Revolutionising nuclear technology for use terrestrially and extra-terrestrially

Show video

Welcome to Beyond blueprints I'm Andrew Smith and  today we're joined by Will Madson who's here from   Antares Industries hi will thanks very much for  joining us and you're joining us it looks like   from much sunnier than it is here in in the UK  I'm in the very dreary Midlands but it looks like   you're somewhere much warmer where are you based  at the moment I'm in the let's call it the Greater   Bay Area I'm a little bit on the outskirts but  yeah within the Bay Area so Northern California   okay sunny no Cal dreamy and will here state  to talk a little bit about Antares Industries   now um well if if somebody Googles Antares at the  moment it's very mysterious your website so can   you tell us a little bit more about what what  does Antares do what is the problem that it's   setting out to solve absolutely so our mission I  think that's about all that appears on our landing   page but our mission is to provide abundant energy  anywhere from from Earth to the asteroid belt what   that really means is we're trying to build very  small nuclear reactors that are optimized to be   rapidly deployable and usable you know with plenty  of trade-offs in there you know so that they're   robust reliable and easy to use vs you know the  you know most cutting edge technology let's call   it or something it's certainly a problem more  about form factor and systems integration than   it is about you know Cutting Edge nuclear R&D  but that is the goal and what we're going out   to solve incredible and when you say so I can get  my head on kind of the size are we talking kind   of a basketball court a tennis court something  could fit in my bathtub how big let's say the   size of a car like a sedan okay wow okay and you  can get out of something the size of a sedan with   nuclear power you can get something that is  able to produce a useful amount of power in   these different orbits absolutely yeah we can get  about 300 kilowatts electric based on our current   system design which you know it would be certainly  incredibly compelling if you're going to run like   a forward operating base for the DoD or something  like that I think the best thing to consider that   would be like a terrestrial system that people  are used to might be big diesel generators so   if you're ever at like a work site or you know  someone setting up some kind of construction on   a house or whatnot where you have to take out the  power often times they'll bring in one of these   huge diesel generators it kind of looks like the  back of a trailer on a truck and you're constantly   filling that thing up and it's incredibly noisy  and loud we would be similar form hopefully a   bit smaller and putting off you know two to three  times as much energy as your typical system like   that and of course you wouldn't have to refuel the  thing but every three to five years since there's   a nuclear core in there okay well so a real kind  of game changer in terms of um just refuelling   really because there is no hard shoulder to pull  over and just top up the tank when when you're I   guess in low orbit or beyond yeah absolutely so  I mean that's that's one of the key things is we   think that we're solving for contested Logistics  issues so like it's very difficult to fly fuel   around if you're in a war zone or you know you're  in incredibly remote locations whether that's you   know in the Arctic or Antarctic or however it  is you know if you're in a remote place that   you don't have infrastructure to have electricity  it probably also is difficult to be constantly be   flying in fuel and we do see that as an issue and  have done plenty of customer discovery on the pain   point of getting power to remote locations  especially because you're then constantly   trying to build up the supply chain to get more  diesel or jet fuel or whatever it is in there   okay and so I mean this idea is fascinating to me  because I can clearly see the the problem that it   solves is you you're getting power where it's  difficult to get it whether that's terrestrial   or extra-terrestrial why hasn't it been done  before kind of why why not what's the enabler   that's bringing Antares into the space sure well  I would advocate anyone watching this to go do a   little Wikipedia search and look up you know the  Snap 10 reactor that was launched in the 60s so   it's not the first time that someone will have put  a nuclear reactor in space and reach criticality   like a lot of things in the nuclear industry  there are regulatory hurdles getting things   approved getting things qualified so I think the  biggest issue of why it hasn't been done before   has a bit to do with you know it's an interesting  engineering problem and figuring it out is a lot   to do with regulatory and economic hurdles and we  think that we've reached you know a point where   there's a confluence of things in our favor  in terms of manufacturing processes focus on   you know eventually building up this high-assay  low-enriched uranium supply chain in the US with   these triso particles various entrants coming  in to solve some of the fuel challenges that's   normally you know an incredible hurdle within  the nuclear industry as well as you know so   many people in the space industry are doing so  many interesting things with turbo machinery you   know in small for jet engines and rocket engines  and coincidentally if you're going to be running   a closed brayton cycle or something like that in  space the the expense for small components and   much smaller turbines than you know traditional  nuclear power plants that have massive turbines   that are incredible cost those things have come  down as well and we think that we can you know   reach economic viability and piggy back off of  a lot of the more recent work that's been done   on qualifying higher temperature reactors higher  temperature reactor you're running you can make it   a bit smaller but we're not looking to have to  go through massive fuel qualifications because   you know other other folks have done that over the  past 20 30 years now as we look to build up this   new newer supply chain around Halo in the US Very  interesting so it's not necessarily a technology   itself challenge that's obviously come along but  it's the other kind of contributing engineering   factors the environment that you're operating  in is more favorable more launch platforms I'm   guessing as well more launch platform options is  that factoring into kind of why no is a great time   yeah absolutely and I mean I don't want to index  too far simply on the space-based applications   because while that is incredibly interesting  and something we're definitely looking at and   we're certainly optimizing for form factors  that fit on C17 aircraft and will be able to   be you know pretty much deployed anywhere you  can put a runway even an unimproved runway okay   amazing so so that's the why that's that's the  big the problem that Antares is solving where do   you fit into the the picture will what is your  what is your role what you bring to the table   absolutely I'm the head of engineering and you  know I kind of came into this position because   I have a whole lot of experience across a whole  bunch of different disciplines I haven't spent   too much time in any one place so I'm more of a  systems engineering type than someone who's deep   diving on a specific problem we have those kind of  Engineers too you know we've got nuclear Engineers   on the team experts in heat transfer and what  I'm doing is you know being a general generalist   plugging in wherever I can on helping with the  design and the analysis and what are we coming   up with but focusing a ton of time on running the  requirements process the systems engineering how   are we validating verifying everything everything  what are we planning in terms of test is that   enough planning for test have we actually called  out our risks have we double checked and made sure   that we have retirement plans around all of these  so that you know we we feel comfortable when we're   getting into the tough engineering or economic  decisions over you know what to build ourselves   what to buy ourselves how many quality assessments  are the right amount and those sorts of things you   mentioned requirements there it's an interesting  one because I imagine my knowledge the nuclear   industry is very surface level but I imagine in  terms of kind of design life and requirements   you've got quite a long horizon to account for  compared to some other engineering field I'm   guessing oh absolutely yeah especially when you're  just you know considering you know what is your   path to getting your full reactor qualified  what needs to happen there and then how many   additional requirements are you leveraging at the  behest of your regulator versus just your end user   you know you know you can visualize your end user  like let's say somebody's got a mining operation   in the Arctic they need a lot of power you know  that person probably cares about having an energy   source that works and that's relatively safe you  know so like we have to care certainly about our   nuclear safety things but you know as long as it  works and we give them the right exclusion zone   like they're going to be happy but our regulator  has many more concerns about you know the inner   workings and all of the materials and margins  of safety and factors of safety we don't need   to get into philosophical arguments about over  regulating or under-regulation and putting places   for sensors at appropriate spots so that we can  collect the right data provide the right data to   the regulators to make that process a little swift  and easier rather than something that's going to   be very difficult because you know unaware of what  the regulators is going to want to see don't carve   out space or methods for measuring various points  in the reactor and then coming up with oh I don't   know we're gonna have to do a redesign to get this  thing actually approved for use okay so it's quite   a complex I guess requirements environment both  from both in the the the life cycle of the product   but also commissioning and decommissioning you've  got to kind of be thinking about all of that   before you even get into the the design of the  product itself absolutely 100% sure so the concept   of operations is is huge that's kind of a military  term that we come back to quite a bit but you have   to know how you're going to install it you have  to know you know what are the safety concerns with   turning the thing on and then you know how are  you to get rid of this what are going to be the   regulatory concerns about removing a reactor that  you had buried in soil what did you activate how   do you get rid of that how are you containing  that you know and does all of that make sense   when you factor in the economic analysis of your  build and deploying this thing I really relate to   the concept of operations we struggle with that a  bit as also an aerospace because people really run   their jet engines hard in certain environments  sometimes in anybody who's had any product at   home very rarely do you read the the limitation  instructions on the product but I guess you've got   to try and anticipate what everybody's behaving  really interesting to hear about the technology   coming back to kind of Antares as a team am I  right in thinking you're you're pretty kind of   early stage kind of how big is the team at  the moment is it can everybody kind of fit   in a room or are you geographically distributed  yeah I don't know how much is technically inside   baseball but we are all located in California and  the team is somewhere between five to 10 let's   say so we can definitely all fit in a room unless  it's a closet okay so you're kind of at that that   sweet spot of being really agile I guess because  you're still very much there's a manageable number   of connections there and you know how was it at  what point were you kind of into the team have you   been in since day since day one have you seen the  team starting to grow yes so I mean Jordan's the   founder so he was the one person that was there  from day one and he handled you know getting the   company set up and the pre-seed raise but then I  was the first employee to join so I have seen it   you know seen the team double when I joined and  then since then we've been growing fast as well   but I guess slightly smaller by percentage just  by the fact that we keep gaining people which has   been great okay amazing so are you at the point  because I think often when when we're talking   especially to other kind of start-up companies  that three to four kind of engineer point tends   to be the the sweet spot and it's the expanding  how do you maintain that good understanding of the   requirements if you've got a massive requirements  list you've had previous experiences in bigger   companies is that right so you you've kind of  seen it from both sides I guess the startup and   the beyond startup phases interested to hear  your reflections yeah absolutely so I do have   experience as a developmental engineer for the  air force where I was doing flight test on radar   systems so the AWACS which is a big radar in the  sky as well as launch operations for the Delta 4   rocket which is a big three stick rocket made  by ULA which does a lot of spy satellite stuff   because has a super massive payload capacity and  then since going on from being a developmental   engineer in the Air Force I worked for four years  helping build super conducting quantum computers   with Rigetti Computing that team was quite a bit  bigger by the time I joined we had already gotten   through the series B rays and you know we were  at around a 100 people or something like that and   then you know Antares is much smaller but going  so getting through the the crux of the question   which is you know how do you manage requirements  and alignment between teams of varying sizes where   you can't where you either have you know plenty  of touch points and you know sub teams or you're   just individuals working on things within the  air force you know the requirements management   process has like entire organizations you know  designed funded and you know operating on that   to make sure you know these things flow out and  I would say that that process is expensive and is   not something you'd necessarily want to replicate  at a private company let alone a startup it all   it all kind of bit of a luxury to be able to  do that yeah absolutely you know so like they   were certainly spending more in terms of risk  reduction especially on the space launch events   you know they were willing to pay the premium to  do additional risk reduction and make sure there   was additional verifications validations against  all requirements and have requirements Engineers   that are looking at vendors and test data and  pouring over these things at Rigetti Computing   the requirements problem and alignment was quite  quite difficult only in so far as it was such an   emerging technology and coming up with like what  is the end user and what's the valuable next thing   to build and therefore what are the requirements  that flow down was very murky I don't don't know   how many folks listening are super familiar with  Quantum Computing industry but if you could build   a big million Cubit quantum computer which is  out of reach by today's current manufacturing   technologies the thing would be very useful and  you could point to those requirements picking   something that's more intermediate is difficult  because you know you can do a bottoms up of like   what can we build now but you want to always be  pushing the envelope in a meaningful way forward   so that we can get to these final big systems so  the the art and science of requirements definition   there was why is this a requirement since it's  not quite a fault tolerant quantum computer so   therefore you're picking something that's a  bit lesser you have to justify why that is   a worthwhile target and ensure the entire team's  aligned and make sure that you're interpreting how   a requirement for one of the subsystems actually  flows up to the performance that a user is going   to see which is very difficult just because  of the levels of abstraction that happen from   a physical system to distilling Quantum logic  at Antares the difficulty I would say is just   making sure that like while everyone's running  at 100 miles an hour that we are checking back   enough and looking back at the same documents and  really detailing out what are all the assumptions   that we're making as we're going forward and  as we're starting to proliferate analyses and   spreadsheets simulations doing our first CAD  modelling our neutronic simulations like all   of these things just like any anything else you'd  be engineering take plenty of inputs that are you   know given assumptions and maybe it's based on  a material you're using or maybe it's based on   some pressure level that you're selecting for a  working fluid and then you're going back to your   table of the thermodynamic properties you know and  like if people don't have exact assumptions around   like well what what do we think our starting spec  is and how does that come from the requirement if   you're not listing these things and ensuring  that everyone is aligned when you have a very   small team everyone has so much work to do and  it's usually you know a it's pretty attractive   opportunity to ambitious folks that like to do  a lot of heads down work like that's why people   generally come to startups and want to work in  that environment so ensuring that everyone slows   down enough to come together and make sure that  you've got you know multiple tag UPS a week and   that you have centralized documentation over like  any assumption that you're making and starting to   proliferate that's kind of hardcoded in one  of your analysis whether it's sheets or mat   lab code or whatever it is and just making sure  everyone agrees with it and it's it's a reasonable   assumption by everyone's estimation rather than  just your estimation you know there's the whole   joke about you know what Engineers or physicists  think a reasonable assumption is and disagreements   but the main thing is whenever you come to an  understanding on something you should be paring   that out and making sure that no one disagrees  and that your your entire team is aligned on   on everything that is a shared assumption and  that you're constantly questioning those things   so that the team is not holding false beliefs  yeah it's very true and what you were saying   about you know people people join startups they  want to be part of that pacy environment where   they're getting to get the engineering work done  so I guess it's quite important especially when   you're at that you know early Crux decision point  to have quite a lean process so people can get on   with the work and you've got enough oversight  that you're managing your requirements kind   of efficiently but you know we all love doing the  engineering absolutely technical work so slightly   um a slightly provoking question I guess kind  of coming at that a different direction and this   could be on the kind of the technological approach  or more about how you work as a team if let's say   we had Antares and it was set up in 1985 versus  Antares as it is in 2023 would you be doing it   the same way or what has changed in that time um  in how you're kind of approaching the problem of   power where it needs to be anywhere in the world  big question I know yeah provoking question so   your solution I think is the same today as 1985  if you just consider at a high level what is a   known technology with a very high power density  that you could scale down and operate I think   that still is a fission reactor I can't think of a  better system B powered that you can operate that   that we understand very well I mean maybe you want  to get kick started on some of this Fusion work or   something like that but you know a fission reactor  is something you can point to in 1985 and say I'm   starting a company I want to build the thing and  I'm going to scale it down now perhaps we'd be   bigger I mean you'd have to look at what what  fuels have been qualified what's going on how   is the regulatory environment around it a lot of  nuclear always always comes back to that I don't   think that we are solving things with too much  brand new cutting edge technology which I think is   a you know something in favor but like I mean you  can point to nuclear submarines the the reactor   rooms or whatever on those highly classified but  you know they're no bigger than you know the you   know one4 of a submarine say or something like  that so like that would be that would be what   you'd point to and say like what what would be the  best the best power source so yeah I suppose I'm   not sure if I totally answered it correctly but  we would I think we'd be building the same thing   the way we're building it has definitely changed  and that's definitely the engineering tools why   are we able to go faster than we would before the  proliferation of information just through the fact   that we all have computers and are all connected  and we don't have to hand build every single   software tool that we're going to use so there's  tons of Open Source tooling out there which allows   us to quickly iterate and evaluate different  design decisions and Vary things and you just   can't go that fast in 1985 when you're dealing  with main frames or whatever people were working   on back then apologies if I butchered that one and  we were already you know at least on desktops by   then I guess yet that that ability to iterate and  I guess simulations I'm imagining that's a huge   part of of what you do um how how that interfaces  with what when do you prototype when do you get   on with the hardware versus The Growing Power of  simulation and how you how you how you balance   those two when is the right point to get early  Hardware done when is it best to really nail   your model absolutely um and I think like really  understanding how your simulations are built so   like even if we're going to be taking open source  tools or whatever is in there like I want to know   what assumptions they made as well and where where  is something you know they're just using something   that's an association versus like a first  principles how thing how something is happening   not like yeah a good thing to always point to is  like if you look at any like simulation tool for a   gas generator or something like that generally  speaking they just assume like a straight up   heat transfer is happening rather than like the  chemistry of a combustion event or something like   that I'm sure that comes up in the Aerospace  industry a lot just because that's notorious   hard hard to simulate like perfectly and then you  say like ah well I'm going to need empirical data   on how my combustion event happens or whatever it  is not that we're going to have combustion events   this is just trying to pick you have to you have  to figure out what's unique about your system that   is just not modelled you know 100% based on first  principles and if it's hard to model that thing   because you know nature can be hard to simulate  then you have to make sure that you're making a   representative test and that you're eventually  able to feed in that data when you're you're   making your digital twin and your simulations keep  getting better as you add proprietary layers on   there Based on data that you're taking and making  sure that you're testing you know the right things   that you know the least about so that you're I  always like to say that you're like trimming off   your margin of uncertainty like how many things  are we just completely uncertain how they work   and then you know maybe you're over engineering  something because you can't get super close to   the limits on something that you don't understand  super well you want to just make sure that you're   constantly cutting down on that uncertainty and  that's where you're going to be spending you   know your your test budget versus just trying to  simulate yeah yeah pick finding the kind of the   holes in your verification and validation where  you can kind of plug in the new data I'm guessing   yeah it's something we really struggle within  Aerospace as well actually you know when to um   when to start testing component level and when  to start looking at kind of what the integrated   system does because you know Hardware is expensive  um and so yeah yeah the idea of like digital twins   and stuff I think we're just going to see more  and more of um so I mean you've got you've got a   great team you've got a great idea you've got the  technology what what keeps the company up at night   what's what's kind of your your big challenge at  the moment what's kind of you know when Antares   is is lined out of the evening what's your um  yeah what's what's your your problem that's   right in front of you sure well because of all  of the things that you listed that you know this   thing can be engineered the technology exists  we're certainly not the only very good team out   there looking at this issue I think what keeps  us up is that we have to be focused on execution   and making you know optimized decisions on the  best information that we have at a pretty quick   Cadence to make sure that you know we're building  the best product on the most favorable time scale   as it's going to be seen by our end customer we  think the DoD is going to be our first customer   there but they have other micro reactor projects  up and running the US Department of Defense out   of the Strategic capabilities office is running  this project pay demonstration which is focused   on micro reactors now those are a lot bigger than  our Reactor with a smaller more modular design   versus a huge one megawatt plus unit but point  being is I think what keeps us up is the fact that   there is some competition you're in a race this  market and we need to make sure that we do things   the best we're the best stewards of the capital  that we have and that we are you know executing   quickly but you know with the appropriate amount  of engineering rigor so of course that we're not   you know falling on our face by trying to go too  fast yeah so you've got the jeel pressures in a   way you've got the the End customer who obviously  wants to wants to see something and then you've   also got other people kind of rushing towards  that customer so you're you're feeling the pace   from a kind of pincer movement yeah I I think that  would be a way to describe it I mean like we've   gone through iterations on designs and what's  possible and we we always try to come back to   what can we leverage that's already been qualified  by Regulators in nu in in the nuclear space so   whether that's the doe that's the US Department of  energy or the NRC the nuclear regulation Committee   in the US and like trying to make sure we're using  as many components and items within the limits of   things that already exist so that we can go you  know faster to our first prototype unit and then   we can you know after we have a system that  works we can work on you know how can we push   the boundaries and limits and how can we engage to  get new things qualified and like really you know   blow the doors off what this technoloy is at and  but you know the point being is to get to that we   need to make sure that we are we are turning  over every stone and that we're not putting   anything too exotic into our first system and I  mean you mentioned kind of first first customer   is likely to be kind of DoD that's like going in  at The Deep End right that's kind of that's not   a kind of nice operating environment so that's I  guess that's a really demanding requirement set to   have as a kind of entry into the market you know  it is it is interesting so my background is in the   DoD certainly I'm used to playing in that swimming  pool they are a demanding customer I think there's   been a lot of focus in the last 10 years on  non-traditional contractors so startups and   others engaging with the DoD and the DoD trying  to make systems to engage with small businesses   and various offices that that call themselves  the front door to X like the front door to space   or the front door to Air Force research lab or  whatever it is they they certainly are working   on on improving processes to engage with smaller  companies and I think there's a lot to to like   about the DoD both in the facts both in the the  way that they are demanding customer but also in   the way that you know they have pioneered a lot of  Technologies you know if you look at the history   of DARPA the various research Labs but like the  DoD likes to take bets on emerging technology some   of those they they solely use themselves some of  those make them to dual use markets certainly we'd   like to be in that category but you know they're  they're a customer that has demanding requirements   but perhaps they're not as price sensitive on the  first OFA kind unit as some kind of commercial   customer might be so so I don't know it is it is  tough you know it's not always the easiest to sell   into the DoD there's definitely big companies  that are competing with us for those exact same   Contracting dollars but I think there is a lot to  like about the market opportunity yeah interesting   as well that as a customer they also I guess have  been it maybe it's a different division but you   know they've been a developer as well so they're  used to making and designing into requirements   so I'm wondering if that also makes them kind  of quite tricky because they know what they're   talking about they know what are the requirements  it's not kind of vague customer they've got quite   a laser focus on what they want to do um which  could be good and bad I guess it gives you gives   you a clear requirement set but it means it's  quite uncompromising absolutely so I think the   way to Envision it is like look if you're going to  try to build a new system to the DoD it's not just   a commercial offering or or you know something  that just is off the shelf today like you're   going to be building something with the DoD they  have a fleet of Engineers and World world-class   scientists and they put the resources behind it  to ensure that this is like a core capability   and that whatever they are buying and bringing  to Market that you know it's exactly what their   user is going to need and their user is somebody  that's you know in life or death scenarios so they   are you know unrelenting on the requirements  and I think for us that's great I mean I want   I want to build safe nuclear systems that can be  deployed all over the world and certainly if we   can build something to the DoD standards I think  that we're going to be in Prime position going   out and eventually trying to augment that design  to make it more palpable to the commercial Market   so you know I'm I'm excited to partner with the  DoD like they have all of this expertise already   in house and all of these engineers and like I  consider an honor to get to work work with them   and hopefully we will you know pick up the right  contracts so just that will happen yeah yeah it's   so interesting the so with with the the DoD the  requirements are clearly so important so how do   you maintain um you said you have you got to keep  this laser focus on kind of delivery and you know   root product how do you keep that kind of end  goal you know in mind how do you maintain the   kind of visibility of ultimately what the product  needs to do is that through these kind of regular   reviews is that's through kind of people really  regularly talking about the the requirements kind   of the system subsystem level yeah so I mean  I like to structure things as much as possible   as you know an engineering project where you're  working towards various Milestones and and then   you're having reviews that are Milestone driven  rather than like arbitrary points on the schedule   so you want to get a certain amount of things done  and different work streams done and have you know   simulations done or whatever it is and then you  want to review that work and always come back I   make sure that requirements are a focal point  of any and all reviews so like just upfront   when you're discussing what will we be reviewing  what's the point of this why are we all getting   together and even though we're a five-person  team and we talk every day and we're constantly   together like why are we having you know a more  formalized you know meeting thing where we're   going through a deck and going going over the  results and somebody's presenting all the work   they did we want to point to the requirements  you know we needed to validate this thing about   the core or I needed to confirm that this was the  assumption that we had made in the working fluid   for our power conversion unit and you know sure  sure enough you know everything looks favorable   and just making sure that you're always pointing  that pointing that back to you know this was the   unit of work that was being done or you know maybe  this was around test planning and you know these   are the sets of tests that we are going to be  reviewing today and you can link those directly   to you know these requirements which end up  you know if you follow the chain to like the   parents that like this is what the user is going  to see and this is why we're doing this so I like   to make sure that you know you have Milestones  you're reviewing after Milestones in some kind   of more formalized way even with your small team  like I think it's important to put that kind of   muscle in place and that anytime you're holding a  review you're pointing back to the big picture of   why why this matters and that usually comes down  to the requirements yeah yeah yeah they're at the   core of everything so with all that in mind I mean  you're and I forgot to ask actually kind of and I   don't know if you can talk about kind of timelines  or you know what you what you're shooting for if   you can say decade I don't know even what you're  shooting for or if that that's all under wraps at   the moment less than a decade certainly I don't  okay oh wow okay yeah we're certainly targeting   less than a decade I don't know given our current  stage how much more I can divulge but well less   that's but fast fast for nuclear that's amazing  how do you see um as we're kind of coming to it's   be so interesting to hear about this how do you  see the future of engine in and Broad question but   specifically I guess in in the industry that  Antares is playing in where where do you see   things going what are you excited for I am excited  you know for the entire push for I guess it's   a slight Renaissance for small modular reactors  micro reactors that word wasn't even in the common   parlance I'd say about five six years ago so it's  a regular it's a It's relatively New Concept that   it's actually economically feasible to build  reactors that are not power plant scale and   that are well less than 10 megawatts and seeing  that pushed forward I think gives us so much so   much opportunity to kind of really thrust into a  second nuclear age I mean that's probably a bit   of a buzzword and you might hear that get thrown  around by other folks within the industry but like   you know the promise of nuclear back in the day  was that we'd have all of these Boundless Energy   sources and consumption would be so high that it  wouldn't even be you know a concern obviously one   of the biggest concerns facing all of us in the  world is power consumption how are we generating   power and what is that doing to the environment  world we live around I think you know more nuclear   will solve a lot of those and I think that doing  that in a in a safe and reliable way you know will   be like not non-trivial for you know the way the  way we live I mean first you solve this problem   for remote circumstances I think eventually you  know energy eventually comes down to micro grid   scenarios more distributed power generation and I  think on the ground mendous terms it just allows   you know people to live better like if if energy  and the cost of energy is no longer a concern for   people imagine how many more things you could be  doing it could be quite amazing so I think not   that not not only that it solves you know current  scarcity issues and and climate types of problems   which is definitely a big part of our mission it's  the fact that you know abund energy for any person   no matter where they are would be profound in in  the way of life and how they can live it's got a   key role to play in the energy transition and that  question from a slightly different point of view   then so that's that's the technology future in  terms of you know if you were to fast forward 10   years time how can you see how we as Engineers are  going to be working differently um or what would   you like to see maybe that's a better question  what would you the thorn in your side that would   just be amazing if it could just go away and it  doesn't need to be about requirements it could   just be about the world of engineering today  yeah absolutely um I think the biggest thing is   you know more collaboration more collaborative  tools you know the fact that all Engineers can   be sharing models and simulations they're easy  to work with there's more or open source tools   even just being able to pull things up on your  computer in terms of like you know going back   to thermodynamics tables or anything rather than  having to like sort through a book thumb through   the old text I think I've got one of them over  here a kind of thermodynamics reference book just   of shot yeah it just lets you go so much faster  and then the fact that the just proliferation of   pre-print servers and allowing people to easily  read into the science that's being done at The   Cutting Edge all across universities across  the world I just don't think there was that   much access to that that type of information you  know even 15 years out unless you had like Niche   subscriptions to many different journals and  periodicals and those those types of papers are   prevalent in everyone's engineering job these  days and you know reading through seeing what   this group's doing that group's doing so I just  think that speeds us all up overall and allows   us to you know iterate faster because you don't  have to solve every single fundamental science   issue and you don't have to write all of your own  software to start investigating things you can   start tinkering you know as fast as possible  and then you can share those results out and   people can you know iterate in real time with you  rather than having you know to download and get a   courier to hand over some papers or a disc to  someone for them to upload into their computer   and start working so I think like there's always  a plenty of like a chorus of people out there   that like you know with the space industry and  the Resurgence of that or the nuclear industry   that like oh you know the course of development  has kind of gone arai since the 50s and 60s and   we were doing all these amazing things you know  I think we may have focused on the right problem   first in terms of highly developing all of the  networking and internet Technologies and compute   power and we've gotten to a point where it's  very easy to have almost any information at   your fingertips so much so that like it's a it's  a real skill to have a good filter on whether the   information is valid or not and being able to  share those things you know and work in real   time as seamlessly as possible so yeah that's  where I think 100% agreed on the collaboration   the something I struggle with and it just sprang  to me there when you were talking about access to   research it is incredible something I sometimes  struggle with is just the volume so You' got it's   like you've opened the Taps is knowing how to  keep a bridged of all the developments um I I   certainly feel like that in Aerospace is that  there's so many studies to kind of triage that   it's a it's a blessing but it can feel like a  curse sometimes as well what to pay attention   to in terms of developments in the space I don't I  don't know if that's the same for you and kind of   you know um the latest you know reactor geometries  or materials all that kind of stuff that I guess   you've got to keep an ear out for but you got  to balance your time yeah absolutely I think I   think almost most every single field is inundated  and that's just because you know everything is   pro posted pre-print now which is net good for  civilization net bad for engineer that needs   to filter through you know 20 different papers  and pick which one to read since they're all you   know seven pages long with additional figures and  appendices yeah that's that's a universal problem   all Engineers um could attest to um brilliant  and before we leave I've got to ask you and I   don't know if you can say this when will we be  able to see read more about Antares or is that   very all under wraps at the moment um you should  be able to see and read more you know within this   year okay very exciting very exciting got to keep  the cards close to your chest um thanks very much   for joining us will and really look forward to  seeing what Antares Industries does in the future   um thanks for joining us today on um and I'm going  to say that again forgotten what the second word   was thanks so much for joining us will on Beyond  Blueprints today thanks it was great brilliant

2023-10-16

Show video