Annotated Source List

Adams, R. (2013). The Fukushima disaster proves that nuclear power risks are manageable. Retrieved
September 29, 2015, from Opposing Viewpoints in Context website:
http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsDetailsWindow?
Viewpoints&limiter=&u=hcpub_hebron=GALE%7CEJ3010843205
Summary
This​ article​ describes the events that occurred during the Fukushima meltdown and how they prove
that uranium can be a reliable source of energy: the updated reactors did not release radioactive
material, the fear of nuclear energy is exaggerated, and the information that antinuclear activists
present is false. In 2011, a strong earthquake shook Japan and created a tsunami. All nuclear power
plants had apparently shut down safely before the tsunami occurred. The tsunami hit two plants –
Daiichi (six reactors) and Daini (four newer reactors). In the Daiichi plant, four reactors were older
while the other two were slightly updated and placed on higher ground. The tsunami wiped out the
main power and almost all of the backup supplies. Due to the lack of circulating water, the reactors
overheated. The newer reactors (some of Daiichi and Daini) were able to be put into a “safe, cooled
down condition.” Also, many activists do not know/recognize that some reactors reached a safe state.
The area is now considered safe with only a 0.5% (at most) risk of contracting cancer from radiation.
The meltdown still did not injure/ kill as many people as other sources of energy have. Future sources
of energy will be expensive, taxed, and not necessarily reliable. Producers of other energy sources are
using media to scare people away from nuclear energy to use their form of energy instead.
Application to Research
The information provided in this article is heavily biased and contradicts other sources that I have read.
I need to determine if this source (and others) is trust worthy. This also teaches me more about
Fukushima.

All at sea [Newsgroup post]. (2014, April 26). Retrieved from​ The Economist​ website:
http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21601231-researchers-find-
advantages-floating-nuclear-power-stations-all-sea?zid=298&ah=
0bc99f9da8f185b2964b6cef412227be
Summary
This​ website​ explains the multiple advantages of floating nuclear power plants compared to those on
land. These advantages include a passive cooling system, protection from natural disasters, familiar
building techniques and technology, more space/ease to find an agreeable location, dismantling and
decommission ease, limitless size, and safety and cost. The passive cooling system is an advantage
because the actual ocean/body of water is the cooling system, so a meltdown is virtually impossible.
The loss of necessity for a cooling system will decrease the cost of creating the plant. Since the plant
will be miles offshore, earthquakes will not affect it and most tsunami waves will be too small to harm
it. Scientists can easily build this plant because it uses two familiar ideas: light water reactors and
offshore constructions. Space on land for nuclear power plants is decreasing; plus no one wants a plant
near their home, so an offshore plant would be easier to find space for. Whenever the plant needs to be
repaired or taken down, it is much easier to do so compared to on land because the plant would only
have to be towed in; no space is ruined/occupied so another plant could be placed in the same spot.
Also, because the location is on water, studies have shown that the size of the reactors is limitless, so
one power plant could potentially supply enough electricity for large cities.
Application to Research
If I were to choose a research question that involves the ideal placement of a nuclear power plant, this
article may help me determine if out at sea is a reasonable location. I want to research more about this
because I have questions about the cost/problems of transporting power from the plant back to land.

Beech, H. (2014, August 21). Three and a half years after a catastrophic meltdown, Fukushima is far
from fixed. Retrieved September 29, 2015, from Time website: http://time.com/worlds-most-
dangerous-room/
Summary
This​ article​ describes the corruption of Japan's government and the reactions of residents. 48 of Japan's
reactors have been shutdown; Daiichi, commissioned in 1971, should have been reexamined a while
ago. The designers did not consider ways to protect the reactors from earthquakes or tsunamis. TEPCO
(power company) has planned to build a wall of frozen earth surrounding damaged reactors to prepare
for the next earthquake. The contaminated water is placed into 1,300 tanks that each hold 1,000 tons.
Many employees at the plant have reached the maximum radiation dosage, so less skilled workers are
taking their place. The radiation levels in areas of the site are actually lower than those of surrounding
towns; 125,000 residents are still considered evacuees because their homes are located within an
exclusion zone. No one will take responsibility for the accident; “'The national […] governments say,
“Please, there’s no danger, live as normal.” But people are concerned'” (Beech). The impact of the lack
of nuclear power is estimated to be $35.4 billion a year. Suicide rates are increasing, and parents are
very concerned about the effects of radiation on their children. Contaminated waste is being stored in
plastic bags on school grounds. One mother sent her daughter to school with a dosimeter and “she
discovered tiny hot spots of radiation throughout the community […] These levels were even higher
than in some towns that had limited outdoor playtime because of […] radiation exposure” (Beech).
Application to Research
This source is great because it is narrated by someone who actually visited Fukushima and the power
plant. It also takes into account of the effects on the culture of Japan; the article includes many quotes
from Japanese citizens that are experiencing the aftermath of the meltdown.

Dewan, L., & Massie, M. (n.d.). Let's talk about nuclear. Retrieved October 7, 2015, from
Transatomic website: http://www.transatomicpower.com/the-science/
Summary
This​ webpage​ explains what nuclear power is and the differences between light-water reactors and
molten salt reactors. Almost all of the reactor designs today are light-water. A revived idea from the
1960's, the molten salt reactor, is being brought to the present by the Transatomic company.
Characteristics of light-water reactors include: the use of solid fuel (uranium oxide pellets), metal
framework of pellets that eventually stop the chain reaction, and fuel that can remain in the reactor for
up to four years. Characteristics of molten salt reactors include: the use of liquid fuel (uranium
dissolved in salt), the chain reaction lasts much longer than that of light-water reactors, and fuel can
remain in the reactor for decades (thus allowing more energy extraction). Light-water reactors use
3-4% of energy in the fuel while molten salt uses up to 96%. Also, the spent fuel from light-water
reactors remains radioactive for hundreds of thousands of years while the small amounts of waste
produced by molten salt reactors are radioactive for a few hundreds of years. Without access to
electricity, light-water reactors can only last up to 72 hours before a meltdown may occur. Molten salt
reactors are safe because the fuel is immediately transported to a cooling chamber if the temperature
rises too high (due to loss of electricity). Plus, light-water reactors require high pressure to maintain the
desired temperature; to prevent the spreading of radioactivity, large and expensive domes are built to
prevent the high pressured facility. Molten salt does not require this; it produces energy at atmospheric
pressure.
Application to Research
This website is very useful because it includes many diagrams, and this company is currently
constructing an innovated molten salt reactor. I could use their data for my data collection.

Dewan, L., & Massie, M. (n.d.). Let's use the technology of today to better the future. Retrieved
October 7, 2015, from Transatomic website: http://www.transatomicpower.com/the-
science/
Summary
This​ webpage​ describes the multiple improvements made on the molten salt reactor design compared
to the first idea in the 1960's. The newer design is “compact, more affordable, and more power-dense
[…] while retaining its tremendous safety benefit” (Dewan). The new design can also run off of spent
fuel/ nuclear waste, which may solve the problem of figuring out where to store nuclear waste.
Characteristics of the 1960's design include: a graphite moderator (to slow the chain reaction) with a
core made up of 90% graphite (bulky) so this resulted in a low power density, a type of salt used only
allowed for small amounts of uranium (33-93% enriched fuel was necessary). Characteristics of the
new molten salt design include: a lighter, zirconium hydride moderator (five times the original amount
of salt could fit), a different formula of salt (could absorb 27 times as much uranium), and because of
this the reactor can use low (1.8%) enriched uranium or spent fuel. In comparison, the new design is
cheaper because little to no money is used on enrichment of uranium by cause of the improved salt
formula; it is more compact and power-dense due to the lighter moderator materials.
Application to Research
This website is helpful because it is the first source that has included information on the previous
design from the 1960's. However, I believe there is some bias included in this writing since it is a
product of the company, and only positive factors of the new design are presented.

DNews. (2014, September 26).​ The future of clean nuclear energy is coming​ [Video file]. Retrieved
from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7FvxN_gkt4
Summary
This​ video clip​ gives general information on the issues associated with nuclear waste and how thorium
molten salt reactors can solve these problems. Compared to renewable energy sources, such as wind
and solar, nuclear power is very reliable. While nuclear produces about 19% of total power, wind
produces about 4.13% and solar produces only 0.23%. Also, in California alone, solar energy produced
13 million tons of waste that needed to be stored, just like nuclear energy. If we were to depend on
these energy sources, we would need storage facilities to store power for when it's not windy/ sunny.
Nuclear technology hasn't been updated since the 1970s (light water reactors). This technology can use
5% of potential fuel, and when the process is finished, the waste remains radioactive for tens of
thousands of years. Thorium molten salt reactors can fix this problem. Because they use liquid salt as
the coolant, no pressure is necessary, there's no risk of rapid expansion of radioactive gases, and it is
“meltdown proof.” If thorium was used (rather than uranium or plutonium), almost 100% of energy
would be extracted, and even more energy would be created from breeding. Breeding occurs when
Th-232 is hit and absorbs a neutron, eventually decays becoming U-233, then splits releasing two or
three neutrons, and thus forming a chain reaction. Thorium is more accessible compared to uranium
because it is three to four times more abundant and is released from mining. A problem found with
MSRs is corrosion of metal that the salt is stored in. However, China thinks they can solve this issue
and plan to have an operating MSR within the next decade.
Application to Research
This is very helpful because previous to viewing this source, I never completely understood what a
breeder reactor was and why thorium seemed better than uranium.

National Geographic. (2015, July 13).​ How to power the world with nuclear waste​ [Video file].
Retrieved from
http://video.nationalgeographic.com/video/ng-live/150713-dewan-nuclear-lecture-nglive
Summary
This​ video​ is a lecture/presentation by Leslie Dewan explaining how her company's (Transatomic)
molten salt reactor design works and the importance of gaining support for nuclear energy. Her design
can consume spent fuel created by conventional reactors, turning it into electrical power. Accounting
for increase in power demand, this design could use the 270,000 metric tons of world-wide waste to
produce power that would supply the entire world for 72 years. Today's reactors cannot run off of
waste due to damage done to the metal cladding surrounding fuel pellets. Because the fuel is placed
directly in the core, the fuel pellets can last in a reactor for up to 3-4 years. In the MSR, the fuel is
liquid, – no metal cladding is needed – so fuel can stay in a reactor until all of the energy is extracted
(MSRs can extract 96% of energy while traditional reactors can only use 4%). Compared to the original
design, Transatomic's MSR is more compact, power dense, inexpensive, and produces less waste; the
new design uses a different moderator and salt formula. The change of moderator allows for 5x more
salt, and the salt formula allows for 27x more uranium dissolution. Since Nagasaki and Hiroshima,
support of nuclear energy dropped and has been increasing very slowly. The spread of (social, political,
economical, etc.) support for nuclear power is very important if the world wants to save the
environment that coal is currently destroying.
Application to Research
Compared to previous reading reports, I better understood this information due to the fact that it is an
actual person explaining it verbally rather than reading a paper. This lecture raises the question of​ why
can't the fuel from spent fuel pellets be removed, replaced into a new metal cladding, then be reused?

Nuclear energy. (2013, October 22). Retrieved September 23, 2015, from U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency website: http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-and-
you/affect/nuclear.html
Summary
This​ article​ explains the effects of nuclear power on the environment. Tritium, cesium, krypton,
neptunium and forms of iodine are radioactive byproducts of fission. Nuclear energy production does
not release carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, or nitrogen oxides, so there is no harm done to the air during
this stage. However, uranium mining, enrichment, and transportation involve the use of fossil fuels. For
cooling and producing steam, large quantities of water are used. This water can be acquired from lakes
or rivers, and that may have a negative effect on aquatic life. Heavy metals and salts accumulate in the
water of reactors, the water is also at a high temperature, so when the water is discharge it may be
polluted and harm aquatic life. During mining, the waste and runoff consisting of heavy metals and
little amounts of radioactive uranium can contaminate groundwater and surface water. Nuclear plants
must empty spent fuel (radioactive waste) every 18-24 months. This waste is either stored “in
steel-lined, concrete vaults filled with water or in above-ground steel or steel-reinforced concrete
containers with steel inner canisters” (Nuclear energy). There may be future construction of an
underground facility for waste disposal. The materials used in plants can be radioactive, so they must
be kept in isolation. Currently they are kept in the power plants until a safer place can be found.
Application to Research
This article helps me attain a general idea of nuclear waste and the different ways of handling it. It is
also the first source that has defined the exact elements that are given off during fission.

Nuclear fission. (n.d.). Retrieved September 9, 2015, from Atomic Archive website:
http://www.atomicarchive.com/Fission/Fission1.shtml
Summary
This​ website​ explains the basic information and vocabulary surrounding nuclear fission, the most
common process used in nuclear energy and bombs. Fission occurs when a neutron is captured by a
heavy atom (uranium or plutonium). The nucleus then splits into fission products and emits two to
three neutrons. Because neutrons are released every fission, a chain reaction can occur; however, to
reach critical mass (become a self-sustaining chain reaction), neutrons must be emitted by fission faster
than they are lost. If the reaction is controlled, it is nuclear energy; if the reaction is not controlled, it
becomes a bomb. To control the reaction, rods made out of neutron-absorbent materials are put in place
to absorb extra neutrons. There are extra neutrons because (for a reaction to be controlled) only one of
the two or three neutrons released from fission should be used in another process of fission. If less than
one is used in fission, the reaction will die out; if more than one is used the reaction will be
uncontrolled. Also, neutrons have a lot of kinetic energy, so they are very fast moving. Capturing these
neutrons may be difficult when they are moving at high speeds, and the high speeds lead to high
temperatures, so a moderator such as water or heavy water surrounds the area of fission to slow the
neutrons. Nuclear weapons such as the Little Boy (gun type bomb) and Fat Man (implosion type bomb)
use fission to power the devices.
Application to Research
This website has so much useful, basic information! The diagrams helped me gain a better
understanding of how nuclear energy and bombs work. The not-so-scientific words made it very simple
compared to other sources.

Radioactive waste management. (2015, January 5). Retrieved September 23, 2015, from Gale Science
in Context website: http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/scic/ReferenceDetailsPage/
ReferenceDetailsWindow?failOverType=&contentModules=hcpub_hebron
Summary
This​ article​ explains the types of radioactive waste and history of the government's interaction.
Radioactive waste is categorized into: “high-level, transuranic (chemical elements heavier than
uranium), spent fuel, uranium mill tailings, and low-level” (Radioactive waste management).
Radioactive decay removes most hazards of most waste after a few hundreds of years. Storage facilities
must be protected from natural and human activities/disasters. Low-level wastes (80% of total wastes)
are flushed, dumped into the ocean, or placed in landfills. Since low-level waste amounts are
increasing, storage safety is improving. They are now being stored in above and below ground vaults
and underground concrete bunkers. Uranium mill tailings are mounded into hills in Western U.S.
Byproducts of plutonium weapons are put in storage tanks/barrels by DOE. High level waste mostly
comes from spent fuel in reactors and U.S. programs that deal with nuclear weapons. The waste is
stored and dealt with, but the remaining 2.5% is non-reusable and has no completely safe way of
disposing it. A new form of technology to treat hazardous waste uses electricity to melt contaminated
material in place. The final result is unaffected by temperature, not biotoxic, stable for one million
years, and passes government tests.
Application to Research
This is helpful for describing the different types of wastes and how each requires its own way of being
stored. This article leads me to wonder why there is no completely safe method for disposing high level
waste.

Sabharwall, P., Ebner, M., Sohal, M., Sharpe, P., Anderson, M., Sridharan, K., . . . Brooks, P. (2010).
Molten salts for high temperature reactors: University of Wisconsin molten salt corrosion and
flow loop experiments – issues identified and path forward.​ Idaho National Laboratory Report​,
1, 2, 28, 29. https://inldigitallibrary.inl.gov/sti/4502649.pdf
Summary
This​ scholarly journal​ describes new reactors technology (the NGNP) that could potentially change
nuclear power forever if scientists can determine the best materials to use. Molten salt has been used
for various functions for decades, so it is not a foreign topic. Molten salt used for the creation of energy
through nuclear power has also been demonstrated “as the liquid fuel in the Aircraft Reactor
Experiment (ARE) and the Molten Salt Reactor Experiment (MSRE) programs” (Sabharwall). Molten
salt was studied very closely throughout the 1950’s - 1970’s. The types of salts that have been
considered include: LiF-BeF2 (67-33 mol%), LiF-NaF-KF (46.5-11.5-42 mol%), and KCl-MgCl2
(67-33 mol%). These salts have been examined in the U.S., Japan, and by the University of Wisconsin.
The molten liquids that may be used in the NGNP must have a low melting point and high boiling
point, great radiolytic stability, large specific heat and thermal conductivity, low vapor pressure,
compatibility with high-temperature alloys, and must be chemically stable at 800°C or higher. The
ideal design and components of a molten salt reactor cannot be determined until actual tests and
experiments are conducted. The formula of the salt, the material in which the fission process occurs,
and all other factors that affect corrosion need to be examined before the most effective salt reactor can
be created.
Application to Research
Although many portions of this journal is difficult to comprehend (because of my lack of knowledge in
nuclear vocabulary), this article provides a lot of information that will most likely come in handy if I
decide to research why the molten salt reactor could be so effective.

Serp, J., Luzzi, L., Merle-Lucotte, E., & Uhlir, J. (2014). The molten salt reactor (MSR) in generation
IV: Overview and perspectives.​ Progress in Nuclear Energy​, 2. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.pnucene.2014.02.014
Summary
This​ scholarly journal​ describes the multiple advantages of molten salt reactors (MSR). The MSR
functions with molten salt as either the coolant or fuel. MSRs can either utilize fissile material
dissolved in the salt mixture or “the molten salt serves as the low pressure coolant to a coated particle
fueled core” (Serp). The higher temperatures and lower pressures compared to light water reactors are
impressive. MSRs are also less expensive when compared to light water reactors: the reaction rate is
naturally slowed since the fuel is liquid, continuous fission-product removal is possible, fuel can
remain in the reactor until all atoms have undergone fission, and transport and enrichment of fuels is
not necessary. The process to create energy in the MSRs is: fissile materials/fuel is dissolved in the
molten salt, fission occurs in the salt, then the fuel/salt flows to the intermediary heat exchanger.
Fluoride salts were first commonly used because they only have one single stable isotope (unlike
chloride). Liquid fuel MSRs often correspond with the 233U–232Th fuel cycle; however, thorium does
not have any fissile isotopes, so uranium is needed. The use of thorium as a fertile element “enables
breeding with a thermal spectrum, and is often considered as more convenient than the U–Pu fuel cycle
in order to minimize the generation of highly radiotoxic transuranic elements” (Serp).
Application to Research
Because this is a scholarly journal, I could not understand everything that was described. For future
reading reports (or just general research), I will search for articles that go into depth about the
unfamiliar topics/vocabulary words included in this journal.

Walsh, B. (2013, July 8). Nuclear energy is largely safe. But can it be cheap? [Newsgroup post].
http://science.time.com/2013/07/08/nuclear-energy-is-largely-safe-but-can-it-be-cheap/
Summary
This​ website​ explains the difficulties in expanding nuclear power. Nuclear energy is very safe;
accidents and deaths rarely occur, and it does not contribute to global warming. 13% of the world's
electricity is from nuclear power plants, but the use of nuclear energy is declining. Current reactors are
of old technology, inefficient, and expensive to build. There is a decline in the use of nuclear energy
because other forms of electricity are by far cheaper. For example, natural gas is very cheap and easy to
obtain, and renewable sources such as solar, wind, and hydro are also cheaper than nuclear. Therefore,
nuclear energy seems to be not worth it. Companies are finding it difficult to get money for research
and permission to build new power plants. Construction is very expensive, so many companies quit
mid-construction due to bankruptcy, thus contributing to the decline in nuclear power. The high cost of
plants are heavily affected by the back up safety systems that prevent meltdowns; however, there are
possible alternatives to the current safety systems. An example of this is the molten salt reactor. This
design includes a drain that is blocked by cooled solid salt. If the cooler turns off or there is a loss of
power (which would result in a meltdown), the salt on the drain would melt, allowing the molten salt
containing the nuclear fuel to drain out into a storage area until safely cooled. Another positive factor
of this reactor is that it could run off of nuclear waste, solving the problem of where to store dangerous
waste. Other solutions to reducing costs include the mass production pieces instead of unique parts for
each plant, and new designs that efficiently improve the back up safety systems.
Application to Research
This news article is great for exploring engineering problems/solutions. More research is needed to
fully understand how the back up safety systems function.

What is uranium? How does it work? (2014, March). Retrieved September 13, 2015, from World
Nuclear Association website: http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Nuclear-Fuel-
Cycle/Introduction/What-is-Uranium--How-Does-it-Work-/
Summary
This​ website​ explains the functions of uranium and plutonium. Uranium is a very heavy metal that is
capable of providing great amounts of concentrated energy. It is 18.7 times denser than water and has a
melting point of 1132°C. Uranium can be found in rocks, Earth's core, and seawater. Its slow
radioactive decay supplies the Earth with most of its heat, causing convection and continental drift.
Uranium is naturally found in mostly two isotopes: U-238 (143 neutrons) about 99.3% and U-235 (146
neutrons) about 0.7%. U-235 is fissile. Both have a long half life and decay very slowly. If U-238
collects another neutron, it becomes Pu-239, which is very similar to U-235 because they both supply
energy. However, sometimes a Pu-239 atom can capture a neutron and not split but become Pu-240,
thus taking up room in the reactor. The top nuclear generators in 2013 were the U.S., France, Russia,
and South Korea. Australia has the most uranium (over 1.6 million tonnes), but Kazakhstan is the
world's top producer. This source also describes the cycle in a reactor, how to go from uranium ore to
reactor fuel, what countries use nuclear power and at what rate, and what countries have and mine
uranium.
Application to Research
This is great background knowledge and will assist me in understanding future sources that expect the
audience to already be informed on the topic. The diagrams are very helpful, and the site fully explains
and expands on all of the topics it mentions.