Skip to main content

Nuclear Energy, Terrestrial Energy: WSJ

Terrestrial EnergyIn the Op-Ed pages of The Wall Street Journal today, William Tucker provides as normalizing an explanation about nuclear energy production as I've seen in the general interest press.
If we are now going to choose nuclear power as a way to resolve both our concerns about global warming and our looming energy shortfalls, we are first going to have to engage in a national debate about whether or not we accept the technology. To begin this discussion, I suggest redefining what we call nuclear power as "terrestrial energy."

Every fuel used in human history -- firewood, coal, oil, wind and water -- has been derived from the sun. But terrestrial energy is different.

Terrestrial energy is the heat at the earth's core that raises its temperature to 7,000 degrees Fahrenheit, hotter than the surface of the sun. Remarkably, this heat derives largely from a single source -- the radioactive breakdown of uranium and thorium. The energy released in the breakdown of these two elements is enough to melt iron, stoke volcanoes and float the earth's continents like giant barges on its molten core.

Geothermal plants are a way of tapping this heat. They are generally located near fumaroles and geysers, where groundwater meets hot spots in the earth's crust. If we dig down far enough, however, we will encounter more than enough heat to boil water. Engineers are now talking about drilling down 10 miles (the deepest oil wells are only five miles) to tap this energy.

Here's a better idea: Bring the source of this heat -- the uranium -- to the surface, put it in a carefully controlled environment, and accelerate its breakdown a bit to raise temperatures to around 700 degrees Fahrenheit, and use it to boil water. That's what we do in a nuclear reactor.
The likelihood of "terrestrial energy" catching on as popular phrase? Not very. (BTW, would nuclear fusion be considered extraterrestrial?) That said, Tucker's Op-Ed, Let's Have Some Love for Nuclear Power, is well worth reading.

Extra Bonus: The author has built his own site, Terrestrial Energy.org, to promote his forthcoming book and comes complete with a good-looking and informative slideshow.

Comments

Joffan said…
A pretty good op-ed, but I tend to agree that the "terrestrial power" tag is unlike to catch on. Perhaps it's just a little too vague. If the continental motion could be harnessed - now that would be terrestrial power.

Maybe we should call fission "Oklo power".

Perhaps then nuclear fusion would be "jovial power" on the grounds that deuterium fusion is what happens in brown dwarfs and giant planets (ie Jupiter).
Anonymous said…
Jupiter doesn't have enough mass to generate the necessary gravity to cause deuterium fusion to occur.
Joffan said…
There's some variation on that opinion... Jupiter certainly doesn't fuse like a star but there may be a trickle of deuterium fusion.
Luke said…
Certainly solar energy would be "extraterrestrial power" - but fusion of terrestrial materials, like deuterium, on earth would still be "terrestrial power".

Jupiter has enough mass to cause deuterium fusion to occur. If a gas planet the size and mass of Jupiter was made of deuterium, then it would 'ignite' nuclear fusion, and it would be a star.

The reason that is not the case, however, is that it is not made of enriched deuterium. Out there in the cosmos, there is no mechanism of deuterium enrichment - all the deuterium is evenly distributed, diluted amongst the vast quantities of hydrogen.

I don't know anything about it, but I suppose it's plausible that there could be a very small rate of DD fusion events inside the heart of the planet.
Joseph said…
I suppose tidal power would be lunar energy.
Joffan said…
I'm willing to avoid the argument by proposing "superjovial power" as the name for fusion.

;-)
ondrej said…
nuclear - supernova power
Rod Adams said…
Can anyone help me understand if Martin Herdon's georeactor theory hangs together?

It sure makes sense to me that fission in the center of the earth is far more likely than fusion in the center of Jupiter.

Of course, what do I know - I am just an English major pretending to know something about physics and thermodynamics.
Charles Barton said…
There is already an alternative brand, "Thorium Power", or "Thorium Energy". Those of us who see the many advantages of the thorium fuel cycle, are, in effect, promoting the thorium brand.
Anonymous said…
Rod, you were a submarine nuclear engineer. No one can contest your knowledge of things nuclear.

Now as for politics, history, Iran, the Dem-onaics and so on - that's a different matter.
Charles Barton said…
anonymous, most of us in the nuclear camp are a little strange. Rod is one of us. Don't mess with him, ya hear.
Finrod said…
Bah! I still like my suggestion of 'archaeonic power' for power derived from nuclear interaction (of either the fission or fusion ilk), although possibly only because it was me who thought of it...

As for the georeactor theory, I chanced to listen to the Atomic Show episode where Martin Herdon was given his say, and a question occurs to me: If the suggestion that protostars have their fusion process initiated by fission reactions in their cores, what mechanism was responsible for initiating fusion in the first generation of stars to form in the universe, before heavy nuclei formed in supernova explosions could possibly have existed?

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

Why Nuclear Plant Closures Are a Crisis for Small Town USA

Nuclear plants occupy an unusual spot in the towns where they operate: integral but so much in the background that they may seem almost invisible. But when they close, it can be like the earth shifting underfoot.

Lohud.com, the Gannett newspaper that covers the Lower Hudson Valley in New York, took a look around at the experience of towns where reactors have closed, because the Indian Point reactors in Buchanan are scheduled to be shut down under an agreement with Gov. Mario Cuomo.


From sea to shining sea, it was dismal. It wasn’t just the plant employees who were hurt. The losses of hundreds of jobs, tens of millions of dollars in payrolls and millions in property taxes depressed whole towns and surrounding areas. For example:

Vernon, Vermont, home to Vermont Yankee for more than 40 years, had to cut its municipal budget in half. The town closed its police department and let the county take over; the youth sports teams lost their volunteer coaches, and Vernon Elementary School lost th…