The Exchanges

Every argument clarity score on this site is built from rows on this page. Each question and answer was assessed with names hidden, the host's own answers included, on four things from 1 to 5: directness (does it answer the question asked), coherence (do the ideas follow), precision (concrete details and clear references), compression (says a lot per word). The weighted mix (30/30/25/15) is the exchange score. A person's published score averages their exchange scores on raw tape only, at least 8 of them, shrunk toward the cohort mean. Full method →

Doug Bernauer no published score: only 6 usable exchanges on raw tape, and a fair score needs 8+ · coarse estimate ≈4.0/5 from 6 raw tape exchanges record → ← everyone

Every exchange below was scored with names hidden, four dimensions each from 1 to 5. An exchange's score is 0.30·directness + 0.30·coherence + 0.25·precision + 0.15·compression. The published score averages the raw tape exchange scores and shrinks small samples toward the cohort mean, so five great answers can't beat twenty good ones. Produced feed rows count only toward coarse estimates, never toward a full score.

clear all ✕
6exchanges match
6on raw tape
0redirected or not addressed
Answered raw tape D 5 · C 5 · P 5 · Cm 4 4.85

Q interesting to kind of understand the scope of how much it takes to fund something like this, um, for you and the, you know, the smaller scale, the micro, um, units that are only powering a thousand homes, um, what is the cost to build that versus, let's say, the really, really large, uh, nuclear facilities that we all see on the internet and are kind of like the symbol?

A Yep. Um, so the, I mean, the, the really big ones that we have now are on the order of a few billion dollars for reactor. Uh, a tiny little one that I'm working on is on the order of tens of millions of dollars, but you know, everyone's design is, uh, quite a bit different, but it's way easier to finance, uh, a much smaller unit like this, of course. Uh, so I think that's really exciting. And there's no reason that, uh, the software control systems, the digital twin, the regulatory work that we do couldn't apply to the larger scale. So I think micro reactors are in this really great place where they don't need a lot of fuel. They don't need a big facility. We can fit ours inside of the old EBR to dome at Idaho national lab. And in this hermetically sealed enclosure, Surrounded by these nuclear facilities and scientists, we can operate it in the most safe place possible to test the technology and then have that technology apply to all the other sizes and scales of, of reactors. So it's, Awesome. I'm super excited to be working on it.

AI assessment note: “really big ones that we have now are on the order of a few billion”

Answered raw tape D 4 · C 5 · P 5 · Cm 4 4.55

Q Yeah. I believe so. I think this will all help, uh, before we get too deep, I'm sure I could ask you a ton more questions about the team. Let's go to the founding of Radiant and what Radiant is. Could you explain more on Radiant Nuclear, how you founded the company, um, what your main product is and where you are in the stage of the business?

A Yeah, that's, that's a whole lot to remember. Uh, so founding, founding the company, um, you know, way back in 2019, Uh, I was at SpaceX and looking at what was happening in the U S the U S military, uh, created a thing called the Pele program, uh, where they said we want a one megawatt transportable air transportable, uh, reactor. So something you can fly around in a C-seventeen. Um, and I was just overjoyed because I recognized that if you could do that, you could put that on a starship, which can take a hundred tons to space. Um, and so this could be the way we actually get nuclear tech in space. Um, and I had worked on these, uh, Mars system design. I knew that that would be massive. Basically, um, could really make making life multi-planetary way less challenging and remove all the miracles, uh, in the way. Um, so that's really the founding. One of the founding moments was this like early, where I saw the market was changing. And this was even ahead of, I think the new found public support for nuclear, which has really started to blossom in the last two years, I would say. Um, but I, I realized that the potential there, uh, I had looked at these Mars studies. I had done a lot of work at SpaceX. I, I believe that the mission of making life multi-planetary is actually still what I'm doing now. And, uh, I realized that it would be a lot easier to leave SpaceX to go and do tha…

AI assessment note: “so founding, founding the company, um, you know, way back in 2019”

Answered raw tape D 5 · C 4 · P 4 · Cm 4 4.30

Q Would you say that because there was such a gap in research and time and resources, uh, for this category of energy that there is like a generational gap of expertise and education in these legislative or, uh, more regulatory environments?

A Um, absolutely. There's a gap. Um, uh, because such a long period of time has passed, of course. And, uh, I think computers have gotten very good too. So it is very easy to allow for analysis paralysis to set in where you can model something and you can model it in amazing detail. You can run it on supercomputers so you can get a fairly quick result. Um, but it's easy to get lost in that world and to kind of play with every lever. Um, and it's definitely true that in many industries we've forgotten how to build. It's not, not just nuclear, but in other areas also. Right. That loss of manufacturing really impacts every industry and nuclear even more so, um, because there's a lot of rules around handling for nuclear material. And if you're making a rocket company, you can go and you can find a test site or someone else's old test site. You can go by and then you can get a rocket engine there and you can just start testing it. It's got, especially if you've already gotten environmental permits, uh, the site. Right. And so there's not really anything limiting you from learning by doing, which is the only way. And, uh, in nuclear, we haven't done that very much, although we do have an ability to do that, and it's through our national labs, but there, to date, is not a really, not a process developed, you know, there's not a muscle there either, um, on the regulatory side, but there …

AI assessment note: “absolutely. There's a gap. Um, uh, because such a long period of time has passed”

Answered raw tape D 5 · C 4 · P 4 · Cm 4 4.30

Q How are you going to build the playbook for additional companies follow or if that even is possible?

A Um, so some of the things that we're doing are going to be generally helpful to nuclear industry. So we are testing nuclear grade graphite right now. We actually will make the results of that available to everyone. So it will just qualify a U S domestic American made nuclear grade graphite supplier, uh, to a higher degree, just, it's just gonna be beneficial. Um, Our fuel specification is open also. We have just published the way that we're gonna alter the particle of fuel to make it more economical for a microreactor, which is really important to do, because someone will do it, and you know, you don't want to be beaten by that in the future if you, you can do it now. But I don't know that there will be a playbook. Maybe, you know, we'll build part of the playbook for the one megawatt Category, but we really, when we're thinking about nuclear or even energy in general, like it's used in such a variety of, of cases at such a variety of scales that we, we have to answer that question for a particular size range. Um, but, uh, I, I should also mention the, the DoD's Pele program from 2019 that I announced. There's a lot of effort. Uh, there are teams working on that. Um, at national laboratories, on the government side, uh, and at companies, and they are making a ton of progress that is helping build the playbook that we need also. So we're not really totally out in front and all b…

AI assessment note: “But I don't know that there will be a playbook. Maybe, you know, we'll build part”

Answered raw tape D 5 · C 4 · P 4 · Cm 3 4.15

Q I appreciate you sharing more on that. Um, the technical detail is super interesting and, um, not something that many people have been exposed to or actually understand. So it's really helpful to get your, your, uh, deeper insights on that. Just a couple more questions. Um, are you guys currently hiring? How are you building out your team?

A Yeah, we're always hiring. Of course. Um, no, there's a, there's roles posted on our website and I mean, there's some, um, You know, interesting ones are like a project manager, because we have actually a lot of these non-dilutive government awards now, but also lead nuclear engineers, um, and several others. Um, and they're, they're constantly updated, but you know, what we really need are people who love the mission, um, who are self-motivated, who are super excited about the future of nuclear that we're talking about here. Um, and I think, uh, you know, attracting a lot of the right personality types is, is one of the things a startup does really well by having this unique new worldview and message. Um, and anyone who finds this an interesting problem, who would love to work on it, um, you're, you're the best way of us growing as a company. You know, come, come talk to us, um, and we might find a fit. That is how I found SpaceX a really long time ago. I have the, the email I wrote to them, uh, years ago, And I was just like, I love, I love your mission. Here's what I know how to do. Let me know if you're interested. I'm like, very simple and straightforward. Um, and I mean, one of the great things about SpaceX, I think was that it attracted the right sorts of people. Um, and you know, what you study in school is kind of important. Um, not totally. I think it's more important…

AI assessment note: “Yeah, we're always hiring. Of course. Um, no, there's a, there's roles posted”

Answered raw tape D 4 · C 4 · P 4 · Cm 3 3.85

Q What is the process like? Why are you behind?

A Um, so many reasons. Um, so, you know, there's no, I like to say this line a lot. There's no new nuclear design that has been fueled in the U S in the last 50 years. And that's true. There's a lot of qualifiers there. Things have happened outside the U S. Some new reactors have been built in the U S um, but they're not a new design. They're a, They're a new build of an old design. So to a large degree, because we haven't done it, we've sort of lost that muscle, right? There's just been atrophying of the system, uh, and there are a bunch of pieces, parts to it. So, you know, the, the NRC don't really have rules that are perfectly tuned for innovation, um, but they do think about it. Um, they're pressed by, by Congress, um, To, to make sure that they're able to modernize. There've been a bunch of modernization efforts. Um, NEMA, uh, the Nuclear Energy Industry Modernization Act, uh, in 2019 is amongst those, but they continue to, to go down those paths. And, uh, I think the NRC actually can easily still be, uh, an effective regulator, um, and can allow for innovation, uh, because every discussion I've had with them has proven to me that there are very dedicated, very intelligent individuals there. Um, Who want to see nuclear, uh, built and to make sure that it's safe, which is their entire job. Um, but for a very long time, there haven't been customers and great products and the …

AI assessment note: “because we haven't done it, we've sort of lost that muscle”

page 1
Made with StarZero

Turn any episode into a week of clips.

This entire site, over 160 episodes transcribed, diarized, checked and made playable, runs on the StarZero media pipeline. Drop in your own episode and the podcast clipper finds the moments worth sharing, cuts them, captions them, and reframes them for every feed.