Taylor Wilson in Forbes

Reflections on fusion history, current events, and predictions for the 'fusion powered future.
User avatar
Brian McDermott
Posts: 683
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 10:28 pm
Real name:

Taylor Wilson in Forbes

Post by Brian McDermott » Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:31 pm

Not a huge or groundbreaking article, but worth a mention:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/eamonnfingl ... s%3Aenergy

User avatar
Jim Kovalchick
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:00 am
Real name:

Re: Taylor Wilson in Forbes

Post by Jim Kovalchick » Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:58 pm

I'm glad to hear a young man stand behind nuclear power as a future energy source even if I have to take exception with his sensationalizing his opinion of the GE boiling water reactor design. I work at one of thsoe older GE reactor sites, and recently when we rewound our generators, the replaced copper was probably some the most successful conductor ever seen on this planet. The simplicity of design and careful operations have made our reactors both profitable and safe. To come compare us to Russian reactors shows his ignorance or over-done play to the press. I'll chalk it up to overall lack of industry experience which I think is effectively zero.

To his credit, I think Mr. Wilson is spot on in his assessment of shale gas. I think he may actually be even farther out than what will actually happen with regards to the flattening of the shale gas impact.

User avatar
Paul_Schatzkin
Site Admin
Posts: 668
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 4:49 pm
Real name: aka The Perfesser
Contact:

Re: Taylor Wilson in Forbes

Post by Paul_Schatzkin » Fri Nov 30, 2012 1:26 pm

Thanks, Jim, for that well-informed assessment. All I had was two words: ''gag me."

--P
Paul Schatzkin, aka "The Perfesser" – Founder and Host of Fusor.net
Author of The Boy Who Invented Television - http://farnovision.com/book.html
"Fusion is not 20 years in the future; it is 50 years in the past and we missed it."

User avatar
Chris Bradley
Posts: 2931
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 11:05 am
Real name:

Re: Taylor Wilson in Forbes

Post by Chris Bradley » Fri Nov 30, 2012 8:46 pm

Jim Kovalchick wrote:
> ...even if I have to take exception with his sensationalizing his opinion of the GE boiling water reactor design.

[Article quote:]"The Fukushima reactors were forty years old, and built to an early GE design that was one of the worst outside Russia "

Irrespective of their design, they did not fail on the basis of their engineering. They failed because someone had chosen to specify the installation to withstand a 10m tsunami. The installation's response to a 12m tsunami that caused the Fukushima disaster was exactly as per the design intent - it failed!!

User avatar
Jim Kovalchick
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:00 am
Real name:

Re: Taylor Wilson in Forbes

Post by Jim Kovalchick » Fri Nov 30, 2012 9:06 pm

Chris, you are spot on with how the disaster happened. I will add though, that the accident was significantly worsened by poor decision making by TEPCO. Early venting of the containments would have gone a long way in helping last ditch water sources work.

I used to help write emergency procedures and as the accident was progressing it was easy to predict what the next actions should be. I was horrified with each piece of news because it was clear that TEPCO was not prepared to take steps for beyond-design base events.

User avatar
Chris Bradley
Posts: 2931
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 11:05 am
Real name:

Re: Taylor Wilson in Forbes

Post by Chris Bradley » Fri Mar 01, 2013 7:29 pm

I didn't think I should start yet another thread on Taylor Wilson news, so;

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/us-teen-design ... 11962.html

... as the claims reported in the press get wilder, one might wonder where it will all end up?

User avatar
Jim Kovalchick
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:00 am
Real name:

Re: Taylor Wilson in Forbes

Post by Jim Kovalchick » Fri Mar 01, 2013 7:54 pm

I understand the frustration that some feel about some of the ideas because they aren't really new, but I think I would like to look at the positives in what he his doing. He is being heard on issues I care about, and his youthful enthusiasm is getting some attention for nuclear energy that could ultimately be very important. The ideas that the press uniquely assign to him weren't being heard when the traditional nuclear science establishment that came up with the roots of them spoke. Even if you have trouble with Taylor's promotions, I would think that we should all be glad that at least he is drumming up attention to the fact that nuclear needs to be an intergral part of the technology that society uses.

User avatar
Chris Bradley
Posts: 2931
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 11:05 am
Real name:

Re: Taylor Wilson in Forbes

Post by Chris Bradley » Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:00 pm

Jim Kovalchick wrote:
> I would think that we should all be glad that at least he is drumming up attention to the fact that nuclear needs to be an intergral part of the technology that society uses.
That's what I mean by 'where will it all end up' - is it 'good' news reporting, or simply likely to raise 'concerns'? Reading the news with an open-mind is a good thing, but how many have open minds these days? Germany is closing down its nuclear reactors *because* there was a tsunami in Japan.

?!?!?

doh!

adrian.f.h
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 6:04 pm
Real name:

Re: Taylor Wilson in Forbes

Post by adrian.f.h » Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:03 pm

Chris Bradley schrieb:
> Germany is closing down its nuclear reactors *because* there was a tsunami in Japan.

No they do so because they can and the people want it to happen. A lot of people are afraid of this technology but I don’t think that's the force behind closing down nuclear power plants. The people are simply sick of all the nuclear power related bullshit that was coming out of the mouths of politicians during the last decades. Most of the people I know are physicist or geoscientist and none of them is afraid of nuclear waste or things like that but almost all of them want the nuclear power plants to be closed down.
And obviously that’s not such bad thing at all. At least you will hardly ever hear somebody talking about the "energy crisis" over here.

User avatar
Jim Kovalchick
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:00 am
Real name:

Re: Taylor Wilson in Forbes

Post by Jim Kovalchick » Fri Mar 01, 2013 11:40 pm

Adrian,
I totally disagree with your opinion. People are not making decisions about nuclear power because they are tired of the politics. In fact they aren't really making decisions at all. The politicians are making the decisions because they perceive their constituents want them to. The perceptions are fueled by flawed media coverage and opinion, and it sounds like your is as well.

I can't dispute that you hang out with physicists who have defeatist attitudes about energy and environmental policies because I don't know you or your friends. What I can say with certainty is that I know plenty of scientist and engineers of all varieties who don't so easily take positions simply because they are tired of politics. One would hope that educated people would bias their opinions in fact and not something that is simply the latest trendy thing to do.

Jim Kovalchick

Post Reply