free energy would destroy global warming false narrative from co2, which would stop global government new world order thats why they kill free energy scientists

Unfortunately dumbness is now abundant in the US. A cat sliding down a stair rail will get millions of views

I know right? He adds huge value to the conversation by thinking through these technical public policy matters "out loud" for the rest of our benefit.

Wonder your opinion on thorium bed reactors

At least he’s getting views. This guy would be covered in dust without the JBP influence 😂 What’s extra sad is to see JBPs subscribers count vs these noname idiots pulling pranks or running around in their huge mansions with their “fam”. We are in the first steps of “Idiocracy” :( Start buying stock in Gatorade ! 😂

Look on the bright side, compared with the last one, you’re in the running for “Most Improved terrible government of the century “

Organise and replace your government

Hello! Can you give some perspective about energry prices in Germany? how bad it is really?

@@CircumambulationMaedia Working on that, will take some more thime tho...

@@Neront90 Just asked Google, for new customers in Germany its about 25cents/kWh in the US its about half 12,69 ct/kWh

cant u just make kangaroos run on a threadmill

And when they don't do that, they bring up Chernobyl and Fukushima. Which were both examples of terrible management instead of the norm.

they do that with vaping and smoking too,if you ask them you beter sty on cancer sticks rather than vaping.corruption has no limits.

we have 2 reactors already, but we must make more solar panels and carbon credits. Also Australia has some old mines that we could get going reasonably quickly if you want to send the money and Workforces

Correct me if I'm wrong. Australia is going nuclear, they're building submarines with the British, aren't they?

Well spoken.

free energy would destroy global warming false narrative from co2, which would stop global government new world order thats why they kill free energy scientists

Ah I hadn't realised he had passed. A fine man and proper journalist

I'm sure he appreciates being reminded about it by random people on every video.

Deepest sympathies for you loss Dr Peterson.

N.G.O.s , laundry money around to "help the poor people" " the poor people" created poor by their definition and society they created and illuminate. The paper they claim has value is the same paper they created. "Democracy knocking st your door" military industrial complex waiting to drop bombs to sell that land to blackrock contracts to rebuild the land they destroyed to generate profits for their buddies.

Precisely

Great take! I'd add: fake scarcity is very profitable (Energy, Health-technologies, Diamonds, Food, etc.)

​@@lightingman117I'll edit: monopoly is very profitable

@@lisajones1438 Agreed. Though IMO the main problem (this comes from Thomas Sowell's Basic Economics Books) Isn't the monopoly itself, it is the bad regulations that stifle innovation/competition. Those bad regulations get passed into law because of the monopoly pumping money into legislation. Get money out of politics pleeasseee.

😂hy3sse0l

Awesome! I’m in NUPOC and am also planning the same path. Navy is definitely one of the best ways to get into nuclear!

Incredible oxymoron. I live in a world where it is not feared to tempt nuclear Apocalypse with bombs,but we can't create energy with the same technology, If people were really that against nuclear power we shouldn't be provoking it at the same time

advocating for nuclear is stupid and so are you

@@johnhilderbrand9204 this is bait

It’s just capitalism to let them all fairly compete in the market and see who wins.

How efficient are they? The current reactors are less than 3%

That's true, he could be a spokesman for the nuclear industry in general.

The world needs more climatologues but thanks God there are more than enough carbondioxydologues.

Any intellectual he would have been good at, so long as it was his passion

@@GregoryShtevensh I don't know if that's always true. I think some people naturally possess inherent proclivities that contribute to their success in certain fields while making them less suited for others. For instance, electrical engineering requires a lot of abstract thinking and painting imaginative pictures to come up with solutions. This is because electromagnetic physics is largely invisible, and it's not nearly as intuitive as classical mechanics. I know plenty of talented mechanical engineers that don't have the temperament to study electrical, and vise versa. Although they may find the field fascinating, their brains are wired to solve physical problems on macroscopic levels. It's often less about passion, and more about inherent personality traits.

@tjcogger1974 you're absolutely right. The personality types that make up certain trades etc. However, still... his personality will govern his passions.

high end actual science vs well..

Most of the reason why we are not using nuclear power is the big oil, and coal conglomerates are not willing to give up their power to give the world free energy. It's about the money and the power they hold over the governments.

As a nuclear-mechanical engineer, I approve this message. The industry has some very smart, highly passionate, accountable, and high integrity engineers, both large scale and in the SMR world.

Probably moreso his culture war show. As a fan of Tim’s, IRL has a tendency to miss the mark of utilizing specialized guests. But a culture war episode with James and Daniel Turner would be solid.

The Yucca Mountain waste facility has been planned for decades, and safe casks for transportation have already been manufactured. The solution exists. The opposition is entirely political.

Not just baseload either, nuclear power plants can be made load-following as well. The ones in France can, IIRC

@@kaasmeester5903 Practical Engineering has a excellent video on the operating principals of electrical grids. Nuclear certainly can ramp up or down to follow loads however (to my understanding) that is still considered to be a base load, not a short term reaction to drops in frequency. That's where IC engines turning generators shine due to quickly being able to change stator speed and having a wide range of rotational speeds available. I love the idea of using gantry cranes to stack mass and take advantage of gravity, or using flywheels to store energy that can be deployed on a moments notice

How about Chernobyl? Don't you feel lied to? James said multiple times that nobody has ever died from a nuclear power plant accident. They intentionally never er mentioned Chernobyl once. I'm a big supporter of nuclear power and have been watching Jordan when he was just a professor. This is the first time I feel like he effectively lied.

Lol that’s all it is really. Some people would not grasp the process...

No they are called Utahamians.

I read a book about 10 years ago that covered the generation of electricity in the USA. It covered several options including nuclear. It is called "Power Hungry: The Myths of 'Green' Energy and the Real Fuels of the Future".

Honestly the only issue of nuclear on a national scale and a problem for EDF here in France is the surplus to stock. That's also why the EU put such ridiculous legislations on French electricity because of how much and cheap EDF exported electricity.

@@biodidu25 Yea, but they wouldn't have had to export the electricity, if they had some form of dynamic electricity demand. You could probably find a company that wouldn't mind only being allowed to run servers during certain hours when standard demand is lower, that way overall demand is always the same.

There will always be a need for oil. Plastics, lubricants, clothing, and a hell of a lot more are made from oil. You can't have wheels or phones (or a million other things) without oil.

@@gethriel yep, I said it wouldn't be necessary for any backup power generation.

You'd still want back up gas turbines or diesel generators. You can't start up a reactor (safely) in less than ten minutes. If you take an automatic trip of a reactor for some random failure, say goodbye to 1000-1400 MW of power. You need emergency response to stabilize the grid when crap hits the cooling tower fans, and that's not where nuclear is at its best. Nuclear is great, but load following is a struggle especially with the old, big reactors. Make nuclear the base load, and fossil fuels the transient/emergency response, and you're set. -Your neighborhood, friendly reactor operator.

What do you mean?

@@TheKZfaqGame Do you have a more specific question? I will gladly answer. Otherwise, I mean what I said.

​@@user-dl7kp2fn4b Well, a specific couple of questions, in that case. Why do you call him _reverend_ Jordan? What sermon specifically does he preach? Why do you refer to yourself and others as apostates?

@@TheKZfaqGame Most people I have known vernacularly use Reverend and Preacher interchangeably. When my parents took me to church when I was young, we referred to the person who preached the gospel as "Preacher". But if you want to be technical, the more appropriate reference would be Preacher Jordan, because Reverend is a clergy specific title. But you know what I meant. Definition of Preacher: One who preaches; one who discourses publicly on religious subjects. Jordan does this on about every video, so he is therefore a Preacher. Definition of Sermon: 1 A religious discourse, especially one delivered as part of a service. 2 An often lengthy and tedious speech of reproof or exhortation. So in the first definition, a Sermon is about religion, usually designed for a religious setting, but not necessarily, or as in the second definition, it can be an exhortion of any subject that can include religion. The Bible is the book used by the Christian Religion, and their general practice is to reference text in this book when giving sermons. Their sermons commonly draw parallels between this text with present day circumstances. Jordan in nearly every video states from memory in his own words, passages in this bible, and relates them to present day circumstances. Therefore, by definition, Jordan is preaching Sermons, and that defines him as a Preacher. So "Preacher Jordan" is an accurate characterization. Definition of an Apostate: One who has forsaken the faith, principles, or party, to which he before adhered; esp., one who has forsaken his religion for another; a pervert; a renegade. I use this word more subjectively. Jordan didn't call me an Apostate, but he is speaking to a mixed audience. I watch his videos, while not as often as before, due to the interesting topics, his reasoning skills, and intellect. As most secular babyboomers, we identified with a religion earlier in life. That's how it was in the 70-80s. So, from that perspective, we have forsaken a faith. My need for status and self-righteousness isn't so intense as Jordans, that I need to delude myself into believing that morality is determined by a two-thousand year old book written by anonymous authors. If I was to find a book and claim it is the word of God, and say "Jordan, here is the word of God", because he is a rational person, he wouldn't be convinced. But with a book that a lot of other people believe, he can therefore gain status, an innate human proclivity. Status is a seesaw, to rise your status, you have to lower others, at least in your mind. So subconsciously or consciously, he sees those that don't adhere to his moral doctrines, as less; he looks down on them. So when he drawed me into his intermittent sermons with secular titles, and then virtue signals, and self-righteously criticizes the morals of people, who as a secular, I approve of, or quotes the book that has been used to judge and subjugate free thinkers like me for centuries, is no different from my perspective, than calling me lost, immoral, of lesser chatacter, or therefore an Apostate. Jordan has a right to his beliefs as I do mine, but some things are not appropriate for mixed audiences. He should preach his sermons to only those who seek them. This is why I rarely watch his videos anymore. The only reason I watched this one was because I couldn't fathom how he can inject a religious sermon into nuclear power.

@@user-dl7kp2fn4b Thank you for the thorough answer; I genuinely appreciate the drawn-out nature and layout of your response. I asked in the first place because of the disingenuous nature of your original comment, which, if you were to say wasn't disingenuous, I'd find it hard to believe given some of the assumptions made in your second response there. I haven't watched enough of Jordan's videos to vouch one way or the other - not looking to try and defend (or criticize) his Biblical views. Two accounts, here: One, it seems rather presumptuous to state that he looks down on those that don't adhere to what he believes the standard is. I word it that way because I can't even say "his moral doctrines," as like I stated earlier, I haven't watched enough of his content to vouch either way for his Biblical views. I argue the point at all because that's not honest. You assume he's trying to up his status. Do you think people that are trying to up their status constantly make enemies? You can try to argue all you want but the fact of the matter is you don't know. Second, if you don't like being challenged in a public space, that's on you. He's allowed to share what he wants with his audience however he wants to. No one's forcing you to be here. You are simply not his audience, if that's the case. And that's ok. Whoever doesn't want to watch doesn't have to. Simple as that. To suggest that he should only say certain things because of the audience is preposterous. You can't talk ideas that way. You can't have a debate, a discourse, a discussion. And what if it's true? You don't only tell the truth in certain places to certain people. That's not honest, either.

Is he working in Ontario or New Brunswick?

@@ymwo97679 italy

thorium nano MSR already done,

KGB

The reason is actually quite depressingly simple: The Cold War hangover. “Nuclear” means Hiroshima and Nagasaki to most people. They think having a nuclear reactor in their city is the equivalent of installing a nuclear bomb in their backyard. The media demonized the very word for over 40 years, for multiple generations, and those people are now the people who are in power and making legislation. It’s completely preposterous, but unfortunately that IS the reason.

SAFER PROVIDED it is not anywhere near Tornadoes, Hurricanes or Earthquakes. Don't kid yourself ANY OTHER WAY. "I'm already sold." Pfffft. THINK, easily amused guy. Fn THINK. It only works if you read and remember but at least try. There are no constrains in your comment, just likes. "Look everyone, it's Jordan! He said something so I believe it! No further thought required!"

Because keeping people energy poor is a critical part of the system of control that keeps people in economic serfdom.

@@timburke127 indubitably...

If you don't support nuclear power you're utterly unserious about anything!

I have also said this many, many times .

Dont complain. Be grateful that you are able to consume this for free! You (and the 6 others that liked your comment) dont have to watch this video if you cant physically do it.

@@nyChannel09It obviously wasn’t a complaint, it was a respectfully put suggestion for improvement; which most people appreciate. This person is clearly a fan of the Pod.

@@nyChannel09 Or, hear me out, steps could be taken to improve the sound quality, that way people could enjoy the informative interviews and the people being interviewed could get their information out to more people.

​@nyChannel09 Of course it was not a complaint. Your own comment is reflexively negative and rather stupid. He obviously was making a positive suggestion - one that I agree with, as I had trouble understanding the guest, and therefore missed some of what he was saying. Creators are happy to receive constructive criticism.

I can hear him perfectly fine

​@@StefanRial elaborate

KGB

A lot of lefties worked hard to achieve this.

it has suffered more from idiots promoting nuclear

@grannyannie2948 Funded at the start by the KGB, and indubitably now encouraged by the CCP.

The current waste issue is with old technology where the rods are only about 10% used before disposal. You can find lots of discussion on waste reuse and mitigation by 3rd generation nuclear tech online.

Wouldn't oceanic storms be a very dangerous damaging force to any reactors? To me that sounds like another Fukushima waiting to happen. If it would be feasible for Guam, how would engineers work around possible natural disasters playing a role in meltdowns and leaks?

Guam's grid is such a mess lol, memories

@@maryamjoha These are self-contained micro-reactors which are walk-away-safe.

Wind power *CAN* work, when it is implemented correctly. Wind power alone is unreliable, and cannot be used as a baseload power source. Wind power paired with battery storage is reliable, and can be used as a baseload power source.

I hear you. Where I live in Australia they are clearing ancient forest to build solar farms to replace hydro. Lots of taxpayers money to be made from renewables that need replacing every ten years. Hmm

Yeah, but what about all the destruction of wildlife that wind power causes. From what I've heard, it's quite significant.

@@etherashe5164 it is indeed, and because people are underinforned about the negative side of 'green energy' such as wind farms they are against using nuclear when really its the only way to produce what we demand with minimal effect on the earth

@@etherashe5164 just to confirm, it is not my wind farm, I refuse to let them destroy my family's farm in order to extend it, other members of my family would happily just cash in but I am fighting it because of what I know, and where I love 🌳🌲🌳🌲🌳

I don't buy for a second the idea that fascism is defined by nationalism, and that the national socialists weren't socialist.

I began investing in stocks and Def earlier this year, and it is the best choice I've ever made. My portfolio is rounding up to almost a million and I have realized that when a stock makes it to the news, chances are you're quite late to the party, the idea is to get in early on blue chips before it becomes public. There are lots of life changing opportunities in the market, and maximize it.

What opportunities are there in the market, and how do I profit from it?

You can make a lot of money from the market regardless of whether it strengthens or crashes. The key is to be well positioned.

I would really like to know how this actually works.

All you need is a good capital and the service of a professional broker, with those your investment will most certainly produce high yields.

For remote areas it can make sense. Ideally you want to go as big as possible though. Efficiency increases as you go bigger.

As a Native American, doesn't that go against your culture?

Native Americans don’t like cheap, clean power?

@@O1OO1O1 I was born in America. My family was born here for generations. I am considered native. I may not be tribal (think Cherokee), nor am I imperial (think Aztec), nor am I Lamanite (older), nor even Jaredite (even older), but I consider this land my home while understanding that it was not always under the care of my ancestors. Both can be true.

@@Benjanuva it's still strange to identify with a place, unnecessary in your statement, and tinged with colonialism.

@@thegreenman2030 nuclear energy is not clean.

100% companies like Curio can take spent fuel and recycle it.

They are also completely impractical given how you have to breed U-233 and the chemistry control needed to do that online is just crazy and never been done.

​@revcrussell there have been experimental thorium reactors that operated for several years. However the 🇺🇸 decided to go with uranium based reactors and that doomed thorium reactors to the experimental...

@@wheel-man5319 Yes, but they all had problems that were never solved. Mostly due to chemistry and materials problems. The company I work for operates the largest nuclear lab in our country and I don't think it will happen. Even if they resolve the previous problems, there the problem with radiation levels that are now considered too high. These are really cool ideas but I just can't see these practical issues solved, and certainly not in the next century given how slow nuclear power progresses.

​@revcrussell no insult to your nuclear engineering degrees but I woùld still like a show done by one or more experts on the field and preferably the top experts.

I would like to see a breakdown of legitimate arguments as to why it is not viable because it seems like the best of nuclear without the dangers of meltdowns or dangers byproducts.

He did mention SMRs several times. Thorium is only one element in the new arena of SMRs, there are others, some only combine thorium in the process.

Nuclear hardly pollutes at all and nuclear waste isn't as big a problem as most people think.They can absolutely be solved without subsidies.

Thorium reactors could burn it up and leave no dangerous byproducts.

Yours is the critical question - look up "Gordian Knot" "Jack Devanney" .

Really, 'nuclear waste' is an overblown problem hyped up by opponents of nuclear power production.

The "spent" rods could be irradiated again and recycled.