The Atomic Age and the Making of Nuclear Power Plants

Russia scientists and engineers designed and constructed the world’s first 5 Mega-Watt electric (MW(e)) nuclear power plant, and commercial generation of electric power was started June, 27, 1954. Although small in size by today's standards, its successful operation marked the beginning of the rapid development of the nuclear power industry.

Before the first U.S. nuclear power plant went on line in 1957, nuclear reactors were already in service in the former Soviet Union and in the United Kingdom. However, Shippingport Nuclear Power Plant was no small undertaking. The Dusquesne Light Company worked in partnership with the Federal Government to build the world’s first large scale commercial nuclear power plant. The reactors were designed by the Westinghouse Electric Corporation in cooperation with the Division of Naval Reactors of the Atomic Energy Commission. Click Here for a photo of the plant. 

President Eisenhower attended the opening ceremonies. Shippingport continued to provide power during the terms of Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, and Carter before finally retiring in 1982, during President Reagan’s first term.

The Incredible Power Potential of Nuclear Fission

The efficiency of a nuclear power plant in producing power is all about the fuel: In most cases a form of processed uranium that has been mined from the earth and processed and manufactured into fuel form for the power plant. This fuel in its manufactured form is a pellet. 

How much energy is in the fuel? The Nuclear Energy Institute puts it into perspective- 
One uranium nuclear fuel pellet the size of the tip of your little finger is equivalent to the energy provided by 1,780 pounds of coal; or 149 gallons of oil, as much oil as fits in three 50 gallon drums; or 17,000 cubic feet of natural gas. 

The energy is released inside the reactor through fission—the splitting of uranium atoms in a chain reaction. In the nuclear plant, the heat energy produced boils water into steam, which drives a turbine generator to produce electricity.

These fuel pellets are put into long cylindrical rods about 12 feet long or so. The rods (in most cases) are bundled together into an assembly. Whenever someone talks about nuclear "fuel rods", they are probably talking about the assembly. 

A little more detail on the energy of the fuel (from  “The Nuclear Tourist”):

Uranium-235 is the isotope of uranium that is used in nuclear reactors. Uranium-235 can produce 3.7 million times as much energy as the same amount of coal. As an example, 7 trucks, each carrying 6 cases of 2-12 foot high fuel assemblies, can fuel a 1000 Megawatt-electrical (MWe) reactor for 1.5 years. During this period, approximately 2 metric tons of Uranium-235 (of the 100 metric tons of fuel - uranium dioxide) would be consumed. To operate a coal plant of the same output would require 1 train of 89 cars -100 tons of coal each car - EVERY day. Over 350,000 tons of ash would be produced AND over 4 million tons of carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides and sulfur oxides would be released to the environment.

This makes the use of nuclear power very attractive in terms of natural raw material preservation and air emissions.

Briefly, how does a Nuclear power plant produce power? A nuclear fuel assembly is used as the source of nuclear energy in a reactor. Most nuclear reactors are powered by fuel assemblies that contain two types of uranium: uranium-238 and uranium-235.

In power reactors, the fuel assemblies contain around 2% to 3% of uranium-235. Some research reactors use fuel rods, which contain up to 60% uranium-235. This is classified as highly enriched uranium (HEU).

As fuel is burned in the reactor, uranium undergoes "fission" as part of a controlled chain reaction. Fission involves splitting the nucleus (the center) of uranium atoms. This releases atomic particles called neutrons, which split as they collide with other atoms, creating more neutrons. This splitting of particles of atoms releases tremendous amounts of energy in the form of heat. The heat is used to boil water to create steam. The steam turns steam-operated turbines, which in turn runs electrical generators creating electricity. Other radioactive elements called fission products and plutonium are created in this process. 

Fission produces heat which in turn produces steam to power turbines that operate generators.

Fission products and plutonium, which build up in fuel rods, make the fuel less and less effective. As a result, the fuel is withdrawn from the reactor after a time and is said to be "spent fuel". Spent fuel rods are extremely hot (temperature can be over 500 degrees F) and highly radioactive as a result of the new radioactive elements created by the fissioning process.

All nuclear plants have storage pools for spent fuel. These pools are typically 40 or more feet deep. In the bottom 14 feet are storage racks designed to hold fuel assemblies removed from the reactor. In many countries, the fuel assemblies, after being in the reactor for 3 to 6 years, are stored underwater for 10 to 20 years. The water serves 2 purposes:

1. It serves as a shield to reduce the radiation levels that people working above may be exposed to.
2. It cools the fuel assemblies that continue to produce heat (called decay heat) for some time after removal

They are stored in fuel storage pools because they are very hot when extracted from the core of the reactor during a refueling procedure. They remain hot – and very radioactive – for years. These pools were intended to store spent nuclear fuel on a temporary basis. In most cases the fuel rods were being stored until they could be reprocessed to extract residual uranium. When reprocessing was discontinued in 1992, these pools became de facto permanent storage facilities.

                Spent fuel storage pool

 What is so dangerous about a Nuclear power plant? 

The energy released by the fuel and the process of “burning” the fuel is called radioactivity and is dangerous and can kill you. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) presents these facts about radiation and radioactivity:

• Radioactive materials are composed of atoms that are unstable. An unstable atom off its excess energy until it becomes stable. The energy emitted is radiation.
• The process by which an atom changes from an unstable state to a more stable state by emitting radiation is called radioactive decay or radioactivity.
• Radioactive materials are dangerous because of the harmful effect of certain types of radiation on the cells of the body. The longer a person is exposed to radiation, the greater the risk.
• Radiation cannot be detected by sight, smell, or any other sense.

A Nuclear power plant houses or stores many more times the radioactive substances that stored nuclear weapons do. A nuclear weapon in the form of a suitcase bomb or warhead has only 10 to 75kg of nuclear material. (Of course, the material in a warhead or bomb, if exploded in the role of a nuclear bomb has terrible and devastating consequences, and is not the subject of this article.)

The fuel for operation of a nuclear power plant is contained in the “core” of the main engine of the power plant, called the reactor. Several hundred fuel assemblies, as described above, make up the core of a reactor. For a reactor with an output of 1,000 megawatts (MWe), the core would contain about 75 tons of low-enriched uranium. 

However, the fuel in a nuclear power plant is about 50 to 100 TONS of Uranium and is extremely radioactive. If there is an accident disaster, or a deliberate act of sabotage, the release of only a small portion of this material has severe consequences. 

There is another danger associated with Nuclear power plants. The 103 United States Nuclear power plants have the “spent” fuel rods – which are still very radioactive – stored in mostly unprotected water pools near the reactor. Fuel rods are the source of nuclear energy in a reactor. Spent fuel rods are highly radioactive.

Underwater storage is appropriate for the short-term to allow thermal cooling and as a simple radioactivity shield. On a long-term basis (more than a few years) it is quite inappropriate. There are problems with corrosion of the fuel and containers, there is the danger of a criticality event (meltdown of the fuel), it is difficult to keep the water clean and safe, there is the danger of radioactive water leakage, and operation of the facility is expensive. Most fuel storage is in unprotected buildings.

This sometimes more than doubles the amount of radioactive material in and around the facilities, and is the perfect material for releasing huge amounts of radioactive elements in so-called “dirty bombs”.

Whenever a Nuclear Power plant "uses" the fuel from the fuel rod assemblies, the fuel rods themselves, which house the Uranium, DON'T loose radioactivity. The fuel rods change form to other types of radioactive materials, which include Plutonium. 

The fuel rods actually are more radioactive (in a different way) than when they went in. The rods must be stored in specially constructed pools of water for a minimum of 5 years to cool off. If the water was lost in these cooling pools and the spent fuel rods were exposed to the air, the rods would spontaneously ignite and cause a horrendous fire and the radioactive particles would be carried into the open air with the heated air from the fire. 

The "spent fuel rod" problem is compounded by 2 serious other problems. Because the Nuclear plant uses many fuel rods in operation and they are considered "spent" in about 2 years, there are many many fuel rods usually stored at Nuclear facilities, especially if the plant has been in operation for many years. 

For example, one of the most "infamous" (because of the worst safety record in the industry) Nuclear Power facilities - Indian Point in New York, has over 1400 TONS of spent fuel rods stored in fuel pools. The amount of stored fuel assemblies at the facilities is a function of the length of time the reactor has been in operation. Typically, a 1000 Mwe reactor uses about 25 Tons of fuel a year and that spent fuel is stored in pools of water to cool down.

The second serious problem is that most of the pools that the spent fuel is stored is (in many of the facilities) unprotected by the containment dome. There are some Nuclear Power plant spent fuel pools that only have a metal roof over the pools. This is the height of negligence and disregard for the safety of the public.

A terrorist group only has to cause the evacuation of the water covering the rods and the result will be a horrible spontaneous fire, carrying the radioactive particles into the atmosphere as depicted above.

One nuclear expert called this catastrophic fire, "worse than a reactor meltdown".  This is a very serious drawback with spent nuclear fuel rods. Another new report is revealed below:

A New Study By the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Claims Great Danger From Spent Fuel Storage

"A catastrophic meltdown in the spent fuel pool of a nuclear power plant could cause fatal, radiation-induced cancer in thousands of people as far as 500 miles from the site," according to a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission study, November 10, 2002.  (The entire article can be found HERE)

 Nuclear Power Plants as Terrorist Targets

In the United States both before and after 9/11/2001, we have had many many warnings of potential deliberate attacks on Nuclear Power facilities. There have been over 160 news headlines this year - stating that very thing. Is it possible?  Let's look at the facts and possibilities:

• News agencies in this country and in other countries, like the BBC in Britain have reported many times that Nuclear Power facilities were prime terrorist targets.

• Talking to a government official in Germany, he indicated that we were very much in danger of this very thing - seems other countries know this and watch us with expectations of it happening

• President Bush announced the possibility of a nuclear power plant attack this year in his "State of the Union" speech.

• Diagrams and locations of Nuclear Power facilities were found in the Al-Qaeda caves. Now, really, why else would they be there?

• Why worry about trying to smuggle enough radioactive material for a "dirty bomb" into the US? There are TONS of unprotected spent fuel rods (which are more radioactive and deadly than when new fuel) that are at easy access for a trained group terrorist attack.

• The Council on Foreign Relations in its report on this issue has this Question:
  "Could Terrorists Target US Nuclear Power Plants?" The answer? - YES and then quoted the President reminding US citizens in the "State of the Union" address of the specific danger of Nuclear Power plants as terrorist targets.

• Ask yourself this question: IF the government did NOT think that nuclear facilities were in danger of being terrorist targets, then WHY did 14 states with Nuclear Power facilities mandate (this year) to stockpile and hand out free anti-radiation pills AND (again) why would the President of the United States include that information in his speech?

• Eight governors have independently ordered the National Guard to protect nuclear reactors in their states.

• The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued an advisory to the nation’s 103 nuclear power plants that terrorists might try to fly hijacked planes into some of them.

Can A Reactor in the United States be "BLOWN UP"?

This is a particularly difficult question to ask and you can believe many experts have pondered it, and here is the conclusion: The nuclear reactors in the US are much safer than the type of Nuclear Power plant in Chernobyl, Russia that blew up and caught fire, poisoning hundreds of thousands of people. (More on that issue in a bit.) Note that this type of event is NOT a nuclear bomb. Now the short answers based on the experts - 

• Can a nuclear power plant be blown up? - YES, and this would most likely result in a meltdown and the release of radiation into the atmosphere.

• Can a nuclear power plant explode like an "atomic bomb"? - NO, not likely. However, if a nuclear device (an atomic bomb like a "suitcase bomb") were exploded in the vicinity of the nuclear fuel, the results are - ??? (maybe)

Team of Terrorists

Consider this factor - if a team of Nuclear Power plant operators have to be specially trained, going through special psychological screening (most of them anyway) and the plant has to be constantly monitored, with many safety features and valves checked and rechecked periodically for the safety of the public, what would happen if a group of well-armed terrorists got into the control room? Could they cause the plant to go critical? What if they are carrying plastic explosives? Submachine guns?

The way to answer that -  absolutely YES. Why? Because in all cases of Nuclear Power plant accidents, the Plant's own trained operators caused the facility's accidents. Now let's replace the trained operators with armed, well-organized terrorists whose mission is to cause the plant to go critical and spew radiation on the public. YES, it can happen.

Nuclear Power Plant Security Team

You might argue that the security around Nuclear Power plant is very high and that there are armed guards and trained teams for just that possibility. The answer is YES that is true - for some plants. One cannot even say "most plants" for fear that it would be a gross exaggeration, when the truth is that most plant security are only given handguns and complain of only being allowed to practice the skill of repelling attackers maybe once a year. 

Furthermore, in Federally sponsored exercises where the Nuclear facility had "mock attackers" whose mission was to cause a loss of radiation containment, over 50% of the nuclear facilities in the US did NOT pass the "test" - even when they knew that the test would be conducted. In other words, it wasn't a "surprise attack" of the mock invaders.

Sabotage

I also believe an "insider" who slipped through the screening process undetected could easily help a team or maybe even single-handedly cause the plant to malfunction and go into "meltdown".

This operative or "plant" could hide and later detonate explosives. The "insider" would also have a better understanding of the operation and safety mechanisms of the Nuclear facility and how to defeat them. There doesn't need to be too much of an explanation of exactly how, one only has to imagine a determined agent, maybe a "suicide bomber" waiting for the chance, just exactly like a ticking time-bomb. Isn't that same description, "a ticking time-bomb" the same term President Bush used to describe the Al-Qaeda terrorists in hiding in this country

Aircraft Flying in to a Nuclear Plant

Knowing the tragic details of what happened on 9/11/2001, an attack on a Nuclear Power facility with a fully loaded and fueled large passenger aircraft would not be a total surprise. I believe that the security for boarding an aircraft have been increased to a point now to where it would certainly be much more difficult for an ARMED group to take control of a passenger aircraft.

However, keep this in mind: it has been reported that the original 9/11 attack was supposed to be a strike into a Nuclear Power plant. Here is a report from the BBC.

It seems likely, but what seems more likely is the future possibility of this type of attack. Many believe that a Nuclear Power plant protective dome could withstand a large passenger jet liner crashing into it. This belief is based on the story of an old test. That conclusion is false, however, and even the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) has admitted the same.

Most experts agree that IF a large passenger airliner, traveling at the speed that the 9/11 terrorists were traveling and full of fuel hit the protective dome of a Nuclear Power plant, there would be loss of containment - the dome would be breached and this would lead to a meltdown and/or explosion and release of radiation.

What Would Happen If There Were a Release? (Meltdown and Loss of Radiation Containment)

This is assumption or theory of the decade. Let's look at the most terrible nuclear accident in history to find the answer: Chernobyl, Ukraine (Russia)

On April 26, 1986, Operator error coupled with a dangerous Nuclear Reactor design caused a major accident, which was followed by a prolonged release to the atmosphere of large quantities of radioactive substances.

The official document of the accident, written by the WHO (World Health Organization) summarized the significance of the area that was affected:

"The radiation released affected the entire Northern Hemisphere."

"The specific features of the release favoured a widespread distribution of radioactivity throughout the northern hemisphere, mainly across Europe. A contributing factor was the variation of meteorological conditions and wind regimes during the period of release. Activity transported by the multiple plumes from Chernobyl was measured not only in Northern and in Southern Europe, but also in Canada, Japan and the United States. Only the Southern hemisphere remained free of contamination."

What is terrifying to note is that the loss of the radioactive substances that caused this come from the fuel "core" of the reactor and that the total percentage of the core lost was ONLY 5%. Five percent of the fuel lost from the core ended up being 6 TONS of radioactive particles, and this does not include the radioactive gasses produced by the nuclear process during normal operation. Note that the radiation released was approximately 100 times the radioactive particles as that released in the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs and resultant fallout.

ONLY 5% OF THE CORE WAS LOST - THIS IS 6 TONS OF HIGHLY RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL

To read more about the "Gory Details" about Chernobyl and how it happened, CLICK HERE.

We asked our visitors and customers in a survey to identify the closest sources of radiation to them and why they chose to stock a supply of anti-radiation pills to protect them from those risks. The questions and answers to those questions are below:

(Question 1) Is there a nuclear facility near you? (see map below)

"...I live about 100 miles from Augusta which has two reactors.  Also I have been told by the fire chief that there is radioactive material at Georgia Power Plant Branch which is about 3 miles away..." (Milledgeville GA)

"...I live 28mi in proximity to Nine Mile I, II, and James E. Fitzpatrick located on the south shore of Lake Ontario near Oswego.  Also Indian Point Facility is West of me near Rochester N.Y., about 50 miles..." (Clay NY)

"The crystal river facility. Located about a one hour drive west by south west from my location." (Gainsville FL)

"...About 100 miles away..." (Dallas TX)

"...The nearest Nuke facility is at Hanford. It is across the Cascade
mountain range from us... in Seattle but it is still about 130 miles
away as the crow flies. We have a nuclear submarine base much closer and in the wind pattern to bring any fallout here if something horrific...any type of accident.... happened .It is about 10 miles across the water from us at Bremerton..." (Seattle WA)

"...About 90 miles to the south of us along the coast in Bay City, TX. We are in Houston in the wind pattern of the facilities..." (Houston TX)

"Are you kidding? All of NYC is in the wind pattern of about 3 nuclear reactors!" (New York NY)

"...My family that lives near 3 Mile Island..." (Harrisburg PA)

"I had NO IDEA there are SO MANY sites here in Illinois!! [Until they saw our map - below]..." - Chicago IL

(Question 2) Have you read/heard about the disaster at Chernobyl and did it have any bearing on your decision to purchase KIO3?

"Yes I read about Chernobyl, it was definitely a contributing factor." (Russellville AR)

"Actually I did not read about Chernobyl...but followed the event very closely when it happened as in this area they suggested that we could get some minor fallout from it. Chernobyl had little to
do with my decision to buy the KIO3 at this time..." (Seattle WA)

"I have read much about that travesty, a neighbor of mine who emigrated  here from Russia approx. 7 years ago and lived outside of the fallout zone died just two months ago from thyroid cancer as well as other cancers which he was battling. He wanted a block party to celebrate the Fourth of July. We buried him two days prior. We had the party in his memory." (Gainesville FL)

"I have read about and seen television programs about Chernobyl, the entire idea of something like Chernobyl is frightening but is one element in a broader view in regard to protecting my family.

"Chernobyl was the key factor and was the example I used to "sell" my family and friends!!  I think it's important because it really happened!!" (Harrisburg PA)  

"Chernobyl events definitely show the real effects and was very influential in my purchase. Chernobyl was the main or first thought I associated with for sound reasoning in the purchase." (Clay NY)

(Question 3) Considering the possibilities of Nuclear Warfare where we may become fallout victims, or a "dirty bomb", or an attack on a Nuclear Power plant - which scenario is the most likely to you? (You may suggest another if it is not mentioned here)

"My greatest concern at this time is the Nuclear plant in our back yard. I don't think it would take much to get into it and we have a lot of foreigners in my area due to [the] University. Therefore, a foreigner would not look unusual. I certainly don't discount a dirty bomb either. Either way I feel it will come in my lifetime unfortunately." (SC)

"...In this day and age, I'm not as concerned about a "nuclear accident" as much as a "nuclear event", either terrorists attacking a plant (less likely), "dirty bomb" (more likely), or a rogue nation with a missile or a nuclear war somewhere in the world we may
get fallout from (even more likely)..." (AZ)

"I think a "dirty bomb" attack is probably most likely to occur before an attack on a nucear facility for a couple of reasons:
*  they know we're most likely watching the plants  
*  they can release a dirty bomb most any place...several if they wanted in several locations and though the effect would probably not be as great as with an attack on a nuclear facility, I'm sure they'd be pleased with themselves and the results and then when they have us running around like rabbits, they might try to hit the reactors...just a thought..." (Illinois)

"The Dirty bomb, I feel the material is already in the country. Terrorists or rogue governments could or will take advantage of what ever situation avails them. Not to be fatalistic but "if" is not part of the equation *when* is the question." (Minnesota)

"I believe most probable is a terrorist attacks on several nuke plants. Dirty bomb least concern for my location because I live in a very rural area." (New York)

"I think that we have to consider all of the possibilities that you mentioned [above]; The fact that spent nuclear waste is being shipped on our highways, and interstates, to Yucca Mountain, make for another target for terrorist that they could use ( it doesn't matter how large of an explosion, or the amount of nuclear waste, it would cause terror across this country) and if it occurs in my area I have a pro-active solution [by purchasing and having KIO3], especially since I have small children at home." (Arkansas)

"I think a dirty bomb is very very possible and an attack on a nuclear power plant almost as possible. (Colorado)

"I think that nuclear exchanges elsewhere in the world are more
likely at this time, especially between India and Pakistan.  I find it
prudent to be prepared irregardless of the possibilities.  Working in Law Enforcement, I wish more people were pro-active and not reactive." (Texas)

"A nuclear exchange could also easily happen in this world where too many people don't seem to understand exactly what it means to drop a bomb with nuclear capacity on some city. Most people in the middle east have never even seen pictures of the devastation in Nagasaki or Hiroshima. I really don't think they understand what they have. In reality I think an attack on a nuclear facility is the least likely...don't know why...just my feeling..." (Washington)
 

If you would like to contribute to the information that these folks have written, you may answer the questions asked above and send to: (nuclearexperience@pro-resources.net) NOTE: We NEVER reveal our customer's private information. Period.

The greatest risk for harm from Nuclear Terrorism is any large population downwind of a Nuclear Power plant.

Indian Point in New York has over 20 million people in a 50-mile radius. This is ONLY 1 NUCLEAR PLANT in New York State!

Illinois is the state with the most Nuclear Power facilities with 13 licensed to operate and a new one coming on line. The 8-million+ populations of Chicago and the surrounding smaller cities are at great risk. 

Also at great risk is the Pennsylvania area. (Remember the infamous Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant accident near Harrisburg, PA, which endangered the lives of over 650,000 people in only a 20-mile radius?) 

Texas has 2 of the largest nuclear plants, up-wind from Houston and Dallas.
 

This bottom map is a Nuclear Attack Fallout map. It shows how fallout from a Nuclear Power Plant will travel with the wind patterns.

While a Nuclear Plant is unlikely to explode like a bomb it can be extremely dangerous. A Nuclear Plant houses more than a hundred times the radiation of an atomic bomb blast that can be released as fallout in a Nuclear accident or because of a successful terrorist attack. 

If terrorists successfully attacked just one of the 100+ reactors in the US, the losses could reach well beyond 100,000 deaths from fallout radiation poisoning and thousands of homes would have to be evacuated. 

The things you must have to prepare for this possibility are what this site is all about. You can spend weeks scouring the web looking for articles on nuclear power plants. Predictably, most of the information is now gone from the web as protection measures. That should tell you a bunch.

"Why, Gee, if nuclear power plants were possible targets, the government might pull information off the net." That is exactly what the government, along with the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) have done. Unfortunately, some of the information on "what to do during an emergency" is also missing.

Have a look at the information available on this next page. I have made many very important resources available to you. I have been collecting this information for a number of years.

Another thing I can tell you: If you are even CLOSE to a nuclear power plant, within even 200 miles, much less 10 miles, you better be prepared. With all the urgent warnings by the Government, Ignore this friendly advice at your own risk.

Furthermore you better have a thyroid blocker, also called "anti-radiation pills" available. You must have KIO3™ or KI on hand before a nuclear event occurs to protect you and your family from Radioactive Iodine Poisoning, the most common and abundant type of radiation released from a Nuclear Power Plant.

Read more HERE about nuclear power plant zones, or go to the front page to read about a chilling story where, not so long ago, one fourth of our planet was poisoned! Read about it by clicking HERE

 

n the event you came to this page by mistake or you are lost, here is a partial site map to the documents on this site: Map of this site

. © Copyright 2005 by Professional Resources Network LLC. - All Rights Reserved