Nuclear+Power

toc
 * By Jack, Jeremy, Sophie Clo., and Will**



=The Basic Principles of Nuclear Power=

According to the website of the Union of Concerned Scientists, the main process in producing nuclear power is called "fission." Fission is basically the destruction of atomic bonds when neutrons collide with other atoms. In the case of nuclear power, fission occurs between neutrons and uranium atoms.* This video provides an explanation of how electricity is produced in nuclear power facilities:

media type="youtube" key="LTnfXLws40Q" height="315" width="420"

This relatively easy to grasp on a basic level. Here are four main steps involved in this process:

1) The atomic reaction inside the nuclear reactor 2) The heating of heavy water** under high pressure*^ 3) The heating of water into steam 4) The turning a generator using the steam

Another explanation of this process can be found at this website and in the following video. media type="youtube" key="pXd4NGO8W6o" height="315" width="420"

=Pros and Cons to Nuclear Power=

Advantages

 * The only carbon dioxide nuclear power produces comes from small sources like the machinery used to mine uranium, so it only contributes minimally to the greenhouse effect.
 * Nuclear power produces large amounts of energy from small amounts of fuel, as can be seen in a preceding video entitled "Nuclear Power - How it Works."
 * Produces small amounts of waste.
 * Nuclear power is reliable for both rural and populous areas.

Disadvantages

 * While little waste is produced, nuclear power plants are nevertheless extremely dangerous. Waste has to be buried and sealed away for many thousands of years to allow the radioactivity to die. It also must be kept safe from earthquakes, flooding, and terrorists.
 * In the nuclear power industry, a lot of money must be spent to ensure safety, for if something does go wrong, a nuclear accident can be a major disaster, and people are increasingly concerned about this. Dangerous disasters can and have occurred, spreading radiation over vast expanses of area, thus leaving the land uninhabitable. One example of this kind of meltdown was the Chernobyl Disaster in 1986.

**Articles Debating Pros and Cons**
Oftentimes, nuclear power corporations try to deceive customers by advertising the idea that nuclear power plants do not emit carbon dioxide. Though this is a positive aspect of nuclear power, companies disregard the other potentially harmful effects of running nuclear plants. One of these, as stated in an article about the risks of nuclear power, is radiation, a byproduct of fission. Human contact with high levels of radiation can result in the formation of cancer cells. Despite the negative effect of radiation, nuclear power also has aspects which are comparatively better than other sources of energy, such as reduction of radon exposures. Radon is a chemical found in uranium ore, and when this uranium ore is extracted from the ground and broken down, the radon is no longer present. By comparison, the burning of coal produces ashes which will eventually increase radon exposure. media type="youtube" key="9L_5sPZaXbQ" height="315" width="420"

In 2003, MIT released a study on the future of nuclear energy. Professor John Deutch said, "Fossil fuel-based electricity is projected to account for more than 40% of global greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. In the U.S., 90% of the carbon emissions from electricity generation come from coal-fired generation, even though this accounts for only 52% of the electricity produced. Taking nuclear power off the table as a viable alternative will prevent the global community from achieving long-term gains in the control of carbon dioxide emissions." In the study, MIT professionals attempted to list certain ways that nuclear power could possibly become a possible alternative to fossil fuels:
 * "Placing increased emphasis on the once-through fuel cycle as best meeting the criteria of low costs and proliferation resistance;
 * offering a limited production tax-credit to 'first movers' - private sector investors who successfully build new nuclear plants. This tax credit is extendable to other carbon-free electricity technologies and is not paid unless the plant operates;
 * having government more fully develop the capabilities to analyze life-cycle health and safety impacts of fuel cycle facilities;
 * advancing a U.S. Department of Energy balanced long-term waste management R&D program.
 * Urging DOE to establish a Nuclear System Modeling project that would collect the engineering data and perform the analysis necessary to evaluate alternative reactor concepts and fuel cycles using the criteria of cost, safety, waste, and proliferation resistance. Expensive development projects should be delayed pending the outcome of this multi-year effort.
 * Giving countries that forego proliferation- risky enrichment and reprocessing activities a preferred position to receive nuclear fuel and waste management services from nations that operate the entire fuel cycle."

=News Headlines Involving Nuclear Power=

Nuclear power is a controversial topic. Here is one article on the huge expense of nuclear facilities. A New York Times article says that many companies are spending multi-billions of dollars on constructing nuclear plants that may or may not even work successfully or efficiently. They also state that many more millions of dollars will be spent if a plant's construction is faulty.

Over the past years many nuclear power plants have posed saftey issues for people and places in the surrounding areas. In Massachusetts some are worried that the Plymouth power plant may not be safe with risks of meltowns and other accidents. A new plan has been unveiled by advocates in Massachusetts. The newly proposed saftey vent would alleviate the heat that occurs when a nuclear meltdown happens.

Here you can find a map of all the active nuclear plants in the United States: [] []

At CNN.com, two articles on the topic of Japan's nuclear energy market contradict eachother. The first, written in March of 2011, says, "Japan has more than 50 nuclear power plants and had planned to build two dozen more by 2030," and also states that they greatly rely on nuclear power because they lack the resources necessary to produce other alternatives. The other article, written on May 6, 2012, explains how Japan has shut down its last nuclear plant and that it will no longer be using nor producing nuclear power. Japan is now "the first country to live in the modern era without using Nuclear Energy." 50 of Japan's Nuclear reactors were not active after one was "temporarily" shutdown for maintenance, but afterwards there was discussion and it was not re-activated, and neither were the other 50. A tableshows that many reactors were already planned to be permanently shutdown. The top explanation as to why Japan is abandoning Nuclear Power is because they are very scared of earthquakes that are possibly going to hit Japan. If earthquakes destroy Nuclear Plants, they can not only be crumbled and release harmful radiation, but they can explode, which is far worse. Japan isn't exactly working too well since the shutdowns of all of the active Nuclear reactors, Japan had gone through months of power shortages and surges, but they would rather a lack of power than using Nuclear power for energy. Japan is facing entire summers now of power surges and shortages. The Japanese government has tried to re-open the reactors but that would be too expensive and they can not convince the public to open them again. Many anti-nuclear activists are declaring that they remain closed. This is the first time in 42 years that Japan has abandoned nuclear power. For decades Japan's $5 trillion dollar economy has relied on nuclear power, and many people worry that Japan may have a large problem on their hands. The public suddenly decided to abolish nulear enrgy when an earthquake caused many nuclear plants to surge, and they became scared, and thought it would be safer is it was gone ASAP. The news articlestates that "public sentiment was wavering between two sources of anxiety - fear over the safety of nuclear power and doubts on whether Japan can live without it."



media type="youtube" key="gR45CNE4YxA" height="315" width="420"

media type="youtube" key="mASCeAh-8zM" height="315" width="560" AT MIT.edu, there is info concerning "The Future of Nuclear Power". It states that MIT, Harvard, and a Dr. John Deutch discussed "the most comprehensive, interdisciplinary study ever conducted on the future of nuclear energy."

Back here in Massachusetts, the Pilgrim Power plant is reaching the end of its licence on June 8th 2012. People are pushing for the decommisioning of the plantbecasue of the risks that it poses to the water sources and the environment in the area. Pilgrim releases radioactive material almost daily,and it is unknown how this affects the enviorment. "Pilgrim already sucks in and discharges about 500 million gallons of water from Cape Cod Bay every day to cool the reactor, killing tens of thousands of fish every year while doing it." Says Pine DuBois a scientist of the Jones River watershed associaton. On June 8th we will learn if this terrible trend will continue. Another power plant, Yankee Power Plant in Vermont has been pushed for decomissioning becasue like Pilgrim it affects water sources, most importantly the Quabbin reservior, the source of Boston's water. = = =Footnotes=


 * Uranium atoms are used in nuclear power because they are relatively large atoms involving many neutrons, causing their bonds to be substantially weaker than other atoms.
 * Heavy water is 10% heavier than ordinary water because it contains deuterium, a form of hydrogen. It is used to more effectively slow down neutrons, so that they are more likely to come in contact with the uranium atoms during fission.
 * ^The heavy water is under high pressure because it allows it to reach greater temperatures, and therefore makes the process of heating water to steam more efficient.