Reddit Posts
Small Modular Reactor Stocks may be the next tech trend. Check where to invest.
China Bans Graphite Export - Lomiko Metals $LMR $LMRMF - watchlist
ALCC - Sam Altmans SPAC, Oklo a micro nuclear reactor startup. - This thing is radioactive (Don't touch it)
The uranium sector: A lot is changing the last 3 months at the demand side. The supply side isn't ready for this (An update: the actual additional uranium demand each event creates. It's impressive) + NEW: U-turn of Sweden + NEW: Germany extending the operations of 3 reactors
The uranium sector: A lot is changing the last month at the demand side. The supply side isn't ready for this.
NuScale Power (SMR) is going to be a beast in the coming years (imo). Why?
SO Southern Company…DD and why I’m Bullish
Is this a way to get invested in a future rush on nuclear power?
Mentions
NRC cannot ‘relax’ the regs, lol. They don’t make the rules, they admin them. Regs are strigenent for a reason,
Same. Nuclear is a must. The Rus-Ukr war shows that if oil is cut off, countries (like Germany) shut down. The Texas hail that smashed $ Bil worth of solar panels proves nothing is impervious. It's nuclear waste handling that needs to be streamlined, along with prevention of anything remotely close to the Chernobyl meltdown. I hear from more knowledgable folks that Oklo has hired former NRC employees to "persuade" the govt. Seems like it is a case of cock-blocking by dinosaurs who harp too much on safety and don't realize new ideas are needed to ensure we don't run out of juice.
I want OKLO to succeed, I love nuclear Power. The NRC definitely is the scary factor at play for that company.
Nice DD but almost no one into ALCC is waiting more than a few days after merger to unload. Most just want the usual post voting day to first day of trading run up that's seen in most SPACs. And as far as the NRC denying Oklo, it is expected as the governmental regulatory body is not keen into innovative techniques, which is what Oklo is trying. Either NRC relaxes its stringent regs so pioneers can try to produce nuclear energy efficiently or firms like Oklo die out.
ALCC is tied to AI because of Sam Altman albeit indirectly. He is most likely going to leverage his OpenAI connections to create deals for Oklo which will allow them to open data centers for AI based companies that uses clean energy. You never know if the NRC activities could be getting processed in the background and some sort of announcement can happen right as the merger occurs https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/advanced/who-were-working-with/licensing-activities/pre-application-activities/okla-aurora-powerhouse.html
Thinking Oklo will come out of gate running. Altman wants to see the public accept fission in thier back yard. After merger they will have the money and clout to effect a change at the NRC. Good luck to all investors! There is a nuclear option. Burn all that waste from the past and shoot the rest into space on Elons heavy lifter. 🚀
I think the pressure is on NRC to stop saying no. We need additional energy capacity in this country. Present day public opinion of nuclear power is more favorable than the past also. It will add pressure over time.
I never knocked their ambition my friend, it’s admirable to take a bold step and change up the industry and I hope the NRC does approve their license. The problem here isn’t their bold ambition, it’s going public when it’s still a gamble as to if or when approval will be granted and how long that will be. The reality is that there’s a chance it may never get approved, the odds aren’t 0. Then what ?
Researching Oklo’s technology beyond their lack of NRC approval 2 years ago should point you to just how pessimistic this comment really is for what’s possible of this company. Their proposed design is massive, cost-efficient, sustainable, and inherently safe in its fundamentals. While I do agree that an NRC approval is the most important step, I really fail to see how their initial denial so strongly convinces you of their inability to succeed in the future… Remember that even submitting an application to the NRC takes years of research and tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars upfront which is a high hurdle for companies like Oklo who are trying to pioneer in the industry. I mean look at NuScale. Their design took 10 YEARS and over half a billion dollars invested to get an approval for a design that was comparatively much less innovative. The acquisition is IMO a clear sign that Altman knows Oklo has something worth funding.
Yes you are correct, the issue is it’s never actually been approved for license to be used. The issue is the NRC’s lack of interest in licensing anything new other than standard nuclear tech.
No problem there, that’s fine. Investors should do their research though and at least realize this is a pump and dump. Buying based on hype (and admitting so) I respect. Just disappointed in general so I thought I’d share what research I found. I guess be careful as there’s a high risk of a big name involved yes, but also a very garbage business plan as well and that will be a fine line between the hype and reality. I mean who knows, I hope the NRC actually changes their mind, it would impact the industry in a huge way and open the door. My gripe is going public before that’s even happened yet.
What research did we discover ? What I found is that the public plans submitted to the NRC are redacted publicly for request to keep company plans from competition. Ok fine, but we can’t see what’s been submitted. Secondly they already got denied by NRC and are now re-attempting to secure a license and won’t know until roughly in a year or more and even then the whole thing is hinged on this approval (that was already denied before). Their only confidence in this is hiring ex employees from the NRC to help “explain” to the NRC why their uphill battle to get licensing should be approved when no one ever has for this type of reactor before, ever. So a company that doesn’t have a license to build or do anything, no access to public records to review the plan, and the odds stacked against them that they will ever even get the proper license. Essentially this company does nothing and won’t for some time and may never do anything. I find it very irresponsible for this to even be going public and preying on shareholders based on Sam’s name, (he is only on the board of Oklo btw).
I think the merger could lead to a surge in price especially if it hits main stream news channels. I think that surge will be very small compared to when they resubmit their NRC application, and then when the Airforce chooses its SMR for Eilson AF Base, and I don't really have the time or heart to try to micro-time things. I did downsize my position some from the time of posting this, but I still have a lot riding on it. I don't want to feel anxiety about needing to watch it every minute of every day. I intend to keep my eye out for the news that will come out this year, possibly soon after merger, and enjoy the slow growth over time.
I own shares in what will soon be Oklo and I believe in them long term. They are planning on resubmitting their NRC application some time this year, and the Eielson Air Force Base, which rescinded its micro reactor pilot program because other companies protested that Oklo was the only one given a chance to participate, will be deliberating on that probably this year as well. My exit point is if Oklo does not get NRC approval for the second time, but I am betting that they will get that approval, and if they do I expect their value to double at least.
In my opinion, yes. None of the other SMRs are able to use recycled fuel for their fueling process. They all rely on the spinning up of newly enriched Uranium, and they don't do that in house. That makes for a more costly, pro-proliferation, higher waste business model. Oklo reactors are also theoretically safer for a couple reasons. They are not pressurized. There are not as many moving parts associated with their design (no rods, no cooling pumps, etc) just natural flow through expansion and contraction and cooling from naturally generated convection currents. Molten salt is perfectly fine being at the required operating temperature. These facts all differ from the other SMRs. Oklo's biggest hurdle will be regulatory. The NRC has a long precedent in reviewing light water pressurized reactors such as those brought forth by NuScale, but not so much time reviewing molten salt reactors for approval. The NRC as a regulatory body is quite picky and resistant to new ideas. They are also not really incentivized to approve new plans. However, with the growing demand for nuclear power in the US that is changing.
Lol user name checks out. I just want Oklo to succeed. Their idea for nuclear power would revolutionize the space. Waiting for their 2024 NRC application to be submitted this year.
ALCC will be infusing \~300 million cash assets into Oklo. When you couple that with the already existing current assets Oklo already has, and assume the higher end of Oklo's yearly operating costs around 75 million going forward, I don't expect them to need to borrow too much money from lenders to get up and running in the next 3 years. Couple big things will be whether they can get their fuel fabrication facility up and running successfully at INL and when the NRC finally approves their COLA application.
What I love about this company: Sam Altman, the Nuclear future, No warrants, Company is actually structured in a way that isn't like normal SPACs (Sam Altman has said they are not taking it public to dilute and raise capital). What I'm unsure of: they don't have approval from NRC currently (which is difficult to get) What I dislike: nothing currently, will update if I see anything I recommended it as a buy at $13, would sell at 20s, buy back in low teens (Not Financial Advice)
I see what you are saying. It's not meant to be an in depth technical analysis, but rather a hype video. I have more in depth reasons as to why I believe in what Oklo is doing. However, you are right, regulatory approval is a huge hurdle. Their fast reactor design is unique in the US so I expect that to be a big challenge for them. The NRC is notoriously picky.
I think it will be a slow buildup, but I don't see them losing much value from here. If you calculate their current share price based on hard tangible cash assets and the maximum outstanding shares alone I consider this to be a good entry point. Keep in mind, while you are correct that they may not have an up and running power plant at the moment, that translates into low operating costs for now, until they begin construction. The big thing will be their NRC application getting approved. I am trading on where I believe they will be in the future.
I apologize for the lack of clarity. The NRC comes back with requests for more information. And the do it over and over and over again. If a company has near infinite resources, then they get through the approval process because the NRC eventually runs out of questions (see, for example, Westinghouse with the AP-1000). Sometimes a company runs out of money before the NRC runs out of questions (see, for example, M-Power). So the NRC didn't reject M-Power's application - they just didn't approve it before the money ran out. In the case of Oklo, the NRC was asking for additional information, and they felt that the company was being unresponsive after being asked multiple times. So, the NRC outright rejected their application. The documents showing this back and forth are on the NRC's web site (although most of the technical details are not included).
Being rejected by the NRC is not that hard to do. They are not the first company to be turned away by the NRC at first. They are also notoriously picky about what they want. Do you have a source you are referring to, or know why exactly they were rejected? Their design is very unique so to me it’s no wonder they would face more regulatory hurdles. It’s a very conservative body. It’s also not a secret that their first application was denied, but that they were told to come back and try again. The DoE is funding them in part. The DoE would not fund them if their NRC application was ultimately doomed. I believe they’ll get approval.
I'll note that Oklo has the dubious distinction of being the only company working on SMRs to have their license application outright rejected by the NRC. That's actually hard to do.
It's not exactly news that Oklo was denied their initial NRC application. Oklo readily admits they had deficiencies. They received backing anyways, from very prominent people. That's because their concept would pave the way for accessing and utilizing fuel waste. A hurdle that none of the other companies you listed had to deal with. They are trailblazing a path to a new potential market. Kairos seems great. I went to Berkeley though. Berkeley professors do not always know what they are doing. Some of them are so smart, they are stupid. However, I am not arguing with you that Kairos might also be a good investment in the future if they go public.
I don’t disagree that the US approval process is overly onerous, and possibly even adverse to nuclear safety sometimes, but that’s not what happened with Oklo. They just didn’t know what they were doing and weren’t able to supply basic information that they should’ve had going into licensing and at least should have been able to provide when the NRC requested it. If you invest in Oklo, you’re probably going to get burned. Their only advantage is that Sam Altman is backing them now, which will make it harder for them to go under. Also, Kairos is headed by nuclear engineer PhDs and professors from Berkeley who know what they’re doing and have approved CPAs for their test reactors. Just because they’re in the bay area doesn’t mean they’re silicon valley trash.
Kairos is also a bay area company, funnily enough. Of the ones you listed, I believe Kairos is also the only one with NRC construction approval. The other companies are in the application phase still. Whether they get rejected initially is still very much possible. The real joke is the licensing process in the US compared to other countries that are miles ahead of us. A rejection is a setback, but I think it is not the most unexpected thing when it comes to NRC approval, especially for emerging reactor plant designs. They do have the go ahead to acquire spent fuel waste and use that to construct a reactor for proof of concept testing. That is a good sign.
I didnt notice the mention, but to me both are going down the same road. They both need to be given the go ahead by the NRC and both have about the same chance of getting it. I could see either as a buy and hold for 15 years from now when they perhaps become profitable but I'd still be weary of buying Oklo now and holding. Especially if they run into another denial from the NRC after going public.
I understand your enthusiasm. However there is already a test case on the market with $SMR and since its merger the price has been halved. I'd go for a short trip with ALCC but until there is some movement with the NRC on the new reactor design I'll be staying clear of these. Or just buy SMR on the dip now if thats your thinking.
That’s definitely a good step but I think they still have a hurdle with the NRC(?) that basically asked them to submit a renewed application and they would consider it. Can’t find any news if there’s been progress. The merger happening two months ahead of schedule is definitely great news though!!
Shares for me. It’ll be years before they get NRC approval (if at all).
From the denial letter opening paragraph: “The purpose of this letter is to inform Oklo Inc. (Oklo) of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff’s decision to deny the custom combined license application for the Aurora micro-reactor pursuant to the requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 2, “Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure,” Section 2.108, “Denial of application for failure to supply information.” Because Oklo has provided insufficient information, as discussed below, for the NRC staff to establish a schedule to review key safety and design aspects of Aurora, the agency is ending its custom combined license application review and denying the application without prejudice. Oklo is free to resubmit its application supplemented by additional information in the areas described below.”
How and when are they putting their SMR in the ground?? Has it passed NRC regulators or even been submitted? No.
Please review their investor day slides. Primary reasons I'm staying away from this for several years: Regulatory 2nd COLA application won't be submitted until late this year, probably next year. While they worked with NRC to update what was lacking in the first submittal (2020), I believe that lack of precedent with light water reactors will significantly delay approval. Probably 2027-28. Infrastructure and Operations They highlight in their risk factors that they could be wildly underestimating the cost to build each reactor facility ($77m with 2 acre plot). These will not be fully automated and will require at least some presence of a highly skilled workforce - counterintuitive to one of their pillars of "rural and remote" areas. The reactor may be innovative and state of the art, but it's generating heat (steam) that spins a turbine and is rectified for immediate DC use or converted for efficient transmission AC. Recycling of used fuel (Uranium) This is a very significant part of their path to profitability and assumes fuel cost can be reduced by 80%. This is an incredibly complex process that they have no plan for processing on-site at the reactor facilities. If it needs to be outsourced, I imagine a pretty large fee would be required if they were to receive back the U/TRU. I understand investor days aren't for this level of detail, but it's a vital component of their business plan, and it's entirely glossed over. Cool concept. Long road full of lessons learned before this is remotely profitable. GL playing the pump on news, but bail if profit is beyond the horizon.
I think biggest ticker will be if Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) gives them the license they want
The reason I saw for denial was “incomplete application.” As in, the application referenced some appendices or tables that weren’t included in the application. The application was only 600 pages and another submitted by a different company was 12000. NRC said something like, “the application was dismissed without prejudice and OKLO is free to submit another application in the future.” I believe I read all of this info on the NRC website. If I find it again I will link it.
At the time of their application, they hadn’t approved a single design in 30 years. The NRC literally has no incentive to. There was a lot of negative response to the NRC for the denial bc of this, and bc they weren’t specific at all in their reasoning. AFAIK their plant automatically shuts down due to the laws of physics if it’s interrupted.
It’s so funny how wrong you are about so many things but are acting like you know what you’re talking about lol. The NRC didn’t “shit on them” at all, they gave them nebulous suggestions about safety (do you have any idea about what that involves here? With the NRC, they have to provide for a meteorite hitting it, bombs dropping on it, the largest tsunami hitting it at the same time as the largest earthquake ever recorded etc etc I’m not kidding. And guess what- their design shuts off just by the laws of physics if something were to go wrong.) and they had never approved a single application for multiple decades bc why would they? The NRC has zero incentive to approve anything. and so they hadn’t at the time of their submission for more than 3 decades. That’s part of why it was so controversial when their application was denied, bc nothing ever gets approved by the NRC. Having to resubmit an application was practically drawn in the sand, it means nothing about their actual safety. Nuclear is the safest form of energy by far, even including wind and solar, and even including Chernobyl and Fukushima and anything else you can think of. It’s extremely safe. A nuclear reactor has almost nothing in common with a nuclear bomb, I think you must be getting them confused or something.. It’s not a paper reactor at all what are you talking about, it’s based on a reactor that has already worked. They just need to get it built and get the dumbasses at the NRC to work with their perfectly safe design. Also- the c-suite literally cannot Adam Neuman their way out, they can’t cash out any amount of stock for another year, and can’t cash out more than that small amount for years after that. They have every incentive to make this really work. And that’s why it’s going up right now before the merger is finalized, when only one other SPAC has done so since 2021. Also, fusion sucks, it has never produced any energy even though people have been trying so hard to for 50 years, so yes Helion is never, ever going to make money. (Feel free to remind me if I’m wrong and please bet me a million dollars if I’m wrong, I’ll give you 3 decades? I’m good for it, it’d be nice to have some more retirement money.) These are entirely different technologies, Oklo is fission, which is what currently supplies 20% of our country’s energy and obviously very proven out- like this reactor, which is just a scaled down version of a proven tech. But please go ahead and keep talking out of your ass. Or I’ll wait on all your specifics, since you definitely know about this lol. Can’t wait to see the creativity.
A lot of SPACs are a scam bc they’re a fundraising pump and dump. This one has personal incentives for the company’s leadership to hit certain stock values over years to be able to cash out. That, and the vast majority of their investors are holding. Also, do you think these people, including Sam A who’ve been at this more than a decade, gotten an extremely laborious NRC application in, and taken upfront money from companies who’ve signed LOIs with them just to fail now? Nah. This is legit. Mark my words this one is going to absolutely crush it over the next year.
Oklo had their first license application with the NRC rejected due to lack of sufficient safety justification. They have an uphill battle to climb in regulatory space.
I don't work for Nuscale, but a different US based SMR company. 1) I think they are worth it for their flexibility in application, long design life, and carbon free power generation. Right now, with how expensive commodities are and with rigorous safety requirements from the NRC, SMRs will not the cheapest source of energy. But they have the potential to get cheaper over time with an expanded supply chain and regulations that are tailored for advanced reactors. 2) depends on the company. Our company wants to develop the tech and license the technology to customers, as well provide life time support services such as centralized maintenance and ops training. 3) I believe in the mission and importance of them, but it's still a risky bet across the board because of the up front costs of nuclear. Being an advanced reactor right now doesn't make it much cheaper per MW, so if the industry can get over the initial cost hump while still having our company and our competitors remain in business, the sky is the limit in the coming decades.
They have been running even on missed earnings. Standard Design Approval application accepted and under review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Only company right now with an accepted SDR
Sales pitch of SMR is (alleged) easier permitting due to improved passive safety, lower EPC costs to build, lower capital cost per project (spread project finance risk over multiple sites), easier refueling, easier operation. Of course none of these things have been proven and you're still dealing with the same NRC for permitting so I have my doubts.
Being approved by the NRC already with a design certification is a double edged sword. They haven't started building anything yet, and their approved design is too expensive, which is why their first project was cancelled. And if they want to make any changes, their approval means the NRC is going to be peeking up their skirt for everything. They worked themselves into a bad spot by going for the design certification before building their first reactor. Nuscale is in for a rough ride over the next several years.
Idk it seems unlikely to me that they would have even begun negotiations without a high level of certainty that the NRC would approve. The NRC are dumbass scumbags tho so who knows whats going on behind the scenes.
Design approval and construction approval are two different applications to the NRC. Their “deal” was a power purchase agreement, which is great don’t get me wrong, you can use it to get financing for the construction. But it is not a permit to construct or operate a reactor. https://www.eenews.net/articles/nuscale-cancels-first-of-a-kind-nuclear-project-as-costs-surge/ https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/smr/licensing-activities/nuscale.html “NuScale first got NRC approval for a 50-MW reactor _design_ in July of last year — a design that’s different than the proposed 77-MW reactors that were canceled Wednesday. The company had also signed agreements earlier this year to develop and deploy SMRs with Nucor, the country’s largest steel producer, and Fluor a Texas-based engineering and construction firm.”
NuScale has not been given permission by the NEC (sic) to build nuclear plants. They haven’t even applied for a license to build a plant, much less operate one. They have a “design certification” meaning someone, in theory, could take their designs and build plants with them. I like nuclear in general and I’m so so on NuScale. But the NRC is a quagmire and everything takes longer than you think it will.
SMR is also debt free and has the first NRC approved small modular reactor design but it is a risky bet imo. I have my eye on it tho
URA, under priced nuclear etf. Will likely go up a bit before mid march, likely go up a lot by end of year unless market crashes SMR, first company with NRC approved small modular reactor design, getting first contracts to build them now. A bit risky as someone else could now make a cheaper design before they can build up but as of now they will likely increase 1000s of % by 2030. They also have no debts, over 200mil in bank, and lots of government funding. Westinghouse could be undervalued, depends on if we really are gonna start going down the nuclear road in the next 10 years which I am extremely bullish on, their new reactor just reached its first criticality and will be joining the electric grid in second quarter this year
But he could use his AI (can you feel it) to engineer the reactor and obtain approval from the NRC….
Oklo is a garbage nuclear company good at advertising themselves as being super innovative and smart like 99% of the garbage "tech" companies out there right now. They tried to submit a license application for one of their reactors to the NRC and it got shat on so hard that it might as well been a toilet bowl. Their shit is a paper reactor and it's going to stay that way until the dumb money for it (aka apparently Sam Altman now) dries up, which may be never at this point.
I like Uranium plays and think nuclear is the future, but perhaps am a little biased by being deeply interested in nuclear energy. On the bullish side of the coin: - Uranium is in limited supply, and new mining methods are being experimented with to increase yields. There are companies with large stakes in Canada (Denison Mines, $DNN) that have new high-yield mining methods in the pipeline. Increase in nuclear energy usage will increase demand for uranium, which will increase the need for mining companies. - Energy crisis and tightening down on "dirty" energy and non-renewables. With grid demand getting closer to capacity and in some cases outpacing it (Texas a few winters ago, summer in parts of US and UK), the need for more grid capacity is increasing. As governments tighten down on environmental standards, more renewable and clean energy sources will need to be used. Solar and Wind are intermittent and have wild inefficiencies - nuclear has neither of these problems. - Continuing on the point above, renewables are wildy inefficient and do not have long lifespans. Nuclear does not have this issue and can be (in my opinion, will need to) be the stepping stone to get to renewable energy. Nuclear is incredibly efficient, very safe, and provides the needed energy for a failing power frid. On the bearish side: - Public perception. Most of the public seems to dislike nuclear and at the very least are fearful of it. Nuclear incidents such as Three Mile Island in the US, Fukushima in Japan, and Chernobyl in the then USSR are the contributors to the this. Lack of public support could be detrimental to growth in the nuclear sector, ESPECIALLY if there is another incident in the next few years. - Cost and construction. Nuclear facilities are unbelievably expensive to build, virtually always completing construction well behind schedule and over budget. In most cases these roadblocks are at or very close to prohibitive levels. With these sorts of issues, it is very difficult for companies to build new nuclear and discourages them from even attempting it. Overall, I'm bullish on anything nuclear. I think the world is slowly transitioning to a more nuclear focused future, at least in the short term. My main concerns are in regards to construction cost and many of the companies making the new facilities such as Nuscale (SMR) sustaining losses before they can turn a profit. I can see it going both ways where it ends up dying off, but for the time being I'm generally feeling positive about it. This is all not to mention all of the Gen IV reactor types that are soon to be introduced and used with the NRC recently approving new designs. Additionally, you have companies like Terrapower working on incredibly efficient designs like SMR's.
Only thing I wanted to clarify: the nuclear tax is not only for reactor components. Every single nut, bolt, fitting, etc in the entire structure is heavily regulated under NRC.
Yea, I saw that short report. My view is if the world is going to do new Nuclear then it needs to be an SMR and NuScale already has NRC approval and is rapidly approaching the final stage. Most other designs have just started this process a year or so ago while NuScale has been at it for decades and already has 2 customers doing early site prep. The short sellers are right they do have financing issues and I expect another capital raise which will hurt SMR shareholders but that's why I recommend Fluor who owns some equity but more importantly will be making a nice return building the reactors. Fluor also has plenty of prospects outside of this. Precious metals & rare earth materials, oil refineries, LNG terminals, infrastructure, nuclear decommissioning even ozempic lol. So they're not reliant on the success of Nuclear but will benefit.
1) Look at the ratio of stocks to spot price. Equities are way undervalued and did not move proportionately to spot. Besides, we are all waiting for a 2007 style spike. 2) The only reason NPPs take so long and cost so much is directly because of the NRC. Imagine being under the thumb of an organization that can completely scrap your design *midway* through construction (which has happened multiple times). There is no reason to to increase the cost of these plants by billions of dollars to get an extra 0.0001% safety margin. 3) Agree with you here. The hoi polloi still have a ways to go before understanding the benefits and safeness of nuclear power.
But NuScales reactors are not only small, but modular. It’s that aspect that is probably proprietarily patented to their reactor. Which would make replicating it AND getting NRC approval so difficult. It’s a similar reason to why there is only one EMS reporting software that has a depiction of a human body that you can use to illustrate the chief complaint and what is wrong with that person. ESO is the only software that has it. Because they patented that aspect of the software. And they make small changes to it and renew it every 2 years to keep the patent.
Sounds like calls on NuScale Power (SMR). They’re the only ones who have a new design that got greenlit by the NRC recently.
Gates is backing a company called TerraPower who’s supposed to be developing several reactor technologies, Abilene Christian University received permits from NRC to build their Molten Salt Reactor in the near future. Nuclear is the future only if the general public can get past ignorance regarding nuclear safety.
>The fastest nuclear power plant built was 39 months, not 10 years. wasn't talking about that, was talking about US power grid and its most 2 recent reactors built took 10 years..... >If the U.S. can't do that, it's because of red tape. *According to a University of Pittsburgh study at the time, “the time from ground-breaking to operation testing was increased from 42 months in 1967, to 54 months in 1972, to 70 months in 1980,” quadrupling total construction costs. Similarly, regulatory requirements inflated the quantity of concrete required by 27%, the length of electrical cable by 36%, the amount of steel by 41%, and the volume of piping 50%.* *Costs and regulatory liabilities have only continued to escalate. Nowadays, it takes 6.7 years on average just for the NRC to just approve a reactor license, and a further 9 years to construct a plant. According to a recent Energy Policy study, the U.S. is unique in its rapid cost escalation, while the paper concludes that “there is no inherent cost escalation trend associated with nuclear technology.”* >France, China, India, Japan, and all these other countries are operating far more intelligently than America is. China and India source energy production is predominately coal, operating far more intelligently is a silly way to try and prove your point. >That's not the grid's fault. first time meeting a grid apologist.... just so you are aware we scored a C- by the society of civil engineers who know far more about this than you or I. [https://infrastructurereportcard.org/cat-item/energy-infrastructure](https://infrastructurereportcard.org/cat-item/energy-infrastructure) >You have a point that batteries suck. They do suck. They are also totally crappy for the environment no matter how you slice it. Never said anything specific about batteries, strawman. I said energy storage that can take the form of many things: frictionless flywheels, water towers, gravity sleds, compressed air, power to fuel, thermal storage, and yes Grid level LFP Batteries! >What percent of the free flat ground in the U.S. (leave the trees standing, don't bulldoze the houses, work around the roads, farmers keep farming, etc) would have to be blanketed by solar in order to supply 100% of the power needs of America, pretending we could just wish sufficient battery power into existence? >100%? *In 2050, ground-based solar technologies require a maximum land area equivalent to 0.5% of the contiguous U.S. surface area. This requirement could be met in numerous ways, including the use of disturbed or contaminated lands unsuitable for other purposes.* direct from the DoE study on the subject..... but we are talking about a mix of energy sources because we live in real life, it doesn't need to be 100% solar. We do need a way to store the solar energy we could easily put in arid dry desert areas where land is cheap and relatively unused. [https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/solar-futures-study](https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/solar-futures-study)
Yeah, who needs OSHA, the FAA, the NRC, the NTSB, the clean air and water act, the FDA, etc, etc, etc. it’d be much better if we just let corporations decide how they’d like to run.
NRC no longer for sale. It is already on the road to recovery.
That’s true. I’m sure the 3 powers: NRC, INPO, and NEI see them as cash cows.
The NRC will ensure no one profits from smr technology
AAC.W I think redemption Gina be a dick kicking, but I have even odds on HTGR approval through the NRC, and considering it requires no feed water and burns less fuel (even while breeding) if this one hits it hits hard.
>Son/daughter of IAS/APS officers deserve quota seats because some hapless villager has to face "castism"? Yes because discrimination doesn't end at the village level. > And I would have no problem with it if it were true.. and god I wish it were true.. in reality BJP is such a pathetic party that they are not even good at fascism.. not uniform civil code, no NRC, Unable to kick-out illegal Bangladeshi/Rohingyas, Unable to stop massive religious subsidies to muslims, failure to reign in archaic madarassa system.. the list goes on.. They need to learn fascim from maino family.. she stopped conversion of NE christians into Jewish faith without any fuss.. So you're openly advocating for fascism? Gotcha.
>You're implying that casteism was a thing of the past and doesn't exist anymore Son/daughter of IAS/APS officers deserve quota seats because some hapless villager has to face "castism"? > multiply it by 100 and you could attribute that to the BJP. And I would have no problem with it if it were true.. and god I wish it were true.. in reality BJP is such a pathetic party that they are not even good at fascism.. not uniform civil code, no NRC, Unable to kick-out illegal Bangladeshi/Rohingyas, Unable to stop massive religious subsidies to muslims, failure to reign in archaic madarassa system.. the list goes on.. They need to learn fascim from maino family.. she stopped conversion of NE christians into Jewish faith without any fuss.. > And why do the citizens of our country vote for the more extreme fascist? Answer is simple.. one is our fascist. The other is someone else's fascist.. One fascist group claims it wants to make India Superpower, the other one goes to pakistan and touches feet of their military jarnails.. and goes to china and gets into secret agreements with CCP. I mean, is it even that hard to choose? lol..
Generation 4 is more of a marketing thing, really. It incorporates safety features of Gen3+ and tacks on "sustainability" and "nuclear weapons proliferation" tags on it. When it comes to actual function, safety, and usability, there's not much actually different. Where $SMR differs from that specific one is critical in a few areas. 1) Limited modularity. XEnergy can expand their system only in to a 4 pack, at 320MWe max output. NuScale can go up to 12 with their plant design and produce 924MWe. 2) [XEnergy is still in pre-application activities with the NRC](https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/advanced/licensing-activities/pre-application-activities/xe-100.html), they don't even have an approved product yet. [NuScale does](https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/smr/licensing-activities/nuscale/review-schedule.html), which gives NuScale *years* of advantage in the area as a first mover. In the power space, especially nuclear power, that's a huge advantage. They get to enjoy the influx of "new tech, implement!" excitement, but by the time their competitors are getting off the ground, they're then the "proven track record" option in the bidding process vs the "new unknown." IMO, I think the first mover advantage is crucial, and gives $SMR massive potential.
It should be noted that while this is true, nuclear accidents are far from clean, they pollute hundreds of miles. Almost certainly further depending on wind conditions in that particular environment. The NRC has before been caught acting in bad faith, multiple business owners (their names escape me but three mile island is the accident you can look up to find the names for reference) ignored critical NRC and safety regulations. Just to start the convo.
Ticker is $SMR. The technology looks good, but they are still building the first units. They're designed to be built on an assembly line and trucked to the new facility. Plants can be 400, 800, or 1200 MW designs. All the safety systems are totally passive. Units are arranged to minimize impact of refueling and inspections. Downside is it's completely unproven and the AP1000 designs set the industry back a few years. Keep an eye on someone getting a combined operating license from the NRC and this could be good money.
The stateside HTGR licensed company X-Energy gonna merge with AAC, a SPAC. HTGR is a moonshot tech, a riskier but higher return version of my other Modular Reactor play - SMR. Both are high potential in my eyes, but X-Energy might legit be a millionaire maker, with a lag due to NRC approvals. SMR has the head start their, but their reactor tech is just ABWR4 stuff. Good, safe, but ultimately will phase out or roll over to HTGR. X-Energy got the Japan license for the tech already, and HTGR allows for Red Hydrogen production (Emissions Negative) compared to current Hydrogen production facilitated by cracking methane. Long story short as energy demands increase and water availability decreases, HTGR are gonna be a super tech for both desalination, H2 production, and general grid demands. Play the uranium, sure. But this shit is also cash. I mean suck my dick don't copy trade me I'm a Jeenius.
Modular reactors gonna be fab in the near future. SMR has a good chance to pick up a lot of sales for fast deploy high energy consumption until HTGRs get the NRC nod. XEnergy looks pretty for HTGR, but SMR might be able to leverage the modular angle harder. That's still 10+ years out.
“Here are some guidelines: Assuming 70 degree temperature, 1,100 pound cow, non-lactating = 9 gallons per day. Assuming 70 degree temperature, 1,100 pound cow, lactating = 20 gallons per day. Reference: NRC, Nutrient Requirement of Beef Cattle, seventh Revised Edition, Update 2000”
As far as I know, they haven't submitted a design to the NRC as they're doing their work solely for the British gov't. Westinghouse has their [eVinci SMR](https://www.westinghousenuclear.com/energy-systems/evinci-micro-reactor) that is much smaller, but their first one seems to be targeted for Canada. I don't know their NRC design timeline or if the EPZ will be limited to the site perimeter fence. Both of these are already in place for [NuScale](https://www.nuscalepower.com/technology/technology-overview). There is a Danish company working on a [molten-salt reactor](https://www.seaborg.com/) as a power barge. Very exciting. [Kairos Power](https://kairospower.com/) from Alameda, CA has an interesting high-temp molten-salt cooled pebble bed reactor, but is privately funded but not SMR, per se. Then there's Bill Gates' funded [TerraPower](https://www.terrapower.com/our-work/natriumpower/) doing their natrium reactor (not SMR) as a coal plant retrofit. Very exciting. Although, I like their traveling wave reactor much better in the long-term as it addresses our above ground storage waste of DUF4... nearly one thousand years of fuel all ready to go if we went with 100% nuclear power in the USA using their traveling wave reactor.
The regulatory hurdles are past. Their VOYGR design is [approved](https://www.protocol.com/bulletins/nuscale-smr-approval-nuclear-power) by the NRC, it took eight years, and also the [EPZ](https://adamswebsearch2.nrc.gov/webSearch2/main.jsp?AccessionNumber=ML22287A155) for plume safety means it can be built in populated areas. No other nuclear reactor can do this. Build it and they will come
Tell that to Europeans that can’t afford to heat their homes this winter. Nuclear isn’t a viable option in places like the US since the NRC (nuclear regulatory commission) has been taken over by radicals that haven’t approved any new nuclear in multiple decades. The most expensive part of nuclear is the permits and paperwork.
What! Diablo Canyon was leaking radiation?!?!? Look even if it were leaking radiation or contamination there is an acceptable amount outlined by the EPA. I can confirm that it never crossed that threshold. Along with that there’s talks with the NRC of keeping Diablo Canyon open due to energy requirements and cost of energy rising. So as of now they are still keeping talks open. Either way California is a stupid state for being against nuclear when they have nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers in San Diego.
Look up SALP. SALP was easy to skirt around if you had good inspection reports. ROP now requires a baseline minimum amount of inspections on safety significant systems. I mean they are private companies that own these nuclear plants…they have to receive a license from us to operate. They also have to keep NRC resident inspectors on site. I would say the nuclear industry could flourish if we got more government backing in small modular reactors. If you want to learn more just go to the NRC website. It’s all public information. You can even see our requirements for inspections and the instructions for them.
True, to date nuclear reactors have been large one offs taking forever to construct. This will not the case with small modular reactors, which will be the model-T of nuclear reactors / being made on an assembly line. The NRC just approved the first SMR ever and dow chemical has just decided to use SMRs for process heat in their chemical plants. There is a lot to be excited about in the nuclear power world.
Completely different rules now than before. The NRC now uses an ROP (Reactor Oversight Program) compared to SALP which had lots of problems. In today’s regulations that wouldn’t happen. Source work as a regulator.
Lol did you not research what actually happened? You can watch the documentary too. Here. >The cleanup was risky, arduous and behind schedule. Bechtel received funds upon completion of individual tasks, incentivizing the company and its hirer, General Public Utilities (GPU), to cut corners and ignore NRC regulations. Like I said. Private companies will cut corners. https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2022/may/05/meltdown-three-mile-island-netflix-us-nuclear-accident
Because they cut corners to save costs. >The cleanup was risky, arduous and behind schedule. Bechtel received funds upon completion of individual tasks, incentivizing the company and its hirer, General Public Utilities (GPU), to cut corners and ignore NRC regulations. Don't try to downplay what happened. https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2022/may/05/meltdown-three-mile-island-netflix-us-nuclear-accident
This is a brain dead take. They would still fall under review of the NRC to even have a license.
AFAIK Nuscale has Gen3+ (ie. Gen3 with NRC approved safety features) technology. I know there's already Gen4 technology. I was wondering what your opinion is on Gen4 (ie. [https://x-energy.com/](https://x-energy.com/) \- not public yet) and how it might impact Nuscale? cc: quick information regarding generation differences: [https://www.polytechnique-insights.com/en/braincamps/energy/the-latest-technological-advances-in-nuclear-energy/nuclear-what-is-a-4th-generation-reactor/](https://www.polytechnique-insights.com/en/braincamps/energy/the-latest-technological-advances-in-nuclear-energy/nuclear-what-is-a-4th-generation-reactor/)
Fuck dude, like 62% is produced without oil. Just place less regulation on nuclear. That'd solve the problem easy. Right now, cost to build a nuke plant is primarily regulatory compliance. Fucking gut the NRC and allow SMR production and bam, our entire energy "problem" is solved. Plus, nuke can provide base load while wind and solar can't.
Well the ticker is $SMR it's actually Nuscale power corporation. A quote from their IR "In 2020, NuScale’s NPM became the first and only SMR to receive Standard Design Approval from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The advanced design of the NPM eliminates the need for two-thirds of the safety systems and components found in today’s large commercial reactors, which significantly improves the economics of NuScale plants compared to traditional nuclear power plants."
I threw some money into NuScale Power Corp. They build small nuclear reactors ( cheaper & possibly accessible for smaller communities in the future) and got approval from the NRC this year. Will hold and see where it goes, chart looks promising so far
Not necessarily, no. They're just companies whose success could be influenced by NRC employees. I just thought it was a good list. Other people in the thread have spoken about their favorites.
I agree with you on some points. Transparency is paramount. We cannot have someone who get up and tell people that everything is ok, when they don’t know the complete situation. As bad as 3MI was, it could have been much worse, and I think that’s what people get wrong. The look at the outcome instead of the potential outcome in this situation. I am less worried about the government making the right decisions on things. The NRC has been beefed up to go conduct inspections and tests of operators and plant facilities. Nuclear accident plans have been made so people have guidelines on how to react, and what actions to take to mitigate damages. The navy has been operating nuclear power plants for >50 years and are able to pull into ports in places where they otherwise won’t allow nuclear power plants to operate. This shows you that a government agency can be trusted. I think that nuclear power is a solution, we need to be able to test and advance to be able to come up with newer/better/safer designs. I also agree with you on saying that it’s not -the- solution. We need to use the correct solution for the situation. Solar/wind/hydro/nuclear should be incorporated in the designs to get away from fossil fuels. Current nuclear plant designs require a source of water, not only for power generation but for plant safety, that will not work well in some areas. Just like solar requires sunlight and works better in some areas than others. We can have a mixture of solutions. I think you have a good opinion and it’s is probably more in line with what the general public thinks. It gives us the issues that we need to address before people are comfortable moving forward with additional nuclear energy.
I think everyone agrees with you. That is the reason that we have the NRC and is to reduce the chance of leaks happening. Everything that we know about 3MI is because of the inspections/reports. The determined the root causes and implemented corrective actions across the entire us to ensure that the same problems don’t happen again. Waste is an issue that already has solution, but is hampered by politics. Reprocessing facilities exists in England and France and reduce the same nuclear waste that the us has into a fraction of the amount. Additionally, you get viable (nuclear fuel) out of the waste that can still be used. When the US pursued nuclear proliferation treaties with the USSR, they signed agreements that prevented them from being able to reprocess their own fuel, due to the possibility that it could be used to make additional warheads. That was about 40-50 years ago. It might be time for a change.
Bought after NRC approved their design
what >#NIKE RUNNING CLUB #NRC APP WILL TERMINATE ITS SERVICES IN MAINLAND CHINA FROM JULY 8. https://twitter.com/Sino_Market/status/1534375330164756481
Yeah. I'm glad they at least showed the NRC dude laughing that guy off
Won't happen domestically (at least in an appreciable way). I'd double any timeline and cost estimate NuScale puts out. Westinghouse told their plants could be online in 48months after first nuclear concrete - two plants (Vogtle) are well beyond that timeline and the only other two (VC Summer) got shuttered due to delays and cost overruns. Oh NuScale is innovating with modular principles? So did Westinghouse and it was/is a trainwreck. Oh they have tons of interest from utilities? I'm convinced that's smoke and mirrors until I see a contract signed. Utilities during the "nuclear renaissance" started doing early site evaluation studies through the NRC for Westinghouse/Areva/Mitsubishi's new plant designs with some getting licenses approved. But no movement. In the finer details a lot of that is considered a capital investment and in regulated states the company can pass on the licensing/testing cost onto the rate base. So even if no plant is ever built the utility gets to charge more money. Just look at all the issued COLAs that are idle and (most likely) won't be used: (https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/col.html) Don't get me wrong- I love the tech and believe nukes are a vital role moving forward. However I just don't think they'll be viable unless oil/NG stays stupid high.
I am a bot from /r/wallstreetbets. You submitted one or more banned tickers: NRC. Message /u/zjz if they're above 1.5 billion-ish market cap and not related to crypto/pennies/OTC.
Never underestimate the power of NIMBY. Nuscale was found in 2007 and started their approval process with the NRC in 2008. Their first reactor will go online in 2029. That’s 21 years. There is still a very long wait time for approval for each site as well as rounds of public comment and lawsuits. Any little hiccup at any site will basically halt all future work for several years. The US is just a really bad environment to try this in.
Thorium is a byproduct of rare-earth refining. There's not much of that going on in the USA because the NRC classifies thorium as radioactive waste, making it expensive to deal with. Even if that changes, thorium will be oversupplied to the markets and not worth very much.
I'm gonna dig but if I remember right they passed NRC preliminary review.
I think we are at the bottom too. I bought several stocks I had my eye on today: CSCO, JBSS, and NRC.
Sure - CMI LYB TTC FNF NRC (no particular order) are in my portfolio, and I think they're all cheap relative to their quality
There is no enriched uranium production presently in the US. Centrus is the domestic fuel rod supplier to a majority of US nuke plants. They are also pilot plant manufacturing HALEU fuel under a DOE contract which was explicitly mentioned today as critical domestic technolgy. Cameco(CCJ) Canadian miner is the only North American vertically integrated Uranium miner, enricher, and fuel rod supplier, but they cannot ramp to fulfill all contracts. They have a joint venture (75%) with Silex(25%) program to produce enriched uranium via laser isotope separation. The program is called Global Laser Enrichment, and program is in the US. Centrus gets enriched uranium via the Tenex contract with Russia, but also from Oreno, a French owned supplier (formerly known as Areva, last uranium cycle). Light bridge and Centrus will likely receive beaucoup support to advance their HALEU fuel rod development and manufacturing. Flour will be a 60% equity holder of NuScale, the DOE and NRC approved SMC small modular reactor under development for 20 + years; design which has approval for construction and multi national backing. In summary, a majority of the global electric base load grid could be converted to SMR designed power generation over the next few decades, and the fuel cycle companies mentioned above are going to benefit far more than a long shot bet on moose pasture, aka a uranium explorer. This is my synopsis of research in the sector. It is volatile, but for good reason.
And the one used to put out the fire, too. I mean, just imagining worst case scenarios if the fire were to reach critical areas. But the risk of this becoming a disaster like Chernobyl is pretty much zero. However, there can be consequences among the local population like an increased cancer rate several years down the road, or the situation could be used for potential war crimes. I’ll check the NRC stuff, too. Thanks!