ZeroCool1

Bill,

Nuclear is notoriously expensive. How do you make sure that you manage/pick people to manage Terrapower so that it financially succeeds by building a product which makes money--and doesn't just make a dream plant?

Right now I know that Terrapower is looking at both sodium, and molten salt on the side, as a heat transfer fluid--why bridge out to so many technologies? Why not maintain a narrow focus?

Lastly, sodium plants have notoriously had issues over the history of nuclear power--both safety and cost wise--what is being done at Terrapower to make sure history isn't repeated?

I work on Molten Salts at U-Wisconsin Madison where I do a bunch of salt chemistry, which involves pushing hot salt through pipes/tubes at temperatures very similar to what Terrapower wants to run at. I'll be giving you guys a call when I get my PhD next December.

What have you learned from the outstanding success of California Proposition 65 (1986), aka the "everything causes cancer label", that you've incorporated into your resolution?

edit: included an extra "are"

Stephen, Why doesn't Mathematica have built in tables of materials properties that are easy to interface with in a problem? For instance, steam tables for water that can be evaluated at any temperature, or materials stress properties as a function of temperature, that can be plugged into any problem just as a variable.

I started off as a physics major, now I am a PhD candidate in nuclear engineering and require these engineering properties. Why isn't Mathematica more engineer friendly? (I'm waiting to be proven wrong-- that these in fact, do exist.)

TLDR: Why aren't there properties tables, which are easy to call and browse, for every possible alloy, chemical, and property?

Thanks.

Al,

I am currently a nuclear engineering PhD candidate doing some of the only experimental research on molten salt reactors in the country. These reactors offer safety and efficiency not seen in current reactors.

You can read my AMA here:

http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1luupt/askscience_ama_ask_a_molten_fluoride_salt_lftr/

My question is: the USA has produced several very successful reactor programs, which operated safely and efficiently and demonstrated the feasibility of new reactor types.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten-Salt_Reactor_Experiment

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_Flux_Test_Facility

In fact, your administration shut down the FFTF, if I recall correctly. However, these have never gone commercial, and it is most definitely not performance. Even worse, countries like China are going to capitalize on our freely published research from a multimillion dollar MSRE effort, by building their own reactor with little research hurdles. (two links there)

We're going to need a balanced portfolio of power generation in the future... What politics are holding up this from occurring? Whats up with the USA? I am the "STEM focused youth that wants to change the world" but the opportunities to do so seem so limited and small scale.

At what point should I feel guilty about taking advantage of the 1 year return policy? At what point to I jeopardize the future of REI?

I just bought a 45L backpack, love it, but found out that for some of my goals I should get a 60L. Is it frowned upon to upgrade or return after a month or two? I really have never bought from a company that has this policy