Upload
hester-grant
View
218
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Quiz time! Review Obj #1-21 to get in the zone.
Read the board!
Field trip reminders! Meet in commons
8:15 Gone all day NO laptop Cell phone/camera Lunch and drink Notebook/pen Dress for weather
Folks staying here: Laptop for
classwork
Home Energy Audit DUE Friday Feb 27 Major Grade in Lab Notebook Show all work, use units Plan must be reasonable Furnace and hot water heater are natural
gas NOT electric!!!!
Reading your bill “kWh used” 2. Calculate how much CO2 your home
creates assuming the electricity is produced with 100% coal. 1 kWh of coal fired electricity creates 1.5# CO2.
#4. Energy Conservation Plan “How many kWh saved/month?” What if you changed some lightbulbs to
LEDs? 100w = 19w LED 75w = 13w LED 40w = 6w LED
Brainstorm – energy savings at home
Let’s continue with sustainable energy ideas! You’ll need paper
for notes.
What if . . . There was a power source with an
abundant fuel supply? A source that created no CO2 in generating
electricity?
What if . . . .
What if . . .that power was nuclear?
Comparison of coal vs. nuclear Coal Domestic fuel Combustion of coal =
CO2, SOx, NOx, particulates, Hg
Nuclear Domestic fuel No combustion = no
air pollutants Mining/processing/
transporting of fuel does create CO2
Waste products highly dangerous
Risk of nuclear accident
The fission reaction – interpret this diagram
Compare/contrast to WA Parish – “Lightwater” reactors
Controlling the chain reaction 1. Fuel is 97% U-238, only 3% U-235 2. Control rods stop movement of neutrons 3. Moderating fluid contains Boron
South Texas Project power plant
Photo slide show!
Reactor core & fuel rod assembly
Check for understanding Explain the fission reaction What is the difference between fission and
fusion? How is a nuclear power plant the same as
a coal-fired power plant? How is a nuclear power plant different
from a coal-fired power plant? How is moderating fluid used to control
the fission reaction?
Comparison of coal vs. nuclear Coal Domestic fuel Combustion of coal =
CO2, SOx, NOx, particulates, Hg
Nuclear Domestic fuel No combustion = no
air pollutants Mining/processing/
transporting of fuel does create CO2
Waste products highly dangerous
Risk of nuclear accident
Radiation – the dose makes the poison Background radiation from planet .1-.2/yr X-ray 1 rem Upper limit for job exposure 5 rems/yr 10 rem/incident – embryo show abnormalities 100/incident – probable leukemia 1,000/incident – nausea, harm to intestines,
death in 2 weeks 10,000/incident – coma, death in two days 100,000/incident – immediate death
104 Nuclear power plants in the US
Nuclear waste Low level waste High Level waste
Two kinds of nuclear waste Low level waste
Protective gear X-ray wastes Medical wastes Stored in near-
surface waste facilities
Remains radioactive about 100 years
Management of low level waste
Management of low level waste – Andrews county Texas to accept waste from 36 states
Second kind of nuclear waste
High Level waste Radioactive 10,000
years Spent fuel rods Currently stored on-
site in the US
How long will it remain dangerous? High Level waste
Radioactive 10,000 years
Spent fuel rods Currently stored on-site
Half-life: the amount of time required for half of the nuclei in a radioisotope to emit its radiation.
Potassium-42 12hrs Iodine-131 8 days Strontium-90 28 yrs Carbon-14 5,370 yrs U-235 710 million yrs U-238 4.5 billion yrs
Half life – how long will it last? Iodine-131 (8 days) If you had 1kg of
Iodine-131, how much radioactive material would you have in 32 days?
Radioactive decay of Uranium
104 Nuclear reactors (at 65 sites)in the US
Yucca Mountain, Nevada – cancelled project
Alternatives? Develop reactors that use 99.9% of fuels –
“4th generation” reactors – won’t be ready until 2030
****Big need for engineers and creative thinkers!!!
Alternatives? Reprocessing – France shut last coal
power plant in 2004. 56 nuclear reactors. Reprocessed fuel is used again; waste is stored in chunks of glass in stainless steel containers a few meters underground and loses radioactivity quickly.
Recovers 25% unused Uranium and Plutonium
Reduces volume of waste to 20% of original volume
NUCLEAR ACCIDENTSOne nuclear accident can really ruin your whole day.
Three Mile Island 1979 Pennsylvania Mechanical and
human failure Lost coolant water,
only partial meltdown
104 Nuclear power plants in the US – possible fallout effects
Chernobyl April 26, 1986 Human error led to meltdown 116,000 people evacuated Area the size of Florida contaminated Cesium 137 and Iodine 131 released –
reactive carcinogen Thyroid cancer rates in children in Belarus
are 100 times higher than preaccident levels
FUKUSHIMA DAIICHI
Fukushima Daiichi Tsunami of March 11, 2011 destabilized plant Full meltdown in three reactors due to
inability to cool reactor cores Seawater used to cool cores, ruined reactors;
loss of moderating fluid Released about 1/10 of radioactive material
as Chernobyl (Cesium-137) Japanese still concerned about food supply
(US fisheries?) 20 km exclusion zone currently in place
Current Fukishima status (CNN: Some residents to 'come home' to Fukushima nuclear disaster zone 2/24/14)
April 1, some 350 people from the Miyakoji district of Tamura city will be allowed to head back to their homes permanently, according to the country's Reconstruction Agency. Some 31,000 people could eventually return home, it added.
The government says about 138,000 Fukushima residents are still living in temporary accommodation.
Areas are declared suitable for habitation if residents are exposed to a maximum of 20 millisieverts of radiation per year. Officials have said they would like to get radiation exposure down to one millisievert a year.
The containment effort at the wrecked Fukushima-Daichi plant has been beset by problems, with regular reports of leaks of contaminated material. Last week, an estimated 100 metric tons of highly contaminated water flowed over a barrier around a containment tank and is being absorbed into the ground, plant operators, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), said in a statement -- though it denied there was any leakage into the nearby Pacific Ocean.
National Geographic returns to Chernobyl national geographic video