever a more appropriate time for the Bill Gates as Borg graphic, I don't know when that would be. If a nuclear-powered Bill Gates is ever developed, then resistance will be fissile! (sorry, resisting that joke was futile)

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Nuclear-powered Bill Gates? by el3mentary · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What I don't get is why he doesn't invest in an American company, like Westinghouse, or B&W, or GE...

      It's nothing personal it's just good financial sense nowadays.

      --
      I reject your reality and substitute my own.
  6. Cherenkov radiation by mdsolar · · Score: 5, Funny

    The blue glow of death.... Who better than Bill to distribute it?

    1. Re:Cherenkov radiation by jittles · · Score: 4, Funny

      Steve Jobs? Rumor says that his RDF has a faintly glowing, aura-like appearance hardly visible to the eyes of us unwashed, barbarian, infidel freetards... ;)

      I believe that glow comes from his halo, you infidel!

    2. Re:Cherenkov radiation by jpmorgan · · Score: 4, Funny

      You mean iNfidel.

  7. Preparing for standoff with Axis of Evil by Orga · · Score: 3, Funny

    Perhaps he's hoping to get Bing into the Iranian and North Korean search engine markets by threatening them with nukes.

    1. Re:Preparing for standoff with Axis of Evil by mcgrew · · Score: 5, Funny

      He'd have more luck keeping nukes from Iran and North Korea by threatening them with Bing.

  8. Seems very comic book by 91degrees · · Score: 3, Funny

    Next he'll shave his head and then try to defeat Superman.

  9. I Don't Know Man by crymeph0 · · Score: 4, Funny

    In the movies, whenever a billionaire builds a nuclear reactor, James Bond usually has to save the world from his evil schemes.

    --
    It should be illegal to say that freedom of speech should be limited.
    1. Re:I Don't Know Man by ciaohound · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes, you know the Windows monopoly is finally threatened with real competition when Bill Gates begins development of a new means of holding the world ransom, for one billion dollars.

      --
      Oh, yeah, it's not easy to pad these out to 120 characters.
    2. Re:I Don't Know Man by Rogerborg · · Score: 3, Informative

      Stark vs Bond fistfight? Winner: SHATNER. Always SHATNER.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    3. Re:I Don't Know Man by Anonymous+Monkey · · Score: 3, Funny
      Um, without the power armor this is how it would go down.

      Stark - "Have a drink?"

      Bond - "Thank you, Martini sh..."

      Stark - "...Shaken but not stirred, I know, Q and I are old friends. By the way, next time you see him, tell him I built something he might like. But for now.." Pours two very large martinis.

      Four hours later Bond has his own suit of power armor that looks like a tux and Stark is off chasing skirts.

      --
      We are the Borg...
  10. Re:Not what we need by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 4, Informative

    There's still huge potential for fission power. It's just that civilian reactor technology is basically stuck in the 1970s.

  11. See Ted Talks by PerfectionLost · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Bill gave a speech on this at last years tedtalks.

    http://www.ted.com/talks/bill_gates.html

  12. Re:Not what we need by Vectormatic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm right on it, just give me oh... say.. 20 years?

    anyway, old school 1960s fission isnt all that interessting, these newer reactors which burn spent fuel from the old school reactors, is very very interesting. It reduces the amount of radioactive waste we have to store, and extracts energy in the process. Fusion, is off course the ultimate goal in nuclear technology, but optimising fission to the point where waste is kept to a minimum, and fuel cycles/reactor designs are far more efficient and safe is definitely a good thing

    --
    People, what a bunch of bastards
  13. Off course not by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 4, Funny

    He's too busy building the organ while stroking the white cat.

    --
    Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    1. Re:Off course not by gurudyne · · Score: 4, Funny

      And this is better than building a cat and stroking his organ?

      --
      Hey, Mom! Is it beer, yet?
  14. Re:Not what we need by Talderas · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I still be the greens will oppose this tech under the grounds that it doesn't reduce waste ENOUGH.

    It will encourage growth, the very last thing the greens want. Expect to see opposition to it.

    --
    "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
  15. Gates tries to make amends, but... by Angst+Badger · · Score: 5, Funny

    If one of Bill Gates' projects leads to clean and plentiful energy and saves the world from global warming, it still won't make up for IE6.

    --
    Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
  16. Re:Obvious concern... by Rogerborg · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yes, briefly.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  17. Toshiba makes sense by confused+one · · Score: 4, Informative

    Notwithstanding Mr. Gates ownership of TerraPower... It makes sense for Toshiba to work with them given (a) Their ownership of the Westinghouse legacy (b) Their experience building large nuclear power reactors (c) Their experience designing small, self contained, fail-safe nuclear reactors in the 100kW to 10MW size range.

    1. Re:Toshiba makes sense by confused+one · · Score: 3, Informative

      Toshiba was working with NASA to produce a 100kW or 200kW reactor for the proposed lunar base. They had gotten far enough along that they've tested the components using non-nuclear heat sources. It's pretty small but it has very little shielding... You wouldn't want this in your vehicle.

  18. . . . and the obligatory: by jafac · · Score: 4, Funny

    "640 volts ought to be enough for anybody. . . "

    --

    These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  19. Sane environmentalists, rejoice! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I, for one, am glad to see the words "nuclear power" and "combat climate change" in the same sentence (which is not also another Slashdot comment).

    Hopefully, something does come out of this in the end.

  20. Re:Preemptive military strike by Chrisq · · Score: 4, Funny

    He's building a bomb, I tell you! A bomb! Send in the troops right now to stop him.

    Running a pirated copy of windows has suddenly become a lot more dangerous.

  21. Re:Not what we need by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I have a working to this problem. During the winter, I heat my house by burning hippies.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  22. Re:Oblig Windows Ref by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 4, Insightful

    To be fair - this is a hard day for the poor average slashbot. Should he praise nukular power or damn Bill Gates to hell? Decisions, decisions...

    --
    Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
  23. Re:Not what we need by delinear · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The irony is that burning oil and coal for the last 25 years has probably left the environment much worse off than if everyone had thrown up nuclear reactors in the 80's. Sure, the greens would object to burning coal and oil too, but sometimes you have to compromise and accept the lesser of two evils.

  24. Re:Preemptive military strike by Red+Flayer · · Score: 5, Funny

    He's building a bomb, I tell you! A bomb! Send in the troops right now to stop him.

    Poppycock. One cannot defeat Googol the Destroyer with mere bombs. This is an attempt by Gatus to deny Googol the Detroyer the power needed to run the antipodal LHC in order to create the bipolar quantum energy conundrum in which Googol will temper the world's data before using it to complete the Rite of a Million Targeted Ads.

    When last we saw our heroes, Gatus and Joba continued in the diverse efforts to thwart Googol the Destroyer. But we saw a new hero rising, in the persona of T-Bone Pickings, who aims to control the world's power supply via creation of wind farms under his control, thereby making fossil-fuel energy obsolete and useless to Googol the Destroyer. It appears that Gatus and Pickings have been coordinating their efforts -- while Pickings is being thwarted by legislators who secretly serve the Dark Master, Gatus has come up with a plan to use small nuclear reactors to make fossil fuels obsolete, thereby denying Googol both the power to run the antipodal LHC and the power upon which his Webcrawling Spiders of Doom feed.

    It appears that Googol the Destroyer has been partially thwarted in China -- there may be additional heroes there who we could celebrate, should we ever be able to get information out of the Great Firewall. Can Gatus have the same kind of Legislative and Bureacratic success against Googol the Destroyer here in the United States? Only time will tell.

    Meanwhile, rumors circulate that Joba, contrary to popular belief, has not been ill. Rather, he underwent a series of surgeries to enhance his natural charisma, marketing abilities, and since he was under the knife anyway, a titanium-clad skeleton, actuator-enhanced musculature, and a bone-white monochromatic epidermis. Cyber-Joba is now a real force to be reckoned with -- but will his new powers be enough to thwart Googol the Destroyer?

    And lest we forget, the roving Druid Stallmanx has ceased roaming for the time being, and spends his days and nights directing the efforts of his Beard Gnomes in his secret laboratory. Just what is he cooking up? Can he reconcile the anarchist developers with the money-grubbing and low-self-esteem developers that Gatus and Joba have converted to the cause of stopping Googol?

    All these questions possibly answered, and more, in next week's episode of Googol the Destroyer!

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  25. Re:Preemptive military strike by eln · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't see why anyone would be surprised by this. He's already a multi-billionaire business tycoon with his own custom-built fortress. Since the job of Batman is already taken, the transition to supervillain is the next logical step.

  26. The beauty of this technology... by sean.peters · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ... is that it's "proliferation-resistant". These reactors use depleted uranium as fuel, and the waste products are such that you can't make nuclear weapons out of them. I suppose there's still a worry about the production of "dirty bombs", but my feeling is that that's more of a concern in theory than reality. From what I've read, it's kind of hard to make a dirty bomb that actually contaminates a wide area.

  27. Re:The sick part on this .... by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well Toshiba bought Westinghouse when the US stopped building nuclear power plants. Rather than letting all that know how go to waste and allowing mindless fear to control their energy policy Japan kept building nuclear power plants.
    GE also builds reactors for the Navy.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  28. Gates is boring by roman_mir · · Score: 3, Funny

    I don't know, there was something about Gates that always struck me as boring.

    He is one of the few people in the world who have access to enormous resources and yet, he just does not do anything with it that I would qualify as fun.

    Springer has his cars or maybe he used to, Woz flew airplanes, right? The Virgin guy, this dude Branson, he sounds like a kind of fella who knows how to have fun with the money he made. Airplanes, submarines, space craft! Now that's the kind of stuff I am talking about.

    Gates is doing his charity of-course, but common, give a man a fish and feed him for a day, teach him how to fish and .... there goes your fishing monopoly. What I mean is, he should be doing something fun with his money before he crocks. What's the point of having all that dough and do nothing exciting with it? Well, maybe he is excited with the charity works, again, I don't know. If I had crazy money, I would definitely build the biggest robots or biggest guns ever or biggest freaking submarine or a Enterprise at Moon's orbit. Something that would be hard and fun to do.

    Common, Gates, do something that would show us that money can really cause great amounts of fun. Build a freaking nuclear reactor and attach it to a shark's head or something!

    1. Re:Gates is boring by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He is one of the few people in the world who have access to enormous resources and yet, he just does not do anything with it that I would qualify as fun.

      Springer has his cars or maybe he used to, Woz flew airplanes, right? The Virgin guy, this dude Branson, he sounds like a kind of fella who knows how to have fun with the money he made. Airplanes, submarines, space craft! Now that's the kind of stuff I am talking about.

      IIRC, Bill Gates has a 30 car collection, it's just that he doesn't really talk about his toys. His (and Paul Allen co-founder of MS) most famous car is the imported Porsche 959 which spent over a decade impounded by customs until they helped get a Federal law passed allowing for "show and display" of cars that hadn't been crash certified in the USA.

      There are a lot of Bill Gates stories, they just don't get brought up when talking about his charity work.
      Your UID is low enough that you should already know some of them.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
  29. Re:Preemptive military strike by centuren · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't see why anyone would be surprised by this. He's already a multi-billionaire business tycoon with his own custom-built fortress. Since the job of Batman is already taken, the transition to supervillain is the next logical step.

    But he's SO far behind Larry Ellison in that area.

  30. Nuclear; Does too little, cost too much by alex_guy_CA · · Score: 3, Informative
    The issues of renewable energy and energy independence have taken center stage in both media and political conversations lately, but the means of achieving various energy goals have proven to be rather controversial. Proposed options dominating news headlines include clean coal, nuclear energy, and offshore drilling. Is there an energy path that we can all agree upon?

    The answer is yes, and Rocky Mountain Institute and Chief Scientist Amory Lovins were featured in a New York Times blog in response to last years Presidential Debate. Energy efficiency, a solution at the core of RMIs work, was discussed as a viable and economically profitable resolution to both energy and economy issues. New York Times writer Kate Galbraith points out that RMI and Amory Lovins have consistently advocated the benefits of a soft-path approach to energy, with efficiency at its core. You can read the article here.

    When it comes to nuclear power specifically, every dollar invested in new US nuclear electricity will save approximately 2-11 times less carbon, and will do so roughly 20-40 times slower, than investing in the same dollar in energy efficiency and micropower (cogeneration plus renewables minus big hydro dams). Buying new nuclear capacity instead of efficiency causes more carbon to be released than spending the same money on new coal plants!

    These conclusions and the empirical evidence supporting them are summarized in Forget Nuclear, and fully documented in The Nuclear Illusion, available for download here, which is to be published in early 2009 by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences journal Ambio.

    Hopefully our vision will help put these widely publicized issues into perspective and move us all toward a better understanding that takes us beyond politically divisive issues to collective and viable solutions.

    1. Re:Nuclear; Does too little, cost too much by alex_guy_CA · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Your statements about the effect of efficiency are pretty close to 100% wrong.

      1. Living closer to work does not equal a more efficient car, so you are not making sense right off the bat.

      2. If you do have a more efficient car, it is more efficient all the time, even if you end up driving a bit more. The amount of extra driving people are prepared to do if gas prices go down is nowhere near the amount of gas we could save if we doubled passenger vehicle efficiency. People don't have the time to double their driving, but doubling vehicle efficiency is already possible.

      3. All transportation energy usage is only 28% of the energy usage of the US. This includes trucks, planes, trains etc... In all of these sectors efficiency can drop usage more than lower prices can increase demand.

      4. We are talking about nuclear, which creates electricity. Most vehicles are not powered by electricity.

      5. People don't actually care about how much electricity they are using. They care about the services they get from their energy. If energy prices go down because everyone has more efficiency TV's and refrigerators, most people are not going to think "SCORE, let's get ANOTHER refrigerator."

      6. In states with high efficiency standards, energy usage per capita, and per unit of economic productivity does down. Better efficiency does in fact work, and we are just scratching the surface of the potential. see: http://ert.rmi.org/research/cgu.html

      For further reading, I recommend http://rmi.org/rmi/Reinventing+Fire+Solutions+Journal+Fall+2009

    2. Re:Nuclear; Does too little, cost too much by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For those interested, Rocky Mountain Institute loves to creatively play with numbers, just like any other organization created for the purpose of propaganda of a particular idea; so take it all with a grain of sault, and double-check the sources for both numbers and context.

  31. Re:Preemptive military strike by rockNme2349 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Windows Genuine Advantage has detected that you are running an unregistered version of windows. Your power supply has registered itself as a Travelling Wave Reactor. Your thirty day trial period has now expired, and your Travelling Wave Reactor will begin its self destruct sequence.
     
    Self destruct in
    15 minutes...
    6 days...
    30 seconds...

    --
    Sewage Treatment Facilities - "Our duty is clear."