Scott Nolan

What if the car crashes?

All those sort of things.

And you could design around that, but I think it just makes a lot of sense to just either do electric or fossil fuels for cars.

I think if you're talking about a neighborhood that's a grid, that should be more nuclear.

Nuclear should be the future of that.

Airplanes, people have talked about nuclear airplanes in the past.

Out in Idaho, they actually tested a reactor that was meant to be for an airplane.

But reactors are still pretty heavy.

Probably better off just, you know, either doing electric or what we have today for airplanes.

So I think, you know, there's some people who might think, okay, nuclear should be every single source of energy.

And I would argue it still could be, even if it's not used in those applications, because those applications run on fuels.

But what if your nuclear was so cheap that you could use it to make synthetic aviation fuel or synthetic automobile fuel?

That's conceivable.

That's a further way away.

I'd say, let's get started with deploying a bunch of reactors.

Let's get their costs down.

And then when their cost is really low, then we should do those things.

But it's going to be step by step.

It's going to be gradual.

That's like a 20-year project, I think, to get everything.