An idealized vision of our worlds nuclear future.

[Seth8530]

Hi, when i applied at The University of Tennessee i was asked to write an essay for admision and scholarship consideration.

The prompt was as follows..

Submit an essay in the space below of between 1,000 and 1,200 words on the following subject:

Select one of the following: literature and the arts, politics and business, science and technology. Discuss one specific aspect of its importance in current global society, including benefits and problems. How would you promote and develop this specific aspect to maximize its benefit to society? Indicate what you believe the financial costs and staffing needs would be for implementation of your proposal over the first five years.

My essay is below. I

[Nuclear energy is the power source of the future. Currently the world is facing one of its greatest crises of all time, a massive energy shortage. This shortage has led to famine, wars, hardship and death for millions. Our world is in desperate need of a plentiful, clean and reliable energy source; fortunately, nuclear energy can be all of these. The world as a whole would benefit greatly from by the mass implementation of nuclear energy.

In our energy driven world there are many nations that are starved for a stable energy source. These nations go to war with each other trying to gain control of valuable fuel sources such as oil, coal, natural gas, and rivers for hydroelectricity generation to sate their economy's growing thirst for the energy needed to propel their nation's interest forward. Without this energy these nations economy's would slip further back into poverty along with the population's quality of life. Obviously the choice between war for energy or letting one's nation stagnate is an easy one to make when the nation's and people's futures depends on sustainable energy. We could prevent many energy driven wars by providing nuclear energy to developing nations whose economic growth outpaces their energy production.

For this to come to reality we must start by the building nuclear power plants in the countries that would benefit the most from energy aid. The only practical way for this to happen would have to be a strong push in an organization such as the United Nations for UN controlled nuclear power plants. These plants would have to be paid for and guarded by the participating member nations. Energy generated by these plants would be sold at the cost of production to ensure that the power produced would be available to as many people and industrial complexes as possible.

The cost for building a new nuclear power plant is approximately eight billion dollars. If there were to be sixty new nuclear plants constructed across thirty developing nations,the cost would be close to 500 billion dollars. Fortunately, much of the money spent on the construction of the plants would be spent on labor; therefore, there would an influx of money in lower and middle class workers where these plants were constructed. Along with the initial influx of workers needed for construction there would also be around 36,00 jobs created that would exist as long as the plants operated; subsequently, the initial cost of construction would be mitigated by the economical benefits created by the cheap energy and the jobs the plants operation would create.

The mass implementation of nuclear energy would come with many green benefits. The fact that nuclear power plants require little space means that they can be built nearly anywhere that a traditional fossil fuel plant can. They are not nearly as intrusive as hydroelectric dams are in that they do not force entire cities to vacate or face being washed away. Nuclear energy is extremely efficient; one kilogram of uranium could provide the same amount of energy that two-hundred barrels of oil can. Combine that with the fact that nuclear energy emits relatively little Carbon dioxide and we would all be well on our way to a greener world.

Compared to other energy sources nuclear energy is safe. There have been only two major accidents in 12,700 cumulative reactor-years of commercial operation in 32 countries. In a thirty-two year period, stretching from 1970 to 1992 there were only thirty-one deaths directly related to nuclear energy production. The next lowest was natural gas with 1200 fatalities. Coming in third was hydroelectric with a staggering 4,000 fatalities. Finally, coming in last with an inexcusable with 6,400 hundred casualties was coal-produced energy.

There are a few significant complications that must be addressed if nuclear energy is to be taken seriously as the world's next great energy source. A worst case scenario for nuclear energy is a meltdown, which is the melting of the fuel rods. A nuclear meltdown would most likely be started by a sudden loss of coolant. At worst the melted fuel rods would melt their way through the containment vessel and onto the ground bellow; in a power-station without a proper containment structure radioactive particles could escape into the environment.

In response to this problem, the designers of nuclear power plants have created many fail-safes to prevent this from ever happening. In the event of a sudden loss of coolant there are emergency water reservoirs that are designed to flood the core if there ever was to be a loss of coolant. There are many backups in this first line of defense including low pressure injection pumps, containment spray system, and refueling pumps. Each one of these backup coolant sources draws their water from a separate water source. The second line of defense is a series of barriers that prevent heat and radiation from escaping the reactor core. This protective barrier is often composed of the nine inch thick steel reactor vessel. Next in line is a thick protective concrete wall. Followed by a steel containment structure; all of these layers of defense are incased within a four foot thick steel- reinforced concrete dome.

The second major drawback of nuclear power is that the fuel needed for nuclear fission is highly radioactive. The intensity of radiation is measured in rems. The average person receives approximately 200 milirems a year from many different sources including the earth, radon gas that seeps out the ground, the sun and even our food and drinks. The average person receives only 15% of his yearly 200 milirems from man made sources; most of that coming from the medical field. Under normal conditions only around .4% of a person's yearly radiation dose comes from nuclear weapon testing and routine power plant operation. However, under abnormal conditions such as direct exposure to enriched uranium or plutonium the effects of radiation can be quite devastating to organisms.

Due to the potentially deadly effects of radiation, the transportation and disposal of nuclear fuel rods must be done with great care. Because the fuel will remain radioactive for thousands of years, so the best way to transport the fuel is to encase it within a strong corrosion resistant metal shell with a thick lining of lead within it to prevent radiation from escaping, and transport it to a secure storage facility by railway. Then the metal shell will be buried inside of a guarded secure complex for storage, such as Yucca Mountain or a converted salt dome for an indefinitely long period of time.

The implementation of world wide nuclear power will be a lengthy process; therefore, if it is to ever succeed, it must be introduced to the world in steps. The first few steps have already been taken for us by the many countries across the world who have built nuclear power plants for the peaceful creation of energy. These nations have lit the stage for our world wide stride into a new nuclear era, not one marked by the threat of nuclear annihilation and mutually assured destruction, but an era that will be remembered as the era where everyone no matter how poor had access to cheap energy.]