chris keefer's banner

chris keefer

@Dr_Keefer • 35,252 subscribers

ER Doc. Energy Analyst. Host Decouple Podcast: https://t.co/DU8cCdW3X0 President Canadians for Nuclear Energy: https://t.co/HThtnXtbr6

Shorts

Activist: “If the dinosaurs had nuclear energy it would still be dangerous…” Paleontologist: (in a polar bear suit) “Actually I’m a paleontologist, the dinosaurs died 66 million years ago, so no nuclear waste would not be a problem” The Monty python moment of nuclear advocacy

Activist: “If the dinosaurs had nuclear energy it would still be dangerous…” Paleontologist: (in a polar bear suit) “Actually I’m a paleontologist, the dinosaurs died 66 million years ago, so no nuclear waste would not be a problem” The Monty python moment of nuclear advocacy

10,393 views

Videos

Anya Rossi

sweetdream.ai

SweetDream.ai•Sponsored•Livecam

Watch Anya Live

Anya is streaming live right now! Join her private show and enjoy exclusive content.

Exclusive private shows

1.2k viewers online

Private Show

Join now for exclusive access

Free preview available • Premium content

Incredibly powerful time-lapse. How short our lives and ability to perceive change are.

Incredibly powerful time-lapse. How short our lives and ability to perceive change are.

128,149 views • 10 months ago

Brookfield CEO explains how Japanese investment dollars will be used by the U.S. government to finance AP1000 builds in exchange for future profit sharing or even an ownership stake in Westinghouse.

Brookfield CEO explains how Japanese investment dollars will be used by the U.S. government to finance AP1000 builds in exchange for future profit sharing or even an ownership stake in Westinghouse.

80,352 views • 11 months ago

In which I explain the extraordinary energy density of nuclear power using the world‘s most famous equation E=MC2. Start with a 100 tonne fuel load in a 1 GW PWR. We fission 3kg of heavy metal per day. Everyday 3g of that mass is transformed into energy. According to E=MC2 thats 3g x the speed of light 300 million m/s squared. 3g x 90,000,000,000,000,000 m2/s2 equals a lot of Joules. Expressed in more familiar terms for the power sector thats 75GWh thermal or 24GWh electric. So to summarize that 3g/day powers 1 million homes every day for 18 months. To watch the full interview on the Great Simplification podcast with Nate Hagens see the link in the replies.

In which I explain the extraordinary energy density of nuclear power using the world‘s most famous equation E=MC2. Start with a 100 tonne fuel load in a 1 GW PWR. We fission 3kg of heavy metal per day. Everyday 3g of that mass is transformed into energy. According to E=MC2 thats 3g x the speed of light 300 million m/s squared. 3g x 90,000,000,000,000,000 m2/s2 equals a lot of Joules. Expressed in more familiar terms for the power sector thats 75GWh thermal or 24GWh electric. So to summarize that 3g/day powers 1 million homes every day for 18 months. To watch the full interview on the Great Simplification podcast with Nate Hagens see the link in the replies.

46,668 views • 6 months ago

Europe imports 80% of the hydrocarbons it consumes and that oil and gas keeps getting more expensive as they unplug from Russian gas and become hostages of the Strait of Hormuz. Germany resisted deindustrialization during the “China Shock” of the early 2000’s in large part due to the ultra cheap Russian pipeline gas that it built its economy around since the 1970’s oil shocks. France electrified its way out of its oil dependence with 54 large reactors built in 20 years. Today’s Europe is short on domestically produced hydrocarbons, refuses to explore for more and has lost the state and industrial capacity to build nuclear effectively. It has somehow convinced itself that deindustrialization and offshoring emissions to Asia was climate heroism. That buying hydrocarbons from elsewhere rather than producing them at home would absolve them from their sins. Will 1970’s energy literate leadership return to Europe? What do you think?

Europe imports 80% of the hydrocarbons it consumes and that oil and gas keeps getting more expensive as they unplug from Russian gas and become hostages of the Strait of Hormuz. Germany resisted deindustrialization during the “China Shock” of the early 2000’s in large part due to the ultra cheap Russian pipeline gas that it built its economy around since the 1970’s oil shocks. France electrified its way out of its oil dependence with 54 large reactors built in 20 years. Today’s Europe is short on domestically produced hydrocarbons, refuses to explore for more and has lost the state and industrial capacity to build nuclear effectively. It has somehow convinced itself that deindustrialization and offshoring emissions to Asia was climate heroism. That buying hydrocarbons from elsewhere rather than producing them at home would absolve them from their sins. Will 1970’s energy literate leadership return to Europe? What do you think?

33,403 views • 6 months ago

China is a prisoner of geography. Its energy pragmatism is in direct response to choke points like the Strait of Hormuz, the Strait of Malacca and the first Island chain through which it’s vital liquid hydrocarbon imports, 12 million barrels of oil per day, must traverse. It is extremely vulnerable to blockade and has organized its energy policies: its massive coal fleet, impressive solar build out, EV dominance and coal to chemicals industry accordingly. For the full interview check out my interview with Nate Hagens on the Great Simplification. Link in replies.

China is a prisoner of geography. Its energy pragmatism is in direct response to choke points like the Strait of Hormuz, the Strait of Malacca and the first Island chain through which it’s vital liquid hydrocarbon imports, 12 million barrels of oil per day, must traverse. It is extremely vulnerable to blockade and has organized its energy policies: its massive coal fleet, impressive solar build out, EV dominance and coal to chemicals industry accordingly. For the full interview check out my interview with Nate Hagens on the Great Simplification. Link in replies.

24,855 views • 6 months ago

China is eating our lunch in nuclear construction. This video shows the positioning the CA01 module of a CAP1000 reactor. The CA01 module is a significant structural component designed to house key elements such as steam generators. Due to its substantial size, over 1000 tons) it is constructed on-site as a “super module” because it is too large to be transported by road or rail.

China is eating our lunch in nuclear construction. This video shows the positioning the CA01 module of a CAP1000 reactor. The CA01 module is a significant structural component designed to house key elements such as steam generators. Due to its substantial size, over 1000 tons) it is constructed on-site as a “super module” because it is too large to be transported by road or rail.

49,259 views • 1 year ago

What if the logic at the core of the SMR paradigm is faulty? One of the key promises of SMRs is to move a greater percentage of work from the unproductive construction site to a productive factory environment... but what if large modular reactors do a better job of that? Module construction for the nuclear steam supply system and balance of plant containing key components, HVAC, electrical, plumbing etc... can be moved to the factory environment in small or large modular reactors like AP1000, ABWR or the most recent CANDUs. Civil works and site preparation cannot. The problem with grid scale SMRs like BWRX-300 & AP300 etc... is that the civil works and site preparation don't scale down proportionately with the decreased reactor output. The nuclear steam supply system and turbine island is typically only 25-35% of the overnight construction cost of a nuclear plant. The civil works, site preparation, installation work dominate overnight cost. Therefore with grid scale SMRs ~300MWe you actually end up with a greater proportion of work per MWe being on the unproductive construction site compared to a large modular reactor defeating the premise and promise of SMR productivity gains.

What if the logic at the core of the SMR paradigm is faulty? One of the key promises of SMRs is to move a greater percentage of work from the unproductive construction site to a productive factory environment... but what if large modular reactors do a better job of that? Module construction for the nuclear steam supply system and balance of plant containing key components, HVAC, electrical, plumbing etc... can be moved to the factory environment in small or large modular reactors like AP1000, ABWR or the most recent CANDUs. Civil works and site preparation cannot. The problem with grid scale SMRs like BWRX-300 & AP300 etc... is that the civil works and site preparation don't scale down proportionately with the decreased reactor output. The nuclear steam supply system and turbine island is typically only 25-35% of the overnight construction cost of a nuclear plant. The civil works, site preparation, installation work dominate overnight cost. Therefore with grid scale SMRs ~300MWe you actually end up with a greater proportion of work per MWe being on the unproductive construction site compared to a large modular reactor defeating the premise and promise of SMR productivity gains.

59,623 views • 2 years ago

Introducing the ultimate workout accessory guaranteed to make you #Canadastrong. The #Candu fuel bundle. Keep your fuel and body 100% natty and 100% Canadian.

Introducing the ultimate workout accessory guaranteed to make you #Canadastrong. The #Candu fuel bundle. Keep your fuel and body 100% natty and 100% Canadian.

25,298 views • 1 year ago

Tariffs and deregulation are not going to bridge the skills gap required to re-industrialize the rust belt and reshore critical industry. A critical challenge is human capital particularly in areas like precision manufacturing. The U.S. education system is structured increasingly as a rent-extraction vehicle, focused on harvesting students debt, rather than as a pipeline for the mass production of skilled engineers and tradespeople. As Apple CEO Tim Cook points out in this video, the number of precision tool engineers in the U.S. could fit in a small auditorium, while China has enough to fill entire stadiums. Even with immediate educational reforms which due to vested interest is hard to imagine, closing this skills gap would take at least a decade.

Tariffs and deregulation are not going to bridge the skills gap required to re-industrialize the rust belt and reshore critical industry. A critical challenge is human capital particularly in areas like precision manufacturing. The U.S. education system is structured increasingly as a rent-extraction vehicle, focused on harvesting students debt, rather than as a pipeline for the mass production of skilled engineers and tradespeople. As Apple CEO Tim Cook points out in this video, the number of precision tool engineers in the U.S. could fit in a small auditorium, while China has enough to fill entire stadiums. Even with immediate educational reforms which due to vested interest is hard to imagine, closing this skills gap would take at least a decade.

11,416 views • 1 year ago

No more content to load