top of page

If this were really about Carbon emissions, we'd be discussing Nuclear technology

Today on the podcast we talked about Netflix's new documentary on Bill Gates, and the "Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation." In the new documentary, Netflix details how Gates is using his massive wealth to eradicate diseases in Africa, and even how he effectively reinvented nuclear power technology.

Gates, along with his wife, and billionaire investor Warren Buffet, have combined their wealth to pursue philanthropy around the world. This is a great thing, and it sets the model for how other billionaires should use their massive stock piles of wealth. The other point that needs to be made is that all of the work they are doing would not be possible if not for the incentives created by Capitalism. Yes, Capitalism can indeed continue it's evil quest to continue saving the entire world.

Let's not leave out the fact that Gates' foundation has spent around $3 billion per year achieving some of these monumental goals. In contrast, the U.S. government spends that much money in just 7 hours.

We also detail Gates' reinvention of Nuclear power. Nuclear is seen as dangerous by almost everybody. Even Gates admits that his battle is with "public perception." Why is that his battle? Because the government regulates the industry, and the government is known to bend to public perception, even when the public is flat out wrong.

How could they be wrong? What about Fukushima, Chernobyl, and 3-Mile Island?

Gates, along with a massive group of scientists, have completely reinvented Nuclear power. Their new plant emits 0 carbon emissions, and runs on an entirely different system than our current "slide-rule" era power plants.

The new technology can use depleted uranium, en lieu of enriched uranium. There's a stock pile of depleted uranium in Paducah, KY, not far from where I grew up. Gates, along with his team, states that that storage of "nuclear waste" is exactly what his plant can use to create emission free energy. He even goes as far as to say that just the nuclear waste stored in Paducah is enough for his technology to power the U.S. for 125 years.

Using depleted uranium is just the start. They also developed a new way to cool the reactor using liquid metal, not the water based cooling system that has failed and caused the meltdowns in the past.

All of the new innovations aside, Gates can't get around the Department of Energy's regulations on Nuclear power. One workaround to test the new plant was to build in China, a country that is still heavily invested in nuclear energy. That plan, however, was foiled by the recent trade war in which the Department of Energy refused to renew licenses for companies operating in China.

Could Gates have actually solved the left's "Climate Crisis?" Maybe so. That begs the question: Why won't they acknowledge nuclear energy as a possibility. In speculation, I would say that liberals are reluctant to speak of solutions that don't require massive growth of government, and a massive hike in taxation.

The numbers are staggering when comparing the efficiency of Nuclear vs Solar on everything from KW/hr generated, resource tonnage to build a plant vs. solar farms, and the cost over time.

Fear and hysteria aside, I think it's time we all take a serious look at Nuclear.