Shippingport Atomic Power Station - Toxipedia Toxipedia Publish this draft for everyone to see. What changed? Other users have edits for this page: Proceed Anyway Permanently discard changes to this page. This cannot be undone. Lead author: Steven G. Gilbert Overview The Shippingport Atomic Power Station, "the world's first full-scale atomic electric power plant devoted exclusively to peacetime uses, (though the British Magnox reactor at Calder Hall was first connected to the grid on 27 August 1956, it also produced plutonium for military uses)" was located near the present-day Beaver Valley Nuclear Generating Station on the Ohio River in Beaver County, Pennsylvania, USA, about 25 miles (40 km) from Pittsburgh. The reactor went online December 2, 1957 (or December 18 , 1957), and was in operation until October, 1982. It was an experimental, light water moderated, thermal breeder reactor and is notable for its ability to transmute (inexpensive) Thorium 232 to Uranium 233 (the latter being the fissile material that fueled the reaction within the reactor core).

References Remarkable Cars: Ford Nucleon ‒ The Atomic Car - GTspirit Remarkable Cars: Ford Nucleon ‒ The Atomic Car Tweet on Twitter Once nuclear power was seen as the pinnacle of progress and modernity. And nuclear power was believed to propel future cars, resulting in one of the most remarkable cars ever conceived: the Ford Nucleon ‒ the atomic car. In a somehow tragic and ironic twist, the nuclear bombing of the Japanese cities Hiroshima and Nagasaki provided a glimpse into the immense power, practical use and possibilities of nuclear technology. Following World War II, the 1950s marked the dawn of the Atomic Age ‒ a period of glorious and naive optimism. The Atomic Age would change the world, it would be the beginning of a whole new era for mankind. Nuclear power would be the solution of every problem ‒ big or small, the mighty atom would take care of it. Nuclear power provided exciting prospects, it was widely believed that this form of technology was safe, clean and especially cheap. Lewis Strauss, then Chairman of the United States Atomic Energy Commission, announced proudly in 1954 that nuclear energy would become “too cheap to meter”.

A few examples of these thoughts illustrate the optimism of those days. Many scientist were even convinced the atomic bomb would render all conventional explosives obsolete and nuclear power plants would do the same for power sources such as coal and oil. Every aspect of modern life would be affected by this new and powerful technology, from food preservation to medicine, from intercontinental travel to your daily commute. It was believed that all power generators in the future would be atomic in nature. Not only submarines and aircraft carriers, but also planes, trains, cars, elevators and spaceships would be powered by a small nuclear generator. So it shouldn’t be a surprise a wide variety of nuclear propulsion methods were developed as the potential advantages were gigantic: nuclear powered vehicles, ships or aircrafts would rarely need to be refuelled. Many military submarines, aircraft carriers and some other ships like icebreakers, were built and powered by nuclear reactors. Fuelled by the Cold War, the Soviets and Americans were also considering nuclear powered aircrafts. This led eventually to the Convair X-6, an experimental nuclear-powered jet aircraft for the United States Air Force. Thankfully the program was cancelled in 1961 before the X-6 was completed, however.

Fitting in with the optimism of the Atomic Era, the Ford Motor Company proudly unveiled the Nucleon in 1958. This car ‒ a 3/8-scale model ‒ was designed on the assumption that future nuclear reactors and shielding materials would be safer, smaller, lighter and more portable. The Ford Nucleon would be powered by a small uranium fission reactor suspended between twin booms at the rear. The configuration of the reactor would based on the driver’s personal needs and distances to be travelled. The power plant of the Ford Nucleon would be work according to the same principle as how nuclear submarines work. A nuclear reaction in the reactor produces heat that is used to boil water. The resulting steam spins a set of turbines. One turbine would provide the torque to propel the car, while another would drive an electric generator. The steam would be condensed back to water and reused again to be boiled, creating a closed loop, an almost infinite cycle without any emissions (well, besides the nuclear waste). The designers estimated the Ford Nucleon would be able to drive 5,000 miles (8,000 km) or more ‒ depending on the size of its core ‒ without recharging.

At that time, the Nucleon would be taken to a charging station where the nuclear core would be recharged or replaced with a new one. Ford envisioned these charging stations would replace the traditional filling stations. Can you imagine buying a cup of coffee, a sandwich and some uranium-235 at once? The passenger compartment of the Ford Nucleon featured a one-piece, pillar-less windshield and compound rear window, and was topped by a cantilever roof. There were air intakes at the leading edge of the roof and at the base of its supports. The passenger of the Nucleon would be shielded from the reactor in the rear. Therefore the passenger compartment had a cab-forward design, even beyond the front axle so it also provided maximum axle support to the heavy equipment and its attendant shielding. Just as with the nuclear drive train, the styling of the Ford Nucleon also embodies optimism about the future. It is likely the design is inspired by science-fiction of those days as the car almost appears to be hovering. In the 1950s, the flying car was a vision of transportation in the 21st century. But just like the flying car and the Atomic Age, the nuclear powered Ford seemed to good too be true.

The Nucleon was actually never produced. The concept of safer, smaller, lighter and more portable reactors was never realized. The shielding to protect the people inside the Nucleon would have turned the car into a tank. Nuclear power didn’t fulfill its promise, electricity didn’t become cheaper. The optimistic idea that eventually all electricity meters would be removed, because power would be “too cheap to meter” turned out to be wrong. Very wrong, when the Shippingport Atomic Power Station in the United States ‒ “the world’s first full-scale atomic electric power plant devoted exclusively to peacetime uses” ‒ went online, it produced electricity at a cost roughly ten times that of a coal-fired power plant. The competition for supremacy in nuclear warfare between the United States and the Soviet Union made the general public aware of the potential dangers of nuclear technology. The Three Mile Island accident in 1979 resulted in public unease, and the tragic Chernobyl disaster in 1986 raised concerns about the safety of nuclear power in general. The Atomic Dream was over, people finally woke up. Safety of the Ford Nucleon is an interesting discussion. It should also be pointed out that the U.S.

Navy has sailed ships around the world for 60 years with nuclear power plants on them and never had an accident. Okay, there are two nuclear submarines still sitting on the Atlantic floor ‒ having sunk in the 1960s ‒ but this wasn’t due to problems with the nuclear reactors. But the safety of the Russian counterparts is quite questionable. Imagine millions of nuclear powered cars on the road driven by people like you, your colleagues or the girl next door. And imagine with thousands of accidents happening worldwide every day involving nuclear powered cars, what would become of the safety with the nuclear debris, waste or contamination? No matter how small the chance on a radioactive incident, with millions of Ford Nucleon’s out on the roads these chances add up over time. From today’s point of view, the concept of a nuclear powered car could be regarded as the worst idea ever conceived by a car maker. But this vision ‒ which could be devised by Homer Simpson ‒ should be viewed in the optimistic light of the Atomic Age. Despite the fact that this car has never been realized, it could be regarded as one the most iconic cars of the Fifties as the Ford Nucleon embodies the spirit of those days more than any other car.

Blog of teh Brute Beast Blog of teh Brute Beast Thursday, September 29, 2011 As stirring to me as any symphony. I recommend clicking the little fullscreen icon. Posted by Sister Worlds I wish I were on Venus at this moment. Breathable air is a lift gas on Venus. A volume filled with breathable air could float above the clouds at around 55 km where the atmospheric pressure would equal 1 bar and the temperature range would be perfectly habitable. I often dream of the possibilities. Venus beckons. Posted by I would so love to camp out on these islands for an excessive period of time. Posted by Exploring the Area: An Alien Lake!? I had an epic time swimming in Maine this past summer and have longed to recreate that bliss here in the Ohio valley. The options are extremely limited and the nearby place that first comes to mind is Tappan Lake. (Of course Lake Erie must be mentioned as it is epic but it doesn't apply in this case as it is a couple hours away.) Tappan Lake is a reservoir created in the 1930's by the Civilian Conservation Corps.

I think all of the nearby lakes that I've researched have turned out to be reservoirs created in the 20th century... Tappan Lake Here is the little town that was swallowed up by the Tappan reservoir. Tappan town before the CCC Tappan Lake does have a public beach in which people are allowed to swim, but I found that little swimming hole to be a dud. It was the quest for an epic place to swim that lead me to notice a strange, bright turquoise, and quite substantial body of water not too far up the river from us on the Pennsylvania border (many thanks to Google and their maps). Our little neck of the Ohio River This isn't merely an unusual body of water, this would be freakish even for the Bahamas. I don't know if it is a secret tropical paradise or a piece of an alien world. Exploring strange new worlds. . . In contrast here is a little snippet of the Ohio River after scrolling a bit northeast in Google maps. The Ohio River near Midland, PA And here is a section of Tappan Lake not far from the public beach area. Tappan Lake Naturally this alien turquoise lake evidently devoid of life calls for investigation.

And what is this strange web of pipes(?) that can be seen on the surface of the lake? Considering that this lake is comparable in size to Tappan, or any of the other recreational lakes around, why is it not so much as labelled? You would think that one of the larger bodies of water in the area would at least have a name. Why not a little beach and some surrounding state forest as well? Just a couple of weeks ago we hiked along the edge of Beaver Creek which can be seen directly north of the mystery lake emptying into the Ohio River. If I had known of the existence of this lake I might have gone to check it out. Being an optimist I wondered at first if it might be some sort of interesting natural phenomenon such as a salt lake. Before too long I found myself thinking the worst: could this be an epic fly ash dump? Beaver Creek meets the Ohio River just north of the blue thing. The town to the west on the north side of the river is East Liverpool Ohio. Below that on the south side is Chester, West Virginia. To the east on the north side of the river is a tiny town called Midland, Pennsylvania.

Midland, PA The majority of what you see in Midland is the steel mill, nothing unusual about that on the Ohio River. J&L Specialty Steel, Midland, PA Well now here is something of note: across the river from Midland is Shippingport, PA, most of which is the Beaver Valley Power Station containing two nuclear reactors as well as FirstEnergy's largest coal-burning power plant, the Bruce Mansfield Plant. Midland, PA & Shippingport, PA Beaver Valley Power Station - Shippingport, PA Shippingport is also notable as being home to "the world’s first full-scale atomic electric power plant devoted exclusively to peacetime uses, (though the British Magnox reactor at Calder Hall was first connected to the grid on 27 August 1956, it also produced plutonium for military uses)." The first atomic reactor (72 Mw) went online in 1957 and was closed in 1982. The first of the currently operational nuclear reactors, 852Mw, went online in 1976, and the second reactor has been operational since 1987. There were upgrades to both between 2000 and 2008.

The image below reveals all of the currently operational nuclear power plants in the continental United States. Operational Nuclear Power Plants While there does appear to be a local myth that the blue lake, called Little Blue Run, was created by dumping water from the nuclear reactors, it is in fact a slurry dump for the Bruce Mansfield coal-fired plant. Bruce Mansfield Plant Bruce Mansfield Plant According to the FirstEnergy environmental fact sheet the coal-fired plant is "a recognized showplace for environmental technology." The lake is not mentioned by name but this is no doubt speaking of it. "A separate pollution control system is used to dispose of this slurry. It includes a treatment and pumping facility at the plant site, seven miles of underground pipeline and a 1,300-acre disposal site, complete with the largest earth and rockfill embankment dam in the eastern U.S." The EPA has the Bruce Mansfield Plant on its list of High Hazard Surface Impoundments. What does this mean?

"A high hazard potential rating indicates that a failure will probably cause loss of human life; the rating is not an indication of the structural integrity of the unit or the possibility that a failure will occur in the future; it merely allows dam safety and other officials to determine where significant damage or loss of life may occur if there is a structural failure of the unit. EPA’s assessment of the facilities that have units with high hazard potential ratings continues to be an Agency priority. EPA plans to make public the results of our assessments as soon as they are completed." Polluting Pennsylvania Power Plant Sued by Neighbors The fly ash monstrosity is bad enough but apparently the air quality isn't as pristine as FirstEnergy alleges in their PR literature. "Currently, the plant is required to monitor air quality just one hour per week. McPhedran says the lawsuit seeks an order for continuous opacity monitoring. Other power plants in Pennsylvania have such monitors, but the DEP has not insisted that they be installed at Bruce Mansfield.

Records provided by FirstEnergy show that the Bruce Mansfield plant released harmful and illegal air pollution at least 257 times between November 22, 2002 and March 29, 2007, says McPhedran. The plaintiffs want FirstEnergy to deal with lower level continuing violations as well as ending the major releases, which can be catastrophic. On July 22, 2006, residents within a five mile radius of the plant were deluged with "black rain," which damaged homes, automobiles, crops, livestock and other vegetation and structures. After the 2006 episode, Penn State University officials warned residents not to sell, butcher or eat livestock that had been exposed to the black rain, and farmers were instructed to throw away any crops or honey that had been exposed. After that, FirstEnergy representatives purchased Hysong's garden for $600, he says, and he cut down all the fruit trees in his yard, lest his grandchildren become ill from eating the fruit." Interestingly the Google Maps image is a few year old as I'm told that the lake is currently "dried up" meaning it is filled to capacity.

Little Blue a few years ago Little Blue Run a couple years ago Little Blue filling up Little Blue is now all filled up Too bad there is no secluded alien Bahamas in our vicinity, just an industrial waste heap that will soon be covered over with soil and grasses I imagine. shippingport atomic power station : definition of shippingport atomic power station and synonyms of shippingport atomic power station (English) The Shippingport Atomic Power Station was the world’s first full-scale atomic electric power plant devoted exclusively to peacetime uses. [notes 1] [2] It was located near the present-day Beaver Valley Nuclear Generating Station on the Ohio River in Beaver County, Pennsylvania , USA , about 25 miles (40 km) from Pittsburgh . The reactor reached criticality on December 2, 1957, and remained in operation until October 1982. The first electrical power was produced on December 18, 1957 as engineers synchronized the plant with the distribution grid of Duquesne Light Company. [3] Shippingport was created and operated under the auspices of Admiral Hyman G. Rickover , whose authority included a substantial role within the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) .

Its design team was headed by Alvin Radkowsky . It was an experimental, light water moderated, thermal breeder reactor and is notable for its ability to transmute (inexpensive) Thorium 232 to Uranium 233 (the latter being the fissile material that fueled the reaction within the reactor core). [4] The reactor was capable of an output of 60 MWe. The reactor was designed with two uses in mind: for powering military ships, and serving as a prototype for commercial electrical power generation. [5] In 1977, it was converted to a Pressurized Light-Water Breeder Reactor (PLWBR). [6] Over its 25-year life, the power plant operated for about 80,324 hours, producing about 7.4 billion kilowatt hours of electricity. [1] Contents 7 External links Construction In 1953, US President Dwight D. Eisenhower gave his Atoms for Peace speech to the United Nations . Commercial nuclear power generation was cornerstone of his plan. A proposal by Duquesne Light Company was accepted by Admiral Rickover and the plans for the Shippingport Atomic Power Station started.

Ground was broken on Labor Day, September 9, 1954. President Eisenhower remotely initiated the first scoop of dirt at the ceremony. [3] The reactor first went critical at 4:30 AM on December 2, 1957. [3] Sixteen days later, on December 18, the first electrical power was generated and full power was achieved on December 23, 1957, [3] although the station remained in test mode. Eisenhower opened the Shippingport Atomic Power Station on May 26, 1958. The plant was built in 32 months at a cost of $72.5 million. [2] Cores The Shippingport reactor was designed to accommodate different cores during its lifetime; three were used. The first, installed in 1957, held 4 tons of natural uranium and 165 pounds of high-enriched uranium. Seven years later it was retired, after having produced almost 2 billion kilowatt hours of electricity. The second core had increased generating capacity and instrumentation to measure performance.

It began operating in 1965 and over the next nine years generated almost 3.5 billion kilowatt hours of electricity. In 1974 the turbine-generator suffered mechanical failure, causing the plant to be shut down. The third and final core was a light water breeder, which began operating in August 1977 and after testing was brought to full power by the end of that year. [3] It used pellets made of thorium dioxide and uranium-233 oxide; initially the U233 content of the pellets was 5-6% in the seed region, 1.5-3% in the blanket region and none in the reflector region. It operated at 236 MWt, generating 60 MWe and ultimately produced over 2.1 billion kilowatt hours of electricity. After five years the core was removed and found to contain nearly 1.4% more fissile material than when it was installed, demonstrating that breeding had occurred. [4] [7] Decommissioning Reactor pressure vessel during construction (1956) On October 1, 1982, the reactor ceased operations after 25 years.

[8] Dismantlement of the facility began in September 1985. [9] In December 1988, the 956-ton (870-T) reactor pressure vessel/neutron shield tank assembly was lifted out of the containment building and loaded onto land transportation equipment in preparation for removal from the site and shipment to a burial facility in Washington State. [10] The site has been cleaned up and released for unrestricted use. The $98 million (1985 estimate) cleanup of Shippingport has been used as an example of a successful reactor decommissioning by proponents of nuclear power. However, critics point out that Shippingport was smaller than most commercial nuclear power plants ; [9] most reactors in the United States are about 1,000 MWe, while Shippingport was only 60 MWe. See also Beaver Valley Nuclear Generating Station is a newer nuclear power station located at the same site. Notes ^ Though the British Magnox reactor at Calder Hall was first connected to the grid on 27 August 1956, it also produced plutonium for military uses.

References Nuclear Industry Embraces Advanced E-Learning Sunday, 08 April 2012 19:15 Nuclear Industry Embraces Advanced E-Learning (0 votes) Westinghouse Electric Company's Progressive Training Vision Westinghouse has provided training services to the nuclear industry for more than 40 years. During that time, the company’s training philosophy has evolved to better meet the learning needs of both its external nuclear customers and its own employees. Today, Westinghouse’s Corporate University is the heart of the company’s training activities. Established about two-and-a-half years ago, it provides the vehicle for determining the training needs of its customers and then developing the learning approach to best satisfy these needs. “We’ve gone through the initial stages of examining the needs of the organization to structure the university in a way that best supports the employees and the business areas of Westinghouse,” says Mike Corrigan, leader of the Design Services Group. “We have done a lot of work up front to communicate to the organization that we are here to help provide the best training and learning solutions possible.

Overall, the organization has embraced the university to the point that people are involving it in more, and earlier in projects.” Traditionally, Westinghouse has used a combination of classroom and hands-on delivery to accomplish its training mission. It offers student-centered, nuclear technology training programs that incorporate advanced educational techniques to achieve its customers’ competency-based learning objectives. Its classrooms feature advanced audio-visual equipment and computer-based training terminals. A nuclear power plant control room simulator and associated equipment allows students to gain hands-on experience in a simulated performance environment. More than 10 years ago, Pam Aigner, the director of online learning programs for Westinghouse, recognized that this already strong portfolio of delivery methods could be enhanced through the use of online learning. Since then, the company has become a nuclear industry leader in the delivery of blended online learning. E-LEARNING AT WESTINGHOUSE Westinghouse views online blended learning as an equal player in its training delivery portfolio, capable of providing training that is at least equivalent to traditional face-to-face training and in some cases superior.

The global nature of its operations provides unique training challenges: e-learning provides a business solution for situations in which face-to-face training is not possible because of diverse locations, time zone differences, shift work and plant operations schedules. The governing training philosophy emphasizes building relationships with customers in order to truly understand their training needs. These relationships then allow Westinghouse trainers to determine if a training solution is appropriate and whether that solution should be e-learning or face-to-face delivery. The training provided by Westinghouse’s Corporate University is nuclear-centric, with the focus of the training is on how that system functions in the context of an integrated nuclear power plant. Similarly, Westinghouse does not simply conduct leadership training. It develops leaders who are prepared to work effectively in the nuclear industry. The company calls this focus “Nuclearning.” The corporate university, which serves both internal and external audiences, plays a central role in enforcing this philosophy and ensuring that it is consistently applied. To a large extent, the Nuclearning philosophy differentiates Westinghouse training from its competition.

Training can be synchronous (instructor-led classroom, lecture-based Webcasts, virtual classroom activities, video conferencing, laptop simulators), asynchronous (self-paced Web-based, instructor-facilitates online, multimedia-enhanced job aids, podcasts, videos, knowledge management portal, computer models), or some combination of both. The idea is to move training beyond the classroom and make it a part of the day-today life of the student. Communities of learning begin to form during formal classroom or online programs and then continue to grow in the workplace. “Learning is a process, not just an event,” say the learning leaders at Westinghouse. The university facilitates company-wide e-learning. It identifies knowledge gaps and then develops e-learning programs to close them. When a training program already exists, the university‘s trainers look for ways to improve these programs and adapt them for online delivery if appropriate. The goal is to create a fluid workforce by creating programs that can be applied company-wide. The college structure of the university, with product line managers serving as deans, ensures that the “voice of the business” is always part of the training and learning process. This helps ensure that training remains focused on performance and that it is relevant to the business.

New technology — specifically mobile devices — are just beginning to enter the training process. Most employees are provided with laptop computers. Instructors and students sometimes receive iPads or other tablet devices. “Our first class produced a ton of printing costs, and we found that if we just loaded iPads with all our training material, and provided each student with them while they were in training, we saved a lot,” says Rick Paese, e-learning project manager for Startup and Operations Support. Adds John Bartocci, operations training instructor for the AP1000 training group: “In New Plant Training, instead of just plain laptops, we actually equipped all our trainers with tablet PCs.” Existing training programs have not yet been modified to take advantage of mobile elearning, but training-on-demand and virtual training are top priorities for the coming year. “We are beginning to look at how we can use mobile and social learning within our industry,” notes Aigner. “With the security concerns in the nuclear industry, we work with our current infrastructure and Information Technology security teams to implement our technical solutions. In the next couple of years, we expect these trends to be a major area of growth.

Westinghouse’s Corporate University will drive this change.” EVALUATION AND ASSESSMENT The nuclear industry is committed to the Systematic Approach to Training (SAT) methodology. Nuclear customer, regulatory and oversight organizations have made SAT an integral part of all industry training activities. “For our training programs, the evaluation part of the SAT process is probably the most important, and it really doesn’t end,” notes Paese. “We send out engineers into the field. We constantly ask them for feedback, any operating experiences, or any lessons learned to continually find new ways to train them before we send them out to the next job. We have a lessons-learned database and active communication with trainees, so we do have a system in place.” Aigner says that the feedback process is very elaborate: “We take feedback from students, instructors and customer report cards. We make any improvements that are necessary, but we also continually follow up with the customer after the training event to get anecdotal evidence on improvement in performance or any gaps we need to address. “As far as quantitative metrics,” she continues, “we’re also beginning to implement pre- and post-testing several months after a training event has ended.

Then we want to measure knowledge retention by giving another exam six months after the training has been completed. One of the interesting observations so far is that retraining-level students have to get on a regular schedule, because many of them have not had training for many years, and pre-tests show that their knowledge base has degraded significantly. But once the training is implemented, we then see a big spike in test results.” Adds Corrigan: “One aspect that the university is focusing on for the upcoming year is to create a better understanding of how the internal training initiatives are impacting the business groups or regions. Ultimately, all training initiatives should be directly linked to business needs.” This is also where the relationship part of Nuclearning becomes important. By leveraging its customer relationships, Westinghouse training can gain a deeper understanding of the operational and business goals of its customers. This understanding allows Westinghouse to tightly identify desired training outcomes and to begin the difficult task of measuring the performance and business impacts of training. Training professionals believe that developing the ability to measure training impact at an operational and business level must be one of its next major focus areas. CHALLENGES Certainly, there are complications and frustrations.

For instance, there are the challenges of managing the cultural change associated with the greater use of e-learning, including setting expectations with students and their managers about what is required to be a successful e-learning student. This applies to both internal students and to utility customer students. Attacking this issue requires online instructors to be coaches and cheerleaders for both their students and their students’ managers. Online instructors must be able to work closely with their online students, recognize their issues, and help them develop their learning skills. Additionally, there is the challenge of getting all instructors, in all locations, to think of themselves as part of Westinghouse’s Corporate University. Convincing instructors and line management that a center-led organization can be as responsive to local needs as a decentralized organization is not always easy. “In creating a center-led organization, minimal resources have been added,” says Aigner. “The challenge is to get the right people in the right place, keeping in mind that each person needs multiple skill sets.” At Westinghouse, these and other challenges will occupy a large part of the training staff’s time. Solving these issues will also require a commitment to developing the skill set of the instructors. Again, the university will play a critical role in meeting these challenges.

IT PAYS OFF Besides being named to Elearning! magazine’s “Learning! 100” list last year, Westinghouse Electric has also won other training awards, specifically: >>Pittsburgh Human Resources Association award in the “People” category; >>2011 CUBIC Award as runner-up in the “Best New Corporate University” category; and >>2011 Corporate University Xchange award for “Exemplary Practice in Alignment.” “We have seen evidence of better working knowledge, increased post-training information retention, better integration and synthesis of information, increased problem-solving efficiency, better communication skills, and improvements to procedures as a result of our blended training methods,” Aigner concludes. Aigner and her fellow learning professionals appreciate the recognition that comes with awards but they know that the real payoff for training is improved performance for Westinghouse and for its customers. They believe that they are seeing both. Handling Change at Westinghouse Westinghouse representatives were asked to list the most important contributing factors to the great learning culture at Westinghouse, and they all agreed that change management was key. Here’s how they responded: “My group spends a lot of time managing change with our customers,” says Pam Aigner.

“That takes leadership from the Westinghouse and customer training organizations. If you have a group of students who are not as comfortable with online learning technology, for example, they may be resistant to its adoption. At the same time, our industry is experiencing some demographic shifts, as a significant percentage of employees are either new to the workforce or nearing retirement, which has added additional challenges. So the need for training has really increased exponentially.” Part of Westinghouse Corporate University’s change management is communicating and better understanding the preferred training modalities within the company’s various groups. “We are actively trying to figure out what we can do to make training and learning initiatives both effective and efficient. There is definitely an element of change management required for some employees and customers to recognize the benefits of alternative modes of training,” Mike Corrigan says. Adds Aigner: “Our training programs are devised in a certain way based on the outcomes that we want to have. So we spend a lot of time discussing expectations up front, not just as far as what the students are expected to do, but also their management.

Although some of the training takes place online, we find it very important to convey to management they wouldn’t interrupt instructor-led training, so they shouldn’t interrupt students in an online class.” And the training/learning groups also have to manage their own change. “We’re constantly getting pushback from managers and customers not wanting to give their employees as much time in training as we would like, because it eats up their time on their normal job,” says Rick Paese. “We’ve constantly tried to better our product and make training more efficient with Webcasts and computer-based training. And we’ve done that well.” About Westinghouse… Westinghouse Electric Company, a group company of Toshiba Corp., is the world’s pioneering nuclear energy company. In 1957, Westinghouse supplied the Shippingport Atomic Power Station, the first full-scale atomic electric power plant devoted exclusively to peacetime uses. Today, Westinghouse technology is the basis for approximately one-half of the world’s operating nuclear plants. The company and its approximately 14,000 employees continue their industry leadership by providing engineering and services for customers around the world.

The Westinghouse AP1000 reactor is the first Generation III+ reactor design to receive final design approval from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Read 807 times 5 - Nuclear Development - Development of nuclear power NERS 211: Fall 2015 5 - Nuclear Development 5 - Nuclear Development - Development of nuclear power NERS... SCHOOL View Full Document This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Development of nuclear power NERS 211: Fall 2015 NERS 211 Lecture 5:" The development of Nuclear Power Reading: Chapter 2 NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power Lecture summary • • • • • First nuclear experiments Chain reaction Early reactors Power stations Inﬂuences on development – Economics – Disasters • Worldwide overview NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power Early History of Nuclear Power • First experiments and theory 1909-1939 • Rutherford/Szilard/Hahn/Strassmann/Fermi – Nuclear Fission • Oliphant/Bethe – Nuclear Fusion • Manhattan project 1939-1945 – Oppenheimer/Fermi/Wigner/Bethe • First reactors built 1942 NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power Rutherford’s experiment (1911) Gold foil α’s ~1 in 8000 α particles were deﬂected Majority pass straight through Conclusion: most of the atom is made up of empty space Development of nuclear power NERS 

211: Fall 2015 Rutherford's experiment 1.

Atomic (10-10 m) sized positive charge Au x + α + + + + 2. Nucleus (10-15 m) sized positive charge ✔ α Au Development of nuclear power NERS 211: Fall 2015 Chadwick’s experiment (1932) Parafﬁn wax Beryllium foil α’s ? protons ? ? Mystery radiation: • Was not affected by magnetic ﬁelds ! charge neutral • Did not invoke the photoelectric effect ! not photons • Discharge of protons from parafﬁn ! particle has to be massive • Conclusion – ? radiation was neutrons!

Development of nuclear power NERS 211: Fall 2015 Nuclear fusion experiment (1932) 2 1 4 1 D+ 31T →2 He(3.5MeV )+ 0 n(14.1MeV ) • Mark Olipant’s experiment demonstrated nuclear fusion • Deuterium and tritium (isotopes of hydrogen) react to € form helium, a neutron and releases energy • (just one example of fusion) • Hans Bethe later developed the theory to show fusion was the reaction occurring in stars - nucleosynthesis • Fusion reactors – see later lectures NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power Chain reaction • Hypothesized by Hungarian American physicist Leó Szilárd (1933) • Realized if a nuclear reaction produced neutrons, these could then cause further nuclear reactions • Original idea was that light isotopes would be used as these produced copious numbers of neutrons NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power Discovery of ﬁssion • In the fall of 1938, German scientists Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassman �

��red neutrons into uranium (Z = 92) • They were surprised to ﬁnd lighter elements, such as barium (Z = 56), in the leftover materials • These elements had about half the mass of uranium • The discovery was a result of a collaboration with Lise Meitner, an Austrian who had been forced to ﬂee Nazi Germany • Worked with Niels Bohr and her nephew, Otto Frisch.

• Meitner and Frisch: barium and other light elements result from the uranium splitting ﬁssion (From DOE/NE-0088) NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power Fission and chain reaction • Szilárd and Enrico Fermi discover neutron multiplication in uranium • Discovery prompted Albert Einstein to write to President Franklin D Roosevelt – he warns that Nazi Germany might possibly be building an atomic bomb: NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power Early Reactors • 1942 Chicago Pile-1 – Built on a racquets court - University of Chicago – Went critical December 2 – First self-sustaining reaction - 0.5 W – Total power 200 W – Control rod employed to limit reaction – First line of defense - man with an axe to cut rope holding another control rod – If all else failed, 3 man ‘suicide squad’ ready to dowse with cadmium sulfate! – No radiation shielding and no cooling system of any kind!

NERS 211: Fall 2015 Enrico Fermi Development of nuclear power Manhattan Project (1942-1946) • Produced the ﬁrst atomic bomb during World War II • Fueled the technological development of nuclear isotope separation and ﬁssion studies • Lectures on nuclear weapons later in the course The Trinity Test J Robert Oppenheimer and Leslie Groves NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power Electricity Generation • 1946 Atomic Energy Commission founded • Experimental Breeder Reactor 1 • Designed by Argonne National Laboratory • Constructed in Idaho National Laboratory • Dec. 20, 1951 ﬁrst electricity from nuclear power source – Initially: four 200 W electric bulbs lit.

Later, 200 kWe (1.4MWt) – ‘Chicago Pile 4’ Assembly of the core of Experimental Breeder Reactor I at Argonne's Idaho site, 1951 NERS 211: Fall 2015 1949, February 8 -- A bottle containing 31 grams of enriched uranium, about 1/60 the amount needed for a nuclear weapon, is discovered missing from an Argonne vault. Investigation finds that all but about seven grams had been shipped to Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The remaining seven grams are found in a trash container in Argonne's landfill.

Subsequent congressional investigation leads to a tightening of Argonne's record-keeping procedures for "sensitive materials." NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power First Civilian Power Station • Atomic Power Station 1 Obninsk, USSR • Switched on June 1954 • 5 MW power – Enough to power 2000 homes • Prototype for Soviet reactor designs – RBMK type – Chernobyl NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power First Commercial Station • Calder Hall Magnox Power Plant, UK • Unique design (now obsolete) – CO2 cooled with magnesium alloy (magnox) cladding • 1956 Operational – 4 reactors, each 50 MW power – Connected to national grid producing commercial quantities of electricity • Primary purpose: military plutonium production • 1957 Windscale ﬁre NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power Investment economics • “It is not too much to expect that our children will enjoy in their homes electrical energy too cheap to meter” – Lewis Strauss, chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission (1954).

• However, economics not only driving force: “the relations of the U.S. with every other country ... could be seriously damaged if Russia were to build an atomic power station for peacetime use ahead of us. The possibility that Russia might demonstrate her ‘peaceful’ intentions in the ﬁeld of atomic energy while we are still concentrating on atomic weapons, could be a major blow to our position in the world.” -Chairman of the Congressional Joint Committee on Atomic Energy (1953) NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power Hyman G.

Rickover • Initiated design of the pressurized water reactor for submarine propulsion • 1949 Assigned to the Division of Reactor Development, Atomic Energy Commission • Also Director of the Naval Reactors Branch in the Bureau of Ships • Developed highly reliable nuclear reactor in a form-factor that would ﬁt into a submarine hull with no more than a 28foot beam Development of nuclear power NERS 211: Fall 2015 Shippingport • 1957 Dec, ﬁrst electricity supplied to grid • “the world’s ﬁrst full-scale atomic electric power plant devoted exclusively to peacetime uses.” • sited near Pittsburg • 60 MW power • Cost $72,000,000 - way over-budget – Due to Rickover (perfectionist) – Cost of electricity 10x coal plants • Design became prototype for world – Pressurized water reactor - most used type Development of nuclear power NERS 211: Fall 2015 The development of nuclear power • Three periods 1. Early development 2. Fast increase 3.

Saturation • Driven by – Demand – World events – Military – Technology 1 2 3 NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power 1973 and 1979 - Oil Crises • First oil crisis 1973 – Yom Kippur War – • OAPEC (Arab states of OPEC) block of oil to supporters of Israel • Second oil crisis 1979 – Iranian Revolution - Ayatollah Khomeini – Consumer panic - price rises • Power stations no longer use oil – US 17% → 2.4%, 1973 → 1997 – France 39% → 0%! • What replaces oil?

NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power Replacing oil • Oil still used for transport • Nuclear, coal Source: Bodansky – Fill gap left by oil • • • • Worldwide trend Surplus oil Oil prices plummet Electricity demand slows Source: EIA Development of nuclear power NERS 211: Fall 2015 Three Mile Island • 1979 March, Three Mile Island accident, near Pennsylvania • Most serious in US commercial plant history • Coolant failure • Serious core overheat • Did not breach containment vessel – Average dose 1/6th that of medical x-ray • Result – Public fear and distrust increased – Safety requirements improved NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power Chernobyl • • • • 26th April 1986 Worst nuclear power disaster Flawed reactor design 5% core released into atmosphere • 28 deaths in 4 months – Radiation burns • 9 deaths from thyroid cancer • 56 total deaths (2004) • 400x more fallout than Hiroshima NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power US Nuclear Power •

 Before 1964 - exploratory period • 1965-1974 trends - more/larger reactors • Post 1975 Slow growth in electricity sales NERS 211: Fall 2015 Role of Capacity Factor • Fraction of rated power actually produced – availability factor is fraction of time available to produce power • Less than 100% because of outages for: – Mechanical or regulatory problems – Refueling outages (months.) • Increasing existing capacity factor is same as adding new capacity Development of nuclear power Development of nuclear power NERS 211: Fall 2015 Capacity factor growth reasons • Outage management – 3 months → 3 weeks • Longer fuel cycles – 1 to 2 years • Experience of operation • Learning curve • Consolidation of operators NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power U.S.

Capacity Factors by Fuel Type" 2007* Fuel Type Average Capacity Factors (%) Nuclear 91.8 Coal (Steam Turbine) 71.8 Gas (Combined Cycle) 43.3 Gas (Steam Turbine) 16.0 Oil (Steam Turbine) 19.6 Hydro 27.8 Wind 30.4 Solar 19.8 * Preliminary Source: Global Energy Decisions / Energy Information Administration Updated: 4/08 NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power Last US reactor to come online • • • • • Watts Bar I (Tennessee) Built by Westinghouse Electric Corp. 1167 MW power Construction began, 1973 Operational 1996!

NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power US Nuclear Power • US nuclear industry fragmented – 104 reactors, 31 operators - before 44 NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power Trends in nuclear growth • France, Japan, Germany – Fast growth after 1973, before 1986 • • • • UK - Slow growth S.

Korea - fast, recent US - Leads world Post 1990 - slow NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power French Nuclear Program • Cited as leading nuclear success story • Presently 70-80% Nuclear – ~15% Hydroelectric – Almost no fossil fuel dependence (electricity) • Substantial electricity exports NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power French Nuclear Program • • • • • • Has limited fossil fuel resources Standardization -- Uniform reactor design Single operator (Electricité de France) Powerful centralized governance -> Efﬁciency/high capacity National pride NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power Worldwide Nuclear Development NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power Worldwide Nuclear Development Source: IAEA NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power The present • Nuclear plants for power • Nuclear plants for breeding – for weapons • • • • • • Iran N. Korea India/Pakistan Russia US technology sharing?

Inﬂuence of public opinion after Fukushima Al Jazeera English - Middle East - Iran wants open nuclear talks 9/23/09 9:07 AM UPDATED ON: WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2009 09:31 MECCA TIME, 06:31 GMT WATCH NOW FRONT PAGE AFRICA AMERICAS NEWS MIDDLE EAST ARTICLE TOOLS Email article Iran wants open nuclear talks Print article ASIA-PACIFIC Iran's president has said he expects open discussion of nuclear issues at a EUROPE planned meeting with US officials and IAEA secret report: Iran worked on nuclearMIDDLE | World news | The Guardianworld powers. warhead EAST five other Send feedback CENTRAL/S. ASIA FOCUS BUSINESS SPORT PROGRAMMES WEATHER However, Iran is not interested in discussing pressure to restrain its nuclear programme, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in an interview with the Associated Press news agency in New York.

IAEA secret report: Iran worked on Ahmadinejad is scheduled to address nuclear warhead the UN General Assembly on YOUR VIEWS Share article 9/23/09 9:09 AM SEARCH ARABIC ABOUT US Mottaki, left, and Okada said their countries would cooperate to denuclearise the world [AFP] Wedneday. 'Secret annexe' to UN nuclear inspection agency report reveals Iran nuclear nuclear programme Iran has 'sufficient information' to make a insists its weapon is intended to produce electricity but the US and its European allies say that Tehran is trying to build a nuclear bomb. Julian Borger guardian.co.uk, Friday 18 September 2009 10.24 BST The October 1 meeting with the US, China, Russia, Germany, France and Britain is to be the first of its kind since Barack Obama, the US president, took office. Ahmadinejad also said Iran is interested in buying enriched uranium for its nuclear power plants. His comments came a day after Manouchehr Mottaki, the Iranian foreign minister, said Tehran would push for international nuclear disarmament.

Talks with Japan During a meeting on the sidelines of the General Assembly, Mottaki told Katsuya Okada, his Japanese counterpart, Iran wants to co-operate with Japan in working to abolish nuclear weapons. Japan is the only country to have suffered a nuclear attack when its cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed by the US during the second world war. Mottaki also said Iran would push for expanded opportunities for all countries including his own - to use nuclear power for peaceful purposes. He told Okada that Tehran had A missile in front of a poster of the Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei no intention of acquiring nuclear weapons and that the age of nuclear weapons was over, Japanese officials said. during a military exhibition in Tehran, Iran. Photograph: Hasan Sarbakhshian/AP Okada said it was a pity suspicion hung over Iran's nuclear activities and urged The urgency of dealing with the Iranian nuclear threat wasto hold frank discussions with the Mottaki underscored today when a leaked report revealed that the UN inspection agency believes the Islamic republic has Obama administration.

"sufficient information" to make a nuclear weapon and has "probably tested" a key Although Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, has said the discussions must component. address the nuclear issue during the forthcoming summit, Iran insists its nuclear activities defence be on the agenda. A day after Barack Obama scrapped plans to deploy missile will not technology in eastern Europe, the Associated Press said it had obtained material from the Source: Agencies International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) which suggests that it was more convinced Iran had been trying to make a bomb than its outgoing director, Mohamed ElBaradei, TOP NEWS US urges Middle East peace push UN talks fail to set climate target Honduras agrees to Zelaya talks Somalia gun battle claims lives Dust storm blankets Australian city MIDDLE EAST NEWS US urges Middle East peace push Elite Saudi university set to open Iran wants open nuclear talks Bulgarian picked to head Unesco Yemeni army 'kills scores' in Saada MOST EMAILED Dangerous hatred in the US?

Israel pressured on nuclear sites US Jews and Israelis split on Obama The forgotten US patients US 'likely behind' Chavez coup NERS 211: Fall 2015 Development of nuclear power Next lecture:" Radioactivity • Radiation – Non-nuclear sources – Nuclear sources • • • • Radioactivity Activity calculations Nuclear processes Radiation energy/spectrum – Conservation of Energy and momentum ... 4 - Nuclear physics (part 2) University of Michigan Nuclear physics 2 NERS 211: Fall 2015 NERS 211 Lecture 4:" Introduction to Nuclear Ph 4 - Nuclear physics (part 2)

Question: What was "the worlds first full-scale atomic electric power plant devoted exclusively to peacetime uses," that went online in 1957?
Answer: Shippingport