Become a Member

Who’s teased as “The Undiscovered Tech Company Behind the Coming ‘TriFuel-238’ Revolution?”

Checking out the teaser pitch from Keith Kohl's Energy Investor

By Travis Johnson, Stock Gumshoe, August 18, 2021

We’ve gotten a lot of questions about this ad, which has been circulating for at least a few weeks now, so today I thought I’d dig in — what the heck is TriFuel-238?

Well, just from the name you’d think it has something to do with uranium — with Uranium-238 being the most common isotope of that element found in nature (it gets enriched into uranium-235 for use in nuclear reactors, and, in a reactor, can become plutonium-239… and then, once depleted into uranium-238 again, is sometimes used for radiation shielding or armor plating).

So what is this Tri-Fuel? Sounds like it’s some kind of new advancement in nuclear power… we get into some clues:

“‘TriFuel-238’ Is About to Undercut Every Other Form of Energy on the Planet…

“Wind, Solar… and Even Traditional Nuclear, Oil, Gas, and Coal!

“I’m not just talking about this fuel in its raw form either…

“According to numbers from the U.S. Energy Information Administration…

“After sourcing, building, and labor… after all costs are factored in…

“‘TriFuel-238’ comes out king — the cheapest of them all!”

That’s where the costs come in for nuclear, of course — not much of the price of nuclear energy comes from buying uranium, that’s a small piece of the cost structure, most of the expense is in building huge and shielded nuclear reactors, operating massive safety systems around and within those reactors, and dealing with the nuclear waste afterward.

So whatever might it be? The tease here comes in an ad from Angel Publishing, a pitch for Keith Kohl’s Energy Investor, which hasn’t been all that active in recent years — perhaps because so many energy investments have been so lousy (to the extent that Energy Investor even teased a “5G” stock with no real energy connection in Akoustis (AKTS) earlier this year, though the newsletter really got its start during the Bakken oil mania a decade ago).

The basic spiel is that they’ll send you a special report called “The Undiscovered Tech Company Behind the Coming ‘TriFuel-238’ Revolution” once you subscribe — and though this is a relatively low-cost letter ($99/yr), and offers a six-month refund window (which we applaud, most publishers thankfully still offer a refund on their entry-level letters, and that’s as it should be… even if their motivation might just be that they want to draw you into a financial relationship before they spring the $2,500 nonrefundable subscription pitch on you for their “better” services), we still, of course, never want to pay money for the reveal of a “secret” stock tip.

Lots of inbuilt psychological biases that most of us have, from anchoring bias to the sunk cost fallacy, make it harder to think clearly about an investment if the first thing we read is a wildly promotional report… and, worse, if we paid for that report (we tend to “anchor” our understanding of a company on the first thing we read about it, and we also tend to try to convince ourselves we made the right decision when we buy a product, which with an investment newsletter means we’re inclined to want to invest in whatever they recommend, to justify that purchase). So let’s try to sidestep a few of those biases, see if we can identify the stock from Kohl’s clues, and try to think about it for ourselves first… then, once you’ve got a little understanding, if you want to invest in the stock, or go subscribe to Energy Investor, well, that’s your call.

Ready? OK, so what are those clues about this “TriFuel-238?”

The hype-y promise is massive, so that’s what we have to resist a little bit… this is from the order form:

“TriFuel-238 is about to become the cheapest and most energy-abundant fuel on the planet.

“And the profits for early investors here could be out of this world.

“As TriFuel-238 takes off and grabs market share from more expensive and less reliable energy sources like coal and solar, it could hand the little-known stock behind this breakthrough a staggering $48.78 billion in revenue per year.

“Even if the company claims just a 1% piece of everything you’ve seen today…

“A $3,000 grubstake could see you collect a life-changing fortune of as much as $1,380,564.”

That’s a frequent logical leap in these teasers, the “what if” statement about claiming what sounds like a small market share in a huge business… taking one percent of the global electricity generation business is not, in fact, a small feat, but that context makes it seem like a “conservative” projection.

And how about actual clues?

Are you getting our free Daily Update
"reveal" emails? If not,
just click here...


This is a tiny company, we’re told, with just a few people and some sort of patented technology…

“…the tiny, 13-man operation that’s behind this revelation…

“Which is lining up deals for this patented technology as we speak…”

What else do we learn about the stock? We get some hints about the backers:

“A Horde of America’s Most Prestigious Hedge Funds Are Silently Loading up on Shares of This Tiny Tech Company’s Stock!

“I’m talking about the likes of Rockefeller Capital Management…

“Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch

“Bank of America… and even the $6.2 trillion Vanguard Group!”

And, here’s a little red flag, one part of the tease is that Jim Simons is on board…

“… they’re joined by trading legend Jim Simons…

“Someone Bloomberg states has no equal: “[Not] Warren Buffett, George Soros, Peter Lynch…”

“A god amongst investors.

“And now this stock-picking genius is one of the mega-money investors going in on this barely known energy-tech stock.”

Simons ran Renaissance Technologies, and posted among the best returns anyone has ever seen for the Medallion hedge fund, but it wasn’t “stock-picking genius” that did it for Simons, at least not in the way Kohl is implying here, it was really just math genius and pattern-finding genius. Simons was a math professor, he brought on tons of other math geniuses and built the most consistently profitable quantitative trading strategies ever, and kept coming up with new ones when his strategies were eventually discovered by others and began to falter.

Medallion didn’t buy stocks for qualitative reasons, because of the merits of the patents or a value argument about the company or the strength of the management team or its future prospects, that fund traded in and out of positions all the time as its quant strategies adjusted or harvested gains. And yes, you can track the thousands of positions that fund had in any given quarter, since they have to file 13F reports like every other hedge fund, so Simons gets name dropped as a shareholder in teaser ads all the time, but it’s extra pointless — his fund often bought and sold hundreds of stocks in a quarter, and by the time you see the stale data (13Fs are filed six weeks after the end of the quarter, and reflect the holdings as of the last day of that quarter), the position may well have been sold (or bought again).

Simons is not actually running the show at Medallion anymore, either, he stepped down in January, but it always galls me a little that people who know better, like Kohl, imply that somehow the best hedge fund manager in history is endorsing their stock as his favorite investment idea. So let me be clear: Yes, we’ll take the fact that Medallion owned shares at some point as a clue, but the odds are very high that Jim Simons has never thought about this stock.

OK, off the soapbox now. Sorry about that. Other clues?

We already get the feeling that this has something to do with nuclear power, but apparently there has been some recent action from the government, including from President Trump on his way out of office:

“On January 5, 2021, just days before his tenure was over…

“Then-President Trump signed Executive Order 13972…

“Which placed ‘TriFuel-238’ at the heart of ensuring the ‘national security, energy security, and economic prosperity of the United States.'”

That was one of several nuclear-related initiatives from the Trump administration, but this particular one was mostly about pushing the Departments of Defense and Energy and NASA to accelerate the development of micro-reactors.

So part of the argument here is that the government is pushing more money into “TriFuel-238” projects, and, of course, that tends to benefit the companies involved (Kohl compares it to the big surge in solar stocks thanks to government subsidies).

He goes on a longer screed about the general demand picture, which I generally agree with — coal plants are getting to the point of retirement and most countries aren’t willing to build new ones, big new natural gas power plants are discouraged because of the focus on “clean” energy, and the fleet of nuclear power plants in the U.S. is itself extremely old and gradually shrinking as the reactors built in the 1960s and 1970s are retired. The nation needs “baseload” electrical power, electricity generation that is “always on,” unlike the sun and the wind, and, logically, to do that without carbon emissions we need either huge leaps forward in energy storage, or newer and better nuclear power plants. Or maybe both.

So that seems to be the foundation of the argument, that we need more nuclear power, and maybe that means lots of mini reactors instead of building new Three Mile Island-style reactors.

Which leads us to a fairly standard “one tiny company owns the only technology” teaser pitch… here’s some more of the detail:

“You’re going to want to be in this company’s little-known tech stock…

“Because this 13-man operation could bank an incredible $7.9 billion per year in royalties — thanks to its sole rights to its fuel!

“And for a tiny company making a little over a million in revenue right now, that’s an almost-unheard-of 745,238x leap in cash!”

Other clues? We’re told that this is a Virginia company, that they have signed agreements with four major US energy companies, including Southern Company and Exelon… and then we finally get into some details about the actual fuel:

“… don’t mistake this for the nuclear energy of the past.

“‘TriFuel-238’ couldn’t be further from it.

“Yes, it creates abundant energy around the clock…

“But as you’ve seen today, it’s 42.9% cheaper than coal… over 40,835 times more powerful than natural gas…

“And most importantly — thanks to this breakthrough — it’s now one of the safest forms of energy on the planet.

“As safe as solar, hydropower, or wind….

“All thanks to the fact that “TriFuel-238” runs an incredible 1,632 °F cooler than old nuclear fuel….

“Plus, thanks to the fact that “TriFuel-238″ can cool down to room temperature in only 50 seconds, a complete reactor failure is now nearly impossible.”

And we get a few clues about the insider ownership, too…

“the fuel tech masterminds behind this company…

“The nuclear industry legends and Ph.D. geniuses alongside former high-ranking officials from the United States Department of Justice …

“They all share one thing in common.

“As we speak, they’re loading up on shares of this small stock.

“They’ve purchased 13,881 shares in the last three months…

“And 206,339 more in the last year.

“A total value of $1.23 million.

“And there’s not been a single sale!”

Those numbers are presumably off by a bit, since I imagine the data is not fresh to the date (the ad is not dated, and we don’t know when Kohl did this research), but that does at least mean that we know the general level of insider trading, and we know that the share price is (or was) somewhere in the $6 neighborhood ($1.23 million divided by 206,339 shares is $5.96). $1.23 million is also a really trivial amount of insider buying or selling in a given year, so that’s a further reminder that this is probably a very small stock.

Phew, sweating yet? You can just feel the greed making you quiver, no? It’s amazing what a long sales pitch can do to get the heart rate building a little and convince you that you’re on the brink of building Rockefeller-like wealth for your family as soon as you punch in your credit card numbers and pay your $99… so yes, let’s bring that heart rate down a little and move on to the big reveal. Thinkolator sez that Kohl is teasing nuclear tech small fry Lightbridge Corp (LTBR)

Which is not a new story for investors — energy technology always has a place in the heart of the speculator, and Lightbridge has at times seemed to be on the verge of greatness… and it’s not even new for Angel Publishing, Keith Kohl’s colleague Christian DeHaemer was predicting massive gains for LTBR as a play on thorium, way back in 2014, when they first got attention for one of their nuclear fuel patents (indeed, I think it’s mostly that same patent that they mostly talk about now).

How do we match the clues, dear friends? Well, the image that Kohl includes, of a cross section of one of these “TriFuel-238” fuel rods, is taken from some older Lightbridge investor materials. And yes, at least at some points in the recent past Jim Simons’ Renaissance Technologies has owned shares (I didn’t see it in their last 13F, but it was in there a quarter or two ago… one of the more than 3,000 stocks owned by Renaissance at any given quarter’s end). The other clues match on those holdings, too, though there are very few institutional investors involved at all — Rockefeller Capital Management does own 2,499 shares, 0.04% of the company, worth only about $18,000, and that puts them in the top ten largest shareholders, which is absurd (not skipping any zeros there, that’s eighteen thousand dollars — probably a smaller position than many Gumshoe readers would consider buying). The other holdings are mostly “extended market” index funds that try to capture microcaps, with Vanguard in the picture because the stock was added to the Microcap Index this year, but in total about 5% of the company is owned by institutions and 1% by insiders… Lightbridge today is a microcap penny stock that mostly is traded by little investors like you and me.

So with a market cap of about $40 million, it probably won’t be a huge surprise that Lightbridge has been a very long term disaster for investors at this point, though it has always been very small — they went from hundreds of employees a decade ago to a total of seven full time employees disclosed in their latest 10-K (I’m sure they have lots of contractors, too), but the market cap peaked around $120 million in 2007 and is down by only 60% or so. And yes, that “13 employees” hint was accurate at some point, I’ve seen it cited elsewhere, just not as of the most recent 10K. Or maybe that includes part-timers.

That 60% drop in value greatly obscures the losses investors have enjoyed in LTBR, sadly, since the company has been chewing through money for years and raising more capital by selling more pieces of itself, so they went from 150 thousand shares outstanding back in 2007 and 2008 to now, after a bankruptcy fear or two along the way, 6.6 million shares outstanding, which is why the total shareholder return since those early glory days has been a loss of greater than 99%. So whatever value that originally technology had is spread much more thinly on the ground… though, hope springs eternal, perhaps they’ve also added something to their technology in the past dozen years? Or maybe are finally inching closer to that finish line in getting something going that could generate some revenue?

On that front, I don’t know — I can say that although Kohl teases this as “making a little over a million in revenue right now,” that’s really not true. According to their filings, though they do have a $600,000 research project underway at the moment, they haven’t reported any revenue since 2017, and the last time they were over a million dollars in a year was way back in 2014.

The good news? They have accumulated losses of about $130 million over the past 30 years… so even if they ever get around to generating some revenue or, God forbid, turning a profit, they probably won’t be paying taxes anytime soon.

What’s the situation today? They do still own that fuel technology, and yes, it sounds dramatically better than conventional fuel rods for nuclear reactors. Their strategy is to get existing reactors to switch over to their fuel as a transitional technology, since apparently their fuel can work in existing reactors to some degree, and then get the builders of the next wave of micro-reactors to use their product, which they call Lightbridge Fuel. The argument is that switching from conventional enriched uranium to Lightbridge Fuel, operators of existing reactors can increase their power rate by 10% and extend the refueling cycle by 30% (from 18 to 24 months), which is more than enough to justify the increased cost of the fuel. Plus, it’s also safer, with much lower temperatures and faster cooling, as teased, and the Lightbridge Fuel also is less enriched than conventional fuel rods, consumes more of the uranium, and does not generate a meaningful amount of plutonium in the spent fuel, which makes waste a little less of an issue (and, theoretically, helps with slowing down nuclear weapon proliferation). And in newly built reactors which might be more specifically designed for this fuel, the advantages are theoretically greater.

And the timeline? As has been the case for the past dozen or so years for Lightbridge, the timeline to commercialization is not at all clear to me. They have been through several R&D joint ventures and similar kinds of pilot projects in the past decade, and they say that they have an “addressable market” of about $20 billion, since their fuel should work in almost any reactor currently operating… and they are still getting some meaningful awards from the government to push the fabrication R&D projects forward (though “meaningful,” in this case, still means less than a million dollars per project).

This is the part of their Investor Presentation that sticks for me, and reminds me that there is no rush to try to “pick the bottom” for this company — they won’t be fabricating fuel samples until next year at the earliest, they have never done so with “live” fuel, and the current plan is to do use Lightbridge Fuel in a test reactor in a few years, which would mean there’s no real-world data until that fuel is spent and switched out, which probably won’t happen until 2025:

As it has every time I’ve looked at Lightbridge over the years, it sounds really cool, and like a great solution for our nuclear fleet. And I agree that nuclear power, despite the bad rap it gets because of the fact that we’re relying on 50-year-old technology for the current plants (and, of course, because of The China Syndrome and the Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters), is the most logical way to meet our electricity demands for the next few decades without pollution or carbon emissions, and I think it’s mostly old fears and old technologies that keep most of the “green” community from embracing nuclear power as the obvious replacement for coal.

But I’m surely no expert on nuclear power or nuclear politics… and at this point, I have no idea whether Lightbridge will be the solution, or how long it will take, or how many times they might run out of money while we wait — all I know is that they’re still chugging along, they’ve shrunk the company down to being mostly just a small R&D team that collaborates with outside groups for testing and fabrication, and is likely to rely on licensing and royalties from much larger companies who actually bring the product to market and use the fuel, which should keep spending fairly low as long as the government tap doesn’t run dry but also means that without a lot of capital of their own, they have to rely on others to move the technology forward, which means they have to be patient… there’s no Elon Musk here, pushing the envelope and getting everyone excited. At their current pace of spending, Lightbridge’s ~$14 million in cash should last them at least another year or so (though they do sell shares pretty much every year, just to keep the rent paid and the lights on).

Penny stocks with a far-off future are inherently speculative, so you just have to calculate the odds as best you can, assess how much risk you’re willing to take (always assume that the most likely outcome is a 100% loss), and be patient while you wait for the possibility that it might become a viable business. I’ll pass, but I do love the story.

That’s where I come down, at least. When it comes to your money, though, it’s your call — what do you think of Lightbridge’s prospects? See a huge change coming sometime soon that would cause investors to see some value in Lightbridge, or a reason to get on board and wait five years to see if they can begin to commercialize the fuel? Let us know with a comment below.

P.S. I forgot to mention… about those insider trades? Yeah, there are some, though they’re not very big. Most of the transactions are monthly purchases by the three main executives as part of their employee stock purchase plan, so the CEO, Seth Grae, uses payroll deduction to add to his holdings each month and buys a few hundred shares a month, but most of the shares transacted are stock grants to executives and board members as part of their compensation (it looks like Grae was granted 79,500 shares last year and 16,146 shares in 2019, for example, so that, not his own buying, forms the core of his 104,502 share stock position, though he also got a 213,855 share restricted stock award last year, so that number should grow as those shares vest). That sounds like a lot, too, he owns more than $600,000 worth of LTBR shares, though everything is relative — and that pales next the restricted shares and options he also holds, and the $3.4 million in salary and bonus he’s earned over the past five years. So yes, there has been a steady drumbeat of insiders buying small numbers of shares to their personal holdings through payroll deduction, and if you add their grants to that then the number of shares roughly matches up with the hints Kohl drops, but over the past year or two most of those shares have been part of employee compensation. It’s good that insiders are buying a little, on average that’s a positive sign… but it is just a little.

Irregulars Quick Take

Paid members get a quick summary of the stocks teased and our thoughts here. Join as a Stock Gumshoe Irregular today (already a member? Log in)
guest

12345

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

24 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
The Countess of_slabs4jabs
Member
The Countess of_slabs4jabs
August 18, 2021 12:36 pm

On the premise that “The beginning of investing…may be the fear of patents,” I’m wondering what the nature of their patent is, how it relates to Tri Fuel 238, and if somebody can describe the steps in layman-simple terms how, because of its patent, it will have THE edge – you would have to somehow for a credible 40+ billion company out of this 3-time reverse splits loser, also going from over 100 employees to about 7 (per Yahoo). I would think it not impossible though….

In this case though, because of this price and fearing patents, my system kicks in – I’m now 2 shares in. 🙂

Assuming the best happens, I see this at worst as a high flying energy company down the line – some of those run strong in portfolios today.

Add a Topic
2798
sandydog
Irregular
August 18, 2021 1:28 pm

Unfortunately the story sold me. Bought in with a 20% stop. So far staying about even. Thought it was worth the gamble. Not sure its a good idea anymore to count on anything political .

👍 11
seussdr13
Member
seussdr13
September 6, 2021 2:10 am
Reply to  sandydog

Political is the word. I was a US Navy diesel submarine officer many moons ago, also (intellectually) interested in the nuclear power world. I discovered thorium was considered long ago for nuclear power development – but was rejected because it was not a system capable of powering a war ship, thus politically a dud. And so it was rejected for sea AND land based nuclear power plants, the latter for citizen electricity. In essence, we cannot show the public a different (better) path least the public disfavor warships. It could be decades before political winds change and this company succeeds – if it keeps its patent rights. Of course China, I believe, is going to use thorium in future nuclear reactors. But do you think it will pay royalties to this company?

Add a Topic
1487
Add a Topic
282
Add a Topic
108
👍 24
Paul
Guest
Paul
October 12, 2023 9:07 pm
Reply to  seussdr13

Hey Brother, I was an AW on P-3’s out of Moffett Field from ’77-81 and tracked Russian subs around the Pacific, Indian and Bering Seas. We were not taught much about our own subs, but I did find two in all those years when tracking the Russians. I was required to shut down my recording and all equipment and declare the mission Top Secret if I found a US sub. I was an 18-year-old senior operator and the O’s were very worried when I did but they never came back and told me I was wrong. Million-dollar flight shut down by 18-year-old, awesome!

gillo
gillo
August 18, 2021 1:46 pm

Been there, done that. Picked up some shares several years ago based on their then alleged big breakthrough–thorium fuel for reactors. Sounded great, didn’t work, stock tanked, I sold for a loss . Lesson learned.

👍 113
Rick Chambers
Guest
Rick Chambers
August 18, 2021 1:51 pm

France derives 90% of their electricity through nuclear so there is a world market for this technology, the waiting would be the challenge. I can’t understand why China & India don’t turn to nuclear as it would benefit our atmosphere tremendously.

Add a Topic
108
Add a Topic
247
👍 21714
timcoahran
Irregular
August 18, 2021 11:20 pm

Long development timelines for nuclear plants, huge cost overruns – and don’t forget: everyone wants to ship their horrendous waste products to my (original) home state.
If one wants to read about incredibly huge financial losses, look up WPPSS – Washington Public Power Supply System.

Please, everyone, bury your sh** in your OWN back yard!
(Mine’s full).

Add a Topic
1881
👍 461
Joe Buck
Guest
Joe Buck
August 25, 2021 6:10 pm
Reply to  timcoahran

Nuclear waste is recycled very efficiently in France.

watson 1078
watson 1078
June 28, 2023 8:34 pm
Reply to  Joe Buck

France I’ve heard “recycles” their nuke waste in the sea!!!

👍 19
MPPOWER
Guest
MPPOWER
August 20, 2021 11:30 am
Reply to  Rick Chambers

wrong comment for India definitely!
India has largest Solar Base, cost of Solar energy went down from Rs 14 to Rs 1 per unit in 10 years.
All UMPP Coal Power projects are already de-commissioned or on its way.
Coal mining is already defunded by Government.

Add a Topic
247
Add a Topic
1337
Rowbearto
Member
Rowbearto
August 18, 2021 2:36 pm

Looking at their 20 year chart they’ve gone through 3 massive reverse stock splits: 1:30, 1:5, 1:12. I like the concept but huge red flags.

Add a Topic
9139
quincy adams
Guest
quincy adams
August 18, 2021 3:20 pm

Thanks for the article, Travis. I was wondering what became of the thorium revolution that was teased so long ago. I hope all of the remaining Lightbridge employees are no older than 30-something, so they may live long enough to see their work commercialized. As a profitable investment, I should only live so long.

Add a Topic
1487
Carl M Welch
Member
Carl M Welch
August 18, 2021 3:47 pm

I thought Bill Gates was pushing nuclear power? I guess he didn’t put his money where his mouth was. Regarding thorium. Why bother? We have the technology for better nuclear reactors and plenty of uranium fuel. Remember breeder reactors? The U.S. is controlled by fear and runs on greed. We’ll die while China pushes the envelope on on all technologies. By the way. How much thorium is mined in a year compared to uranium?

Add a Topic
630
Add a Topic
1487
Add a Topic
520
👍 21714
Bill White
August 18, 2021 5:52 pm

I’ve been seeing the pitch for a few weeks now. So thanks for the enlightenment.

Bob
Guest
Bob
August 18, 2021 6:18 pm

Patents aren’t forever. Most of what I read about patents involve long-duration court cases, or news that the better mousetrap is obsolete because someone patented an improvement on it. So what year was the patent granted, and does anyone else have a patent that does the same thing, only better?

Joseph E Fasciani
Member
Joseph E Fasciani
August 22, 2021 12:33 pm

Greetings from Canada!

Add a Topic
4206
Joseph E Fasciani
Member
Joseph E Fasciani
August 22, 2021 1:03 pm

Thorium does have definite advantages over conventional uranium reactors, as Travis mentioned, but it hasn’t meant the nuclear power industry has embraced it as yet.

There would have to be a very substantial build out of this ‘new’ sector for it to reduce, never mind replace, the existing uranium industry, so we’ll have plenty of notice as it does so. As it’s fairly esoteric, I’m sure investors as well as speculators won’t be rushing into it, so the price won’t take off as junior gold & silver have historically done.

Finally, it may be more suitable for people younger than I am, at 78.7 years.

Anyhow these are my thoughts on this topic. Travis is quite astute in his evaluations and insights, but I’m not impressed with it’s administration: from my diligence with gold & silver juniors they are crucial to a healthy promotion, from Chief Geologist to board members. I’m not comfortable with the makeup of LTBR, but that’s my instinctive reaction.

I’ll be looking forward to and following other reader’s comments!

Add a Topic
4206
atabor
Member
atabor
August 27, 2021 4:01 am

Trifuel 238 looks like step forward in efficiency and safety for nuclear. However from a climate change reduction view point ALL energy sources need be compared on a full environmental life cycle basis or at least life cycle carbon footprint. Many years ago univ of NSW researchers (Australia) compared nuclear against coal, wind, solar etc and nuclear was worse than wind or solar. There s an enormous amount of energy used in mining and processing uranium which is a significant fraction of life cycle emissions tCO2-e/MWh generated. Same principle applies to all tech. A role for the US DOE…

Add a Topic
4206
👍 2
richard billinge
Guest
richard billinge
October 24, 2021 7:58 am

interesting assessment–i.e–only worth a small punt

David Woodruff
Guest
David Woodruff
November 18, 2021 1:33 pm

It has likely been said before, “the amount of time the presentation takes is inversely proportional to the cube square root of the potential gains, growth, opportunity, etc” That equals a no growth to likely loss of the investment…!!

Add a Topic
5607
John Corden
Guest
John Corden
January 11, 2022 9:40 pm

It seems agood spec but it needs a lot of money and work to get it off the ground.Easier said than done.

gabriella benko
Guest
gabriella benko
January 31, 2022 5:41 pm

thank you for your honesty .

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By clicking any link on this page you are giving your consent for us to set cookies.

More Info  
55
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x