Glad to hear it. One issue in the advanced nuclear industry is that a lot of people (there are ~50 individual advanced nuclear efforts in the USA [1]) are comp

Glad to hear it. One issue in the advanced nuclear industry is that a lot of people (there are ~50 individual advanced nuclear efforts in the USA [1]) are competing to have the best nuclear technology without collaborating all that much, even though such collaboration may be necessary for the industry to overcome its challenges (i.e. survive in an era of cheap natural gas and popular/successful intermittent renewables). It's important for nuclear to survive because intermittent renewables in the 50-75% of total energy range can benefit a lot from some low-carbon baseload (or, even better, just low-carbon dispatchable energy), and it will be much easier to decarbonize with a successful nuclear fleet. In advanced nuclear, you need test facilities to perform multi-year material and fuel tests, physics modeling software to be validated against experimental facilities that no longer exist, and a big-ticket hardware supply chain that's ramped up to "N-stamp" quality assurance programs. All of this is hard. Secrecy in the nuclear industry dates back to the Manhattan Project and the naval nuclear stuff, but it's holding it back now. I've been dreaming about much more work in open-source reactor design software, open-source reactor hardware, and other ways to share facilities, supply chains, etc. The hard part is finding business cases when the industry is still mostly run by old-school engineering managers. [1] https://www.thirdway.org/infographic/the-advanced-nuclear-industry-2016-update https://www.thirdway.org/infographic/the-advanced-nuclear-in...