Nuclear Fission

• The waste is hazardous and difficult to store.
• There is some potential danger in operating a nuclear power plant (cf. Chernobyl and Three Mile Island), but the principal disadvantage is the need to safely store the spent fuel for tens of thousands of years.
• With proper regulation, safety features, and common sense pretty much none. When you test a poorly designed reactor, lets say a light water graphite moderated reactor also know as an RBMK reactor (Chernobyl) under low power low coolant conditions with al of the safety features turned off things can happen. When you ignore what the computers when they say to shut down the reactor and keep it running (Three mile island) things happen. But if you need disadvantages:
• Radioactive Waste
• Higher level waste can be reprocessed into Plutonium either through the use of a reprocessing facility or can be prevent from being made by using a breeder reactor where the higher level waste is not made and enriched Plutonium is made instead.
• Proliferation of fissionable materials
• The problem with breeder reactors is also the reason why they are good.They produce more fuel but they produce more fuel this highly enriched fuel can be used to make nuclear weapons, dirty bombs, or be used in a nuclear reactor to make energy.
• There is a large safety risk, from accidents and from terrorists stealing the fuel/byproducts to make weapons of mass destruction, nuclear power plants cost a lot to start, the nuclear fuel is non renewable and there is only enough to last approx 70 years.
• Nuclear fuel is in fact renewable in so-called "breeder" plants. France uses them, though there are none in the US.
• Nuclear plants are quite expensive to build, but so are coal-powered plants of equivalent capacity. Several companies are working on low-capacity plants... enough to power a neighborhood or a small village... that would be much cheaper.
• One disadvantage not mentioned above is the problem of disposing of spent... but still radioactive... fuel.

1. it is a clean source of producing energy and doesn't cause CO2 or greenhouse gas emissions.
2. It is safer than other fossil or renewable energy sources.
3. it could be used for medical treatment.

Nuclear fission process results in thermal energy production (this due to mass difference before and after of fission). This thermal energy is transferred to reactor coolant system. Then the thermal energy is converted into mechanical energy through turbines. The mechanical energy is converted into electrical energy through electric generators.

you need to get a life.

False. Combining nuclei to form a new nucleus is called nuclear fusion. Nuclear fission is the splitting of an atomic nucleus.

There is a greater binding energy per nucleon. Greater binding energy signifies a more stable nucleus due to stronger bonds; in fission, the amount of electrons is irrelevant to stability.

Stars work on nuclear fusion not fission. When enough material accretes, gravity compresses and heats the material to begin stellar formation. At some point, with enough material and heat, fusion will begin.

Under nuclear fission with thermal neutrons uranium release an enormous quantity of energy (202,5 MeV per one atom of 235U); the obtained heat is converted in electricity.

a. atoms are tiny indivisible particles

b. atoms of the same element are identical

c. compounds are made by combining atoms

d. atoms of different elements can combine with one another in simple whole ratios

Any nuclei of elements greater than one proton, ie; hydrogen, can undergo fission depending on the amount of energy available.

The cost of nuclear fission per kilowatt hour can vary depending on factors like construction and operating costs, fuel prices, and government regulations. On average, nuclear fission is estimated to cost between $30 to $60 per megawatt-hour.

Energy is released in nuclear fission because when a heavy atomic nucleus is split into smaller fragments, the total mass of the products is less than the original nucleus. This mass difference is converted into energy according to Einstein's famous equation, E=mc^2, where E is energy, m is mass, and c is the speed of light. This energy is released in the form of kinetic energy and radiation.

In the US, about 20 percent of electricity

1. Some of the waste products from the spent fuel are very radioactive.

2. The plants are expensive to build, and to insure.

Based on current events and researched gathered by IAEA: an exposed core, with unusable fail safes (to cool the reactors) as well as assuming staff are continually dosing the external housing with a coolent (i.e. salt water), you may believe it may take just a number of days to advert a nuclear catastrophe and cool down the reactor, right? Unfortunatley, the reality looks very grim. Without a proper circulation of coolent WITHIN the reactor, the build-up of hydrogen atoms and water vapor would expose the fuel-rods that would create am imminent partial-meltdown, assuming all fail safes are still non-functional/ Unlike chernoybl, technology has improved greatly, however, the heat generated from the fuel rods are capable to slice through the housing similar to that of melted butter exposing the core to the atmosphere. (i.e. Swiss cheese) Assuming the worse, an individual reactor in no way could generate the same nuclear fall-out as Chernoybl, however, with four reactors on the verge of a partial-meltdown and assuming these cores are exposed to the atmospehere in a partial-meltdown the catasrophe would be similar to that of chernoybl. The time frame you can expect a disaster of this magnitude to be adverted would be roughly * 2 - 4 weeks depending. However, you can expect the nuclear fall-out to be contained not anytime soon. If I were to make an educated guess with the clean-up process and containment, you would be looking at roughly 1 year. Worse case scenario would contaminate an area the size of the state of Maine, USA partiallu unusable for hundreds of thousands of years.* This worse case scenario would be approx half as destructive as Chernobyl.

Yes, the conventional explosives would trigger an explosion of the conventional explosives inside the nuclear bomb which would blow apart the nuclear components of the nuclear bomb, causing significant alpha emitter radiological contamination but no nuclear yield.

Fusion. Fusion requires very high temperature and pressure. So on earth we use
a critical mass of weapons grade uranium to start a fission chain reaction which
enables a fusion reaction in hydrogen. Fusion is of course more powerful than fission

Nuclear fission can be used to generate electricity through nuclear power plants. It works by splitting atoms of heavy elements, such as uranium, to release a large amount of energy, which is then harnessed to produce electricity. This process is a reliable source of energy production with low carbon emissions compared to fossil fuels.

They are similar only in that they are nuclear reactions. In nuclear fission involves the splitting of an atomic nucleus, whereas nuclear fusion involves the joining together of atomic nuclei.

Enrichment.

apex.

The 235U fuel releases neutrons, which will continue the chain reaction. It also releases heat, which is carried off in the coolant and (usually) used to generate steam to spin turbines to generate electricity.

When an atomic nucleus fissions, it splits into smaller atomic nuclei. These smaller atomic nuclei are referred to as "fission fragments."

The unstable nucleus of a radioactive element can fission (split) into smaller nuclei, i.e. those of lighter elements. This can also release other atomic particles, as well as energy. In nuclear power and atomic weapons, the fission process is initiated to release the nuclear energy. Natural fission is a much rarer occurrence than radioactive decay.

weak fuel pump or fuel lines leaking under intake penilum or fuel regulator or injection unit (spider itself) and or plugged injector tubes. (94 safari 4.3 CPI injection)

neutrons