Bilibino Nuclear power plant in the Chukotka Autonomous Okrug, Russia, houses the world's smallest commercial nuclear reactor. It is equipped with four EGP-6 light water graphite reactors (LWGR) with gross power capacity of 12MWe each.
Here the world's 10 smallest commercial nuclear reactors, either in operation or under construction.
It depends on critical mass. For uranium-235, at normal density, at 100% enrichment, a perfect sphere would be critical mass at about 52 kg, or about 17 cm diameter. For plutonium-239, it would be about 10 kg, or about 9.9 cm diameter.
Problem is, that if you are right at critical mass, then the first event would take the reactor subcritical, because that first event would consume fuel, reducing mass, and reducing criticality. Its an interesting problem, and I can't get any more detailed than that, because information beyond this is classified, and I don't have access to it.
Fissionable material, that is, material with the ability to fission, occurs in some isotopes of heavy elements. The most useful ones are uranium-235 (U-235) and plutonium-239 (Pu-239).
In brief, when fission occurs, an atom of nuclear fuel (and we're talking about the fission of nuclear fuel here) splits. This splitting yields what are called fission fragments, and the atom splits approximately in two. Note that there are several options as regards what the atom splits into. It can split into "A" and "B" or it can split into "C" and "D" or a few other resultants. But regardless, the fission fragments recoil after fission occurs, and most of the energy of this recoil, which is kinetic energy on the atomic scale, is expressed as heat (thermal energy).
The fuel in a reactor, whatever it is, is tightly sealed in a metal jacket (cladding). The atoms of the fuel are being held rigidly, and when fission occurs, the recoil of the fragments is "contained" in the fuel itself. This mechanical energy gives rise to the appearance of thermal (heat) energy. The lion's share of energy released by fission is carried off in the recoil of the fission fragments, which is kinetic (mechanical) energy. Said another way, the fission fragments can't "go anywhere" in the fuel matrix, and the kinetic energy they come away with after fission is captured in the fuel and appears as heat.
There are also free neutrons released, and they carry off kinetic energy like the fission fragments. These neutrons are slowed down in the moderator to increase the chances that they will be captured by other fuel atoms and cause other fission reactions. They will continue the chain and cause more fissions following neutron capture events. Electromagnetic radiation in the form of gamma rays is also produced in nuclear fission. It must be shielded against. In review, most of the energy of fission appears in the kinetic energy of the fission fragments, and that kinetic energy is converted into heat within the fuel element.
A nuclear reactor is a core made up of an assembly of fuel bundles, which are made of fuel elements, usually using enriched uranium as the nuclear fuel. In the pressurized water reactor, this assembly is inside a pressure vessel, as water is used as the primary coolant, and also the moderator. It can be ordinary water or heavy water. We also see some reactor designs that use graphite as a moderator. Also in the reactor are the control rods.
The primary coolant is the heat transfer medium. It carries heat out of the core and into the steam generator and back to the core in a closed loop. The reactor is made to reach criticality on start up when control rods are pulled. The chain reaction within the fuel will produce a steady power output as a result of nuclear fission, and this will release heat. The heat is used to produce steam in a steam generator, and the steam is feed to a conventional steam turbine/generating unit to generate electric power.
For those investigators attempting to trace the transformations of energy, nuclear energy (the binding energy that holds atomic nuclei together) is converted into electromagnetic and kinetic energy in fission. The electromagnetic energy, which appears as gamma rays, is largely lost as we cannot "capture" and "use" it. The kinetic energy (mechanical energy) of the fission fragments is converted into thermal energy (heat) because the fission products are "trapped" in the fuel matrix and cannot "fly free" as they would in air. The thermal energy created in the fuel bundles heats the fuel, and the primary coolant picks up that heat and transports it to a steam generator. The steam generator turns secondary water into steam, and the steam is piped to a turbine. The thermal energy of the steam is converted into mechanical energy in the turbine, and the mechanical energy is transferred into a generator. The generator converts the mechanical energy into electrical (electromagnetic) energy, and that is the useful product we derive from nuclear fission.
Links are provided to other questions and to other web pages so you can check facts and learn more. You'll find the links below.
Nuclear reactors can be as small as a single room. There are many reactors that are less then 30 MW (a typical reactor is around 1,000 MW), and consider that a normal car engine is about 200 KW (or .2 MW) so some reactors produce the power of only about 100 cars.
The smallest that are standardly used, other then for research, are found on submarines.
I'm not aware of any deaths which have been attributed to nuclear reactors in the US, Canada, or W Europe. What has happened in the past in the Soviet Union has never been fully admitted, but one suspects some accidents might have occurred especially in the early days. There were certainly well documented deaths in the Chernobyl accident in 1986 in the Ukraine. About 50 direct deaths occurred amongst the operating staff and firefighters. The more long term effects on the general population are difficult to assess and really one can only go on statistics. Website www.world-nuclear.org has some references which you can follow up if you want to get more information.
SL-1 caused the death of three men. That was a US accident, the only one involving fatalities.
It sounds like your policy wasn't in force -- either due to a lapse or a cancellation -- when an accident occurred. If that's the case, you have a few options: 1. You should check with your agent and carrier to verify the lapse wasn't due to a misplaced payment. If, for instance, you dropped a check off at your agent's, but it didn't make it to your carrier in time, your carrier and/or agent needs to handle that accordingly, since you did what you could to get the payment in. If you mailed a payment in, you should also check with your carrier about the postmark on your payment. If it was within your policy period, you might be okay. 2. If #1 doesn't work, and you clearly have no applicable coverage, you're probably going to end up paying out-of-pocket for any damages you caused to another vehicle (this would also apply, of course, to any damages to your own vehicle). Hopefully, the other person has full coverage, and his carrier will handle his damages up front. Then, you can work with the other carrier to set up a payment plan. They might insist that you pay them everything at once, but if you show that's impossible, they're usually satisfied with a monthly payment schedule. 3. If you have a loan on your own vehicle, and your lienholder was aware of your lapse in coverage, make sure they didn't "force" coverage on your vehicle. If they did, you might find coverage there (this is a long shot, by the way, but every little bit helps).
Reactor control rods are made of a substance that absorbs neutrons.
Far higher fuel energy density (1-10 million times coal/oil/gas)
1 GW-year requires 3.75 million tons of coal but only about 1 tonne of U-235
Nuclear waste is highly toxic but the amount is small so full containment is practical. 1 GW-year from coal produces 8.75 million tons CO2, with little alternative but to dump it in the atmosphere.
Nuclear plants produce no NOx, SOx, CO, HC or smoke. Scrubbers have cleaned up coal plants but they're complex, expensive and consume much power. Fly ash must be stored if it can't be sold (e.g., for concrete).
Nuclear is the only non-fossil dispatchable source that can be significantly grown in the US (hydro is pretty much fully developed). Without nuclear, wind and solar beyond 30% of total generation will require either much more pumped storage (and habitat destruction) or a major battery breakthrough.
Good baseload (24/7) source, vs wind and solar and even hydro (drought years). Reactors usually shut down for refueling only every other year. Can also load-follow (e.g., in France). Only renewable source good for baseload is geothermal, which is limited.
Fast neutron (breeder) reactors mean enough uranium and thorium for many thousands of years, far more than coal (most abundant fossil fuel). No need for imports. Fast reactors also burn long-lived actinides, keeping them out of waste. The important fission products have half lives of <= 30 years, so volume of waste is much smaller and will decay much faster (to the activity of uranium ore in just a few centuries).
Very expensive and time-consuming to build, mainly politics and legal challenges and delays. Proliferation of one-off designs that run up costs.
Significant physical and computer security requirements.
Current reactors need active cooling of decay heat for several days after shutdown. Loss of power can cause core melt, H2 generation and serious explosions (Fukushima). Newer designs emphasize passive cooling.
Although major accidents and terrorist attacks are unlikely consequences could be severe, outstripping private insurance. Significant evacuations may be needed. The public and politicians don't deal rationally with low probability, high consequence accidents.
Still no agreed-on high level waste disposal -- arguably political, not technical.
US doesn't reprocess fuel due to nuclear weapons proliferation concerns. But several other countries reprocess, and our policy does nothing to inhibit the Iranians or North Koreans.
Nuclear plants are usually sited near bodies of water that can be used for cooling. This makes them potentially vulnerable to tsunamis (e.g., Fukushima), and leakage of water-soluble fission products.Advantages:
Disadvantages include the fact that nuclear power plants produce radioactive waste that is quite dangerous and difficult to safely store or dispose of. And nuclear power has proved to be quite expensive. Coal is much cheaper. And nuclear power plants can have accidents that are tremendously destructive, the worst such accident being the one that happened at the Chernobyl plant. No other type of power generation presents that level of risk.A:Pros
No Carbon dioxide emissions contributing to global warming.
Uranium safer to mine than coal (strip mining)
Nuclear plants need very little fuel making them less susceptible to fuel shortages or transport problems.
Uranium produces far more energy than any other fuel (other than the sun which only shines during the day) and is about as expensive as coal.
Nuclear power is very reliable.
Meltdowns are some of the worst disasters known to man where the reactor core heats up too much and melts; releasing radioactive clouds in the air. Many precautions are taken to prevent the plant from reaching this point, and does make the probability of disasters of this magnitude very unlikely, but is also very expensive.
Byproducts of this power require time away from society until they are no longer dangerous. Transportation of this deadly material is dangerous and the biggest problem faced by pro nuclear people is that of where to put the waste.
Nuclear plants may be vulnerable to sabotage, including terrorist attacks
You get lots of power for relatively little cost, on the other hand Nuclear Power Plants are dangerous and you have to find a place to put the waste (which is really nasty).
Cons that aren't really cons
1. Nuclear waste -- According to a study by Stanford University the waste consists of the fission products. They are highly radioactive at first, but the most radioactive isotopes decay the fastest. (That's what being most radioactive amounts to). About one cubic meter of waste per year is generated by a power plant. It needs to be kept away from people. After 10 years, the fission products are 1,000 times less radioactive, and after 500 years, the fission products will be less radioactive than the uranium ore they are originally derived from. Radical anti-nuclear elements claim that the waste is highly radioactive for tens of thousands of years because they do not tell you about reprocessing of fuel that is done in France, Japan, Canada, Russia, and many other countries that use nuclear power.
2. Nuclear proliferation - Every country wanting to make bombs has succeeded as far as is known. None have used material produced in power reactors. (Plutonium produced in RBMK reactors may have been used in Soviet weapons. The RBMK was designed as a dual-purpose reactor suitable both for power production and bomb production. For this it was necessary to be able to replace fuel rods while the reactor was operating, and this made the reactor too big for a containment structure, and this is what allowed the radioactivity to spread). Iran may be doing this. In the US we are talking about single purpose reactors for power not bombs. Radicals will try to scare you and tell you that if we build nuclear power plans and fuel reprocessing plants, then nuclear bombs will proliferate. However, the Carter Administration decided not to reprocess nominally on the grounds that if other countries could be persuaded not to reprocess, the likelihood of nuclear proliferation would be reduced. So far not one other country has been persuaded. Meanwhile other countries rely less on oil and more on nuclear, except the US.
3. National Security - Nuclear reactors represent a clear national security risk, and an attractive target for terrorists some will say. Well actually, the plants are designed so that a plane can be crashed into the reactor and it will not break or leak. So this is a scare tactic used by those that think we can run the country on solar power. Perhaps some day we can but not yet. Don't be fooled by those that lie about nuclear power.
4. Accidents - Fewer people have died from radiation poisoning than from mining other forms of energy. Does this make the deaths less important, no. Any death must be guarded against. But the record so far, including Chernobyl, shows that mining for coal is far mor dangerous.
5. Cancer -- There are growing concerns that living near nuclear plants increases the risk for childhood leukemia and other forms of cancer. However, using fossil fuels causes far more cancers. Is Nuclear Power Plants safe? No. Nothing is perfectly safe, but they are safe enough to be relied upon as a source of energy. Because safe and healthy power sources like solar and wind exist now, some say we don't have to rely on risky nuclear power. However, the reality is that to power New York City all of New Mexico would have to be covered with solar collectors. So, solar is just not feasible yet. Give up? No, research should continue. Meanwhile Nuclear is needed until Solar is more efficient.
6. Not enough sites - Some say there are not enough sites for nuclear plants. See above answer about covering the state of New Mexico with solar cells to power New York and then tell me that there is enough room for solar. This is a false argument against nuclear power.
7. Not enough uranium - Some say - even if we could find enough feasible sites for a new generation of nuclear plants, we're running out of the uranium necessary to power them. Scientists in both the US and UK have shown that if the current level of nuclear power were expanded to provide all the world's electricity, our uranium would be depleted in less than ten years. This answer does not tell you that no one is proposing that ALL of the worlds energy come from Nuclear, just like it is not feasible that it all come from wind or solar. Plus this answer does not account for nuclear plans that generate more fuel and it ignores reprocessing of spent fuel to pull out more usable fuel.
8. Costs - Some say that a nuclear power plant brings few jobs to its local economy while accelerating solar and energy efficiency solutions creates jobs good-paying, green collar, jobs in every community. This of course is a complete lie. We do not yet know what jobs could be created by expanding solar nor if it would generate more jobs than expanding other sources of energy. Meanwhile, cities in France COMPETE for nuclear plants to get the good paying jobs. Which is a better paying job, nuclear engineer or solar panel installer? By the way, few will tell you that it takes and ENORMOUS amount of electricity to make solar cells. Where does that electricity come from. Well right now it comes from fossil fuels.
9. Private sector unwilling to finance - Due to all of the above, the private sector has largely chosen to take a pass on the financial risks of nuclear power, which is what led the industry to seek taxpayer loan guarantees from Congress in the first place. Of course the same can be said for subsidies to finance the use of any alternative power source - remember the credits for solar power on your income tax form? Well, that's tax payer financing.A:Advantages-
I think the positives of nuclear power is very important for development in the fiel of medicine and therapies , on the negative folks, is in the use of the extermination of the human race
The world is running out of coal and oil. After these 2 resources become scarce nuclear energy can still be used.
Nuclear Power plants produce much more energy with much less than Fossil Fuels, which produce less and cost more.
Well operated nuclear power plants don't cause pollution, unlike the burning of Fossil fuels.
Nuclear energy is extremely dangerous. 2 nations, Russia and the United States have nuclear weapons that can kill every person on the face of Earth. What if there was a nuclear war, or if Terrorists got them...we'd be in deep s**t
Accidents in Nuclear power plants may occur. This is caused by a radiation or hydrogen leak, which will explode the entire factory like a bomb and the area around it.
Usually, Uranium-235. Sometimes, in special applications, Plutonium-239.
Note that naturally occurring Uranium is more than 99% Uranium-238, and less than 1% Uranium-235. In order to build an effective reactor, the Uranium is enriched, typically to around 5% Uranium-235.
Just like a line reactor..
A 3-phase Line Reactor is a set of three (3) coils (also known as windings, chokes or inductors) in one assembly. It is a series device, which means it is connected in the supply line such that all line current flows through the reactor, as shown below. Line Reactors are current-limiting devices and oppose rapid changes in current because of their impedance. They hold down any spikes of current and limit any peak currents. This resistance to change is measured in ohms as the Line Reactor's AC impedance (XL) and is calculated as follows: XL = 2 π f L (ohms), where: f = frequency in hertz (cycles per second) harmonic frequency examples: harmonic (60 Hz)frequency (Hz)5th3007th42011th660 L = reactor inductance in henries (H), millihenries (mH) -- H x 10-3, microhenries (µH) -- H x 10-6 By inspection of the XL formula, the Line Reactor is directly proportional to the frequency (f) and the inductance (L). That is, if the impedance of a Line Reactor is 10 ohms at 60 Hz, then at the 5th harmonic (300 Hz) the impedance is 50 ohms. If the inductance (L) is increased, then the impedance will increase proportionally. This increase in Line Reactor impedance will reduce the current in the line. The higher the frequency (Hertz), the lower the current. A Line Reactor's DC resistance (R-ohms) is very low by design so that the power losses (watts-I2R) are low. Line Reactors are rated by % impedance, voltage and current. However, they are sized by % impedance, voltage and motor horsepower. The motor horsepower determines the necessary current rating for the Line Reactor. Line Reactors are rated by impedance, voltage and current. # Impedance (% impedance of load Z)
The load impedance (Z) is calculated by this formula:
Z = V/I, where Z = load impedance (ohms), V = line voltage (volts), and I = line current (amps)
This percent of load impedance also determines the voltage drop across the Line Reactor. For example, a 5% Line Reactor would have a 5% voltage drop. # Voltage rating
Since a Line Reactor is a current-sensitive device, the voltage rating is needed for dielectric concerns as a maximum voltage and horsepower. It is also used to determine the current rating when given only voltage and horsepower. # Current rating (amperes)
This is the current required by the load(s). It is total current flowing to the load(s) and through the reactor. This current is measured in amperes (amps).
Uranium-235 or Plutonium
No, a nuclear reactor produces thermal energy and ionising radiation, no magnetic effects.
It is often useful as a coolant because it can absorb thermal energy without a large change in temperature.
It can't explode like a nuclear bomb.
It could have a steam explosion, as can any steam power plant. It is also possible for it to build up hydrogen gas if it runs too hot and damages its fuel rods, the hydrogen could explode.
the asia's largest producer of nuclear generated electricity is Japan.
The first demonstration nuclear reactor was built in USA by Enrico Fermi in Chicago Stadium. Fermi was an Italian Physicist, best known for his work on Chicago Pile-1 (the first nuclear reactor).
on 26 June 1954, in the town of Obninsk, near Moscow in the former USSR, the first nuclear power plant was connected to an electricity grid to provide power to residences and businesses. Nuclear energy had crossed the divide from military uses to civilian applications.
Sure, the most harmful isotopes will have decayed to safe levels in about 200 years.
However its probably best to leave it as a permanent wildlife preserve.
It is used: 1. natural uranium (metal or oxide); 2. Uranium dioxide; 3. MOX fuel (Uranium Oxide + Plutonium Oxide); 4. Plutonium Oxide; and in future 5. Thorium fue
According to the US Dept of Energy, the last reactor built was the "River Bend" plant in Louisiana. Its construction began in March of 1977. The last plant to begin commercial operation is the "Watts Bar" plant in Tennessee, which came online in 1996.
Note: The list I obtained only listed operational reactors.
To produce heat.
As far as I know, reactors come in different sizes, producing different amounts of power, so you would expect the amount radiation to vary, as well.
What is ROBLOX's password on roblox?
Asked By Wiki User
Does Jerry Seinfeld have Parkinson's disease?
Asked By Wiki User
If you are 13 years old when were you born?
Asked By Wiki User
What is a hink pink 50 percent giggle?
Asked By Wiki User
What are some more advan dtages of nuclear power?
Asked By Wiki User
Does anyone have a diagram of a Mark III BWR containment?
Asked By Wiki User
Describe how New Mexico has been involved and is still involved with nuclear power and waste?
Asked By Wiki User
What are arguments for and against power vacuuming?
Asked By Wiki User
Copyright © 2020 Multiply Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. The material on this site can not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with prior written permission of Multiply.