Skip to main content

Transatomic Snags $2 Million Investment from FF Science for New Reactor Design

Transatomic Power Logo
We generally don't pay much attention to news from the venture capital community here at NEI Nuclear Notes, but for one day we're happy to make an exception for this announcement from Transatomic Power:
Transatomic Power, developers of a breakthrough in nuclear reactor design, announced today that FF Science, an investment vehicle of Founders Fund, has invested $2 million to assist the company with its seed stage development. The funds will be used for bench-top laboratory testing and refinement of the company’s designs and computer models.

"We believe there are massive opportunities for innovation across all parts of the energy sector, ranging from technologies to improve production and transmission to new methods of baseload generation, like the Transatomic Power reactor. Transatomic has the potential to make nuclear energy clean, safe, and affordable, providing a low-cost source of carbon-free power and consuming the waste of older reactors currently in operation,” said Scott Nolan, Partner at Founders Fund.
Congratulations to the team at Transatomic, and in particular to Chief Science Officer, Leslie Dewan. Most of the world got their first chance to know Dewan thanks to this 2011 Ted Talk where she first posited her idea about how she could tackle the question of used nuclear fuel by burning it in a new type of reactor. It wasn't long after that Dewan caught the attention of Forbes, being named to the magazine's "30 Under 30" feature in 2012.

Of course, here at NEI, we know Dewan all too well as she's one of the four faces of our Future of Energy campaign that we kicked off earlier this year.



To get to know Dewan a little better, watch this video interview she did after shooting the NEI ad. And when you get a chance, please check out the website for Founders Fund, where it looks like the Founders are having more fun investing in the future than they might want to let on. What other startups have they invested in? How about Facebook, SpaceX and Spotify? Have to like that track record.

UPDATE: Check out additional coverage from the Wall Street JournalXconomy and Reuters. Apparently, it's tough out there on energy companies looking for VC support.

Comments

dennisearlbaker said…
guess you'll block this one !

http://sfy.co/gb3A
Engineer-Poet said…
I wish he had blocked that one.  I wouldn't have wasted my time determining that it was nonsense.
trag said…
Nuclear energy is already "clean, safe and affordable". We don't need Transatomic to make it so. It's great that they're developing an innovative new reactor, but denigrating the rest of the industry in order to build themselves up is factually wrong, and will not benefit them or the industry in the long run.

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…