 Bill Gates, thank you very much for speaking with the IAEA. You're doing a lot of work on the issue of climate change and the climate crisis. But now we have the energy crisis. How is this convergence of crises affected opinions on nuclear power? Well, the climate is getting more attention as it should. And people are realizing that you need, you know, almost three times as much electricity even in rich countries and then in poor countries to enable their economies, you need dramatic increases even beyond that. And so if they look at that and say, oh, we also want it to be reliable. That is when it's super cold, we still want, if you have electric heating, that to work when it's super hot. We want air conditioning to work. And unfortunately, the solar and wind, which will play a gigantic role, trying to use that alone without a miracle in storage that we don't expect at all, it just doesn't create the solution. And so having a non-weather dependent, you know, completely green, reliable form of energy generation that can be cheap enough means that there will really have to be some nuclear in that equation. So nuclear is the perfect partner for renewables? The two can go together extremely well. You know, in fact, the terapower design and perhaps some other next-generation designs, it can change and generate over the 24-hour period when the renewables are not fully available. So it can shift out of that sunny, windy period of the day where we should just let the renewables do their thing. And so designing a reliable grid that takes the nuclear piece and that renewable piece, that's an incredible opportunity and we need to do it. Do you believe that the public acceptance issues that still surround nuclear power can be adequately addressed? Well, there are countries that, you know, are going to their population saying, hey, this is important. And so I think those countries like the U.S., France, UK will lead the way. I do think it's important for the other countries who won't be in the vanguard to stay open-minded because, you know, not only is the history of nuclear power relatively safe compared to other ways of making energy, the opportunity for a new design to be dramatically safer, you know, not have an after-heat problem, for example, is actually quite exciting. And so the energy of the leading countries is much higher than ever before and, you know, trying to back approaches that get rid of the economic problem. I mean, nuclear really, the acceptance thing is very, very important. But the reason nuclear has gone down somewhat is because the cost of third-generation plants disappointed people the amount of time and money that went into those. And so we need a design that puts us in another level economically less than half the cost of what's come before. But with that comes a chance to build in passive safety systems that I hope people take a hard look and understand that the record, you know, per unit of energy generated is relatively quite good. You know, none of the sources of electricity today are completely without negative side effects. So innovation, is that the sole answer to the cost and the construction time challenge that nuclear power has faced in some countries? Yeah, some countries are good at building reactors quickly. What you, the ideal is to get a reactor that the U.S. National Regulatory Commission, you know, looks at super hard and says, OK, this is very safe and that can be built far more easily. The smaller reactors are going to completely be built off-site. The tear power, which is a bigger reactor, is trying to build the vast majority off-site. But then the assembly, because it's a very large thing, you can't stick the whole thing on a train car. So there is on-site assembly, but, you know, you want that to be dramatically less because that's, you know, delays and costs and the on-site skills you need. It's been a challenge for the third generation. And so, yeah, improving the construction time, the economics, you know, safety, using, getting more out of the fuel so you don't run into a fuel shortage and you reduce the waste problem, you know, a design that clearly doesn't promote proliferation. It's a challenge. But, you know, I think the world is up to this challenge. We can digitally design and simulate a reactor. And so, you know, looking at, OK, what would a plane crash do or a volcano or an unexpected earthquake? You know, those old designs, there was some, you know, pragmatic views about it, but they couldn't simulate the tough conditions. And now that is allowing us to not only meet those constraints, but also optimize the design quite a bit. So you're a technological innovator. Can the regulators keep up with you guys? The regulators are super important. Without them looking at the safety and being extremely rigorous about the safety, the public will never trust these things. So, yes, the regulators need to be properly funded. They have to have some incentive, not just to say no to everything, but I think having an early stage communication, very collaborative view where they go off in their very independent way past judgment, that is a critical part for this new generation. Nuclear power has kind of long been seen as a technology for rich countries. Are we getting to the point where it's now ripe for middle income or developing countries, maybe through SMRs? Well, the goal that Terrapower has is to be a technology that would help electrify Africa. That won't come first because you need to get the rich world regulators, you need to prove that everything works, and you need the volume to get the cost down. I mean, basically no nuclear plant has ever been built at volume. Out of the 400, there's so much variation that you have four or five identical at best. Here, we want to get to 40, 50, and so your costs can go down a great deal. So, although that won't come in the early stages, enabling the countries in Africa to have lots of electricity, that's part of my motivation for my engagement. Whether SMRs can do that well or whether these larger units are needed, that's healthy competition. How important do you see the role of international cooperation, for example, through the IAEA, to facilitating the safe and secure deployment of advanced nuclear technologies? Well, it's absolutely critical. Nuclear is very complicated, and we can't expect every country independently to figure it out. Also, the issues of avoiding proliferation, those are very complicated, and the world depends on the global agency to have that expertise. We don't want to have it so that every country has to have its own nuclear industry. You want whether it's making fuel, making the parts for the equipment, reviewing the safety. We want the combination of global thinking so that that is done the best it can be. Climate means that we need nuclear solutions, and that's going to only come through global cooperation. Bill Gates, thank you very much. Thank you.