NEI Teaches the Teachers About Nuclear Energy

When 11,000 science teachers invaded St. Louis, Mo., last week, the nuclear energy industry was there to teach them about clean-air nuclear power.

The Nuclear Energy Institute hosted an exhibit hall booth that drew strong traffic during the week-long convention that ended April 1. We answered plenty of questions about new plants and used fuel, and provided brochures and other material about nuclear energy.

We received an overwhelmingly positive response from the teachers. Many appreciated our up-to-date materials. That’s especially important since many said that their textbooks contain little or no information on nuclear power. And even when the books discussed nuclear energy, the information was out of date (sometimes by 10 years or more). Here's a sampling of some of their comments:

-- "I don't understand why we ever stopped building nuclear power plants in the United States." – Missouri teacher
-- "When will we build more plants? I am behind that 100 percent." – North Carolina teacher
-- "Give me everything you've got on Yucca Mountain. I am a big supporter of the repository." – Chairman of a California educational resource company
-- "I live near a nuclear power plant. It is a great neighbor." -- Illinois teacher

The convention was sponsored by the National Science Teachers Association.

Comments

Anonymous said…

It is amazing how little information is included in our high school science curriculum on nuclear energy.

In fact, it is not covered well in science museums.

An exception would be the Liberty Science museuem in New Jersey, which not only has a mock up of a reactor, but a display showing orange FarberWare (uranium glaze) pottery. One can hold a geiger counter to the pottery.

The Museum of American History at the Smithsonian, also has an exhibit of CP-1, a life size mockup with mannequins, as well as Glenn Seaborg's original sample of plutonium.

Nuclear energy must be included in science education. It is essential.

-NNadir

April 3, 2007 at 12:27 PM

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog