Hitchhiker's Guide to Nuclear (Blog and Podcast)

This site is migrating

noreply@blogger.com (Mark Williams) — Tue, 13 Oct 2015 09:22:00 +0000

Over the years, we have tried producing high quality content in the form of articles and podcasts. I've been really pleased with the legacy of content available on this website, but it wasn't always the easiest to navigate.

With this in mind we decided earlier this year to create a new site, based on the same high quality principles, but tapping into the wider community here in Manchester and across the U.K. Today, I'm pleased to announce that we are ready with an exciting bunch of new writers and talkers to provide their views and experience on all things nuclear.

I'd like to promise regular new content, and I feel like this might be the closest we will ever get. Wish us luck, and of course, check out the new site:

See you at the new site!

Mark Williams

'Mind the (nuclear skills) gap' and 'Managing new nuclear- what's new?'

noreply@blogger.com (Mark Williams) — Thu, 27 Aug 2015 10:09:00 +0000

We're still here! The site is undergoing some changes, including improvements to the podcasting side and some new 'nuclear crowd-sourced' posts. This is all thanks to a renewed interest from many new faces, soon to grace this here website.

First though I'd like to share some new articles!

Managing New Nuclear – what’s new?

http://blog.policy.manchester.ac.uk/posts/2015/08/managing-new-nuclear-whats-new/

Mind the (nuclear skills) gap

http://blog.policy.manchester.ac.uk/posts/2015/08/mind-the-nuclear-skills-gap/

These posts confirm for me some suspicions I've long had about the nuclear industry - an impending skills gap, the requirement for non-UK investment and an industry-academia separation. Although I don't agree with everything these authors have written (perhaps an insight into my inner-scepticism) the overall impression from both is one of panicked enthusiasm.

I'd love to know what you think, post a comment below, or tweet us.

Mark Williams

Nuclear and Society: an outsider’s perspective

noreply@blogger.com (Mark Williams) — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 14:58:00 +0000

A new guest blogger! This time, we have Elizabeth, an outsider with a burning curiosity for nuclear.

By Elizabeth Harper

On the 27^th January, I attended a lecture entitled ‘In The Public Eye: Nuclear Energy and Society’, given by Malcolm Grimston as part of The University of Manchester’s Dalton Seminar Series. This was set to be a particularly compelling lecture because, as we all know, nuclear has something of a PR problem and there are no clearly defined ways of rectifying it. Grimston based his lecture on a book he is currently writing on society’s conceptions of nuclear and the nuclear industry, and the innumerate tensions and uncertainties that these generate.

He began the lecture by saying that the nuclear industry does not deal with the distrust and negativity surrounding it in a very constructive way; often ending up in an indecisive state of ‘rubbing hands together’ and not proactively addressing the claims made against it. He argued that this is because of the way in which ‘people’ respond to the statements released by governments and companies like EDF that aim to inform and calm people. This can be seen in the case of the Fukushima evacuations where the government wanted to quell national and international anxiety by providing ‘safe zones’ which, ironically, served to inflame ‘people’s’ fear of radiation. According to Grimston, ‘people’ react perhaps quite rationally to the information put forward specifically regarding nuclear safety: if they are told that nuclear stations are to be made ‘even more safe’, then how safe were they before, if it is possible for safety to be improved? Through this deconstruction of what it means to be rational or irrational, he argued that the nuclear industry and nuclear experts have to perpetually navigate a minefield of semantic eggshells in fear of inadvertently worsening ‘people’s’ already apprehensive sentiments towards nuclear.

A still from little known TV animation, 'The Simpsons'.

I use the word ‘people’ specifically with quotation marks because it was a word that cropped up time and again in Grimston’s lecture. As he progressed, his diagnosis of who or what comprised ‘people’ became increasingly problematic: ‘people’ become an homogeneous mass of all of the people who exist outside the realm of science and the understanding of nuclear that this entails. More specifically, and more importantly, Grimston casually conflated the media with the general public, suggesting that they think (be it rationally or irrationally) in the same way.

This is problematic because the media and the general public are not the same thing and they cannot be conceived of in the same way by the nuclear industry, including highly respected academics like Grimston. There is a chain of understanding that starts with industry, which passes through the media and then is consumed by the public. As a result, the media can be considered to be more powerful than the public because they are the ones who take the information given by the industry and relay it in any way that suits their own, oftentimes, reactionary, ideological or political agenda. This not only encompasses nuclear power but also information and statistics regarding immigration or benefits claimants.

One obvious example of such an outlet is The Daily Mail, which only a few days ago published an article on how fallout and radiation from Chernobyl will affect our crops this harvest. As a result, the public read and can be swayed by headlines that scaremonger, distort facts and fuel ignorance of nuclear, producing the paranoid (ir)rational responses that Grimston discussed. I would argue, therefore, that members of the public are not to blame for their warped conceptions of radiation (amongst other nuclear problems) because they consume news headlines or Hollywood films that tell them otherwise. If the public were not subjected to such sensationalised stories that feature in the tabloids, some of the most read newspapers in circulation and online, then it is much more likely that there would be a positive embracement of nuclear energy. As a result, the public and the media cannot be described under a vague umbrella label such as ‘people’.

This is important to not only give some credit back to an interested and interesting public who, it is becoming increasingly apparent, are misinformed and distrustful of nuclear because of the media (71% of 23,231 people from 23 countries in 2011 after Fukushima wanted to replace nuclear and coal with renewable energy sources), but also to improve the image of the nuclear industry itself.[1] It is hard to feel sympathetic for an industry where high profile academics do not critically separate the media from the public and show no active attempt to engage with the media to shine a light on the inflammatory journalism produced. Even though I, a humanities graduate, had a few of my own misconceptions addressed by the lecture, none of what Grimston said seemed to be news to the majority of the people there, evident from the knowing tutting and chortling taking place. As a result, the lecture actually ended up casting a scornful gaze on the public who through, perhaps, no fault of their own, do not know any better. This was cemented for me, when Grimston provided each case study with an example of ‘people’s’ (ir)rational reactions to safety measures; a sentence or two in the voice of ‘people’ that supposedly summed up their interpretations of various situations, mostly regarding Fukushima. As he read them out to a chuckling room, they sounded like they could have been taken for tabloid headlines. Instead of being critical of this, ‘people’, that indiscriminate homogeneous mass of everything outside of the industry, were merely mocked.

I argue that the most effective way for people who work in nuclear to ensure the future implementation and success of new nuclear is by directly addressing media headlines, for example this one from The Daily Express or this one, again, from The Daily Mail. Accept that the public have been misinformed by what they have seen and heard in the newspapers, on the television and at the cinema and confront the sensationalised stories directly. Nuclear has often been accused of secrecy and of lacking transparency, and this is becoming a self-fulfilled prophecy. I would argue that the industry must actively and publically engage in a much more open and critical dialogue and debate with the outlets and ideological apparatuses that construct what the public have come to know, understand and, ultimately, trust.

[1] Globescan poll commissioned by the BBC, 2011.

Veritasium - "The Most Radioactive Places on Earth" review.

noreply@blogger.com (Mark Williams) — Fri, 06 Feb 2015 13:45:00 +0000

By Mark Williams

YouTube.com is a great place to learn some science (see end of article for a few of my favourites), here we take a critical look at a recent video on radiation.

Since its upload more than 1 month ago over 1.5 million people have already viewed Veritasium’s new video measuring radioactivity around the world. Armed with a neat Geiger counter, Derek visits many of the most infamously radioactive places on Earth: Trinity Site, Hiroshima, Fukushima and Chernobyl as well as a Uranium mine, Marie Curie’s office and the stratosphere.

The table below is based on the information provided in the video, but here I’ve kept the units at per hour, instead of per year, for each example.

Place	Approximate dose, in µSieverts per Hour
Usual background dose	0.1 to 0.2
Eating a banana	0.1 (per banana)
Peace Dome, Hiroshima, Japan.	0.3
Uranium mine	1.7
Marie Curies lab door knob	1.5
Trinitite at Trinity, US, nuclear bomb test site.	2.1
33,000 feet (The stratosphere)	2.2
Cruising altitude (long haul flight)	3.0
Chernobyl, Ukraine	5.0
Fukushima, Japan	10
Basement of Pripyat Hospital, Ukraine	2000
Permitted US radiation worker limit.	~5.7 (based on 50,000 per annum)
At the space station	~18.25 (based on 80,000 per 6 months)
Smokers lungs	~18.25 (based on 160,000 per annum)

Making ionising radiation relatable is difficult, and this video has highlighted a few important problems that arise with doing just that. For example, the Sievert does not just consider the radioactive material, but also its proximity and likely effect on the human body. This video talks about the equivalent dose, in other words the dose in a fairly homogenous field, like a city. But it also looks at the dose on a specific organ, in this case the lungs, which must consider a ‘weighting factor’ - here radioactive smoke comes into direct contact with the tissue and you have what is known as an ‘effective dose’.

For example, smokers are much more likely to develop lung cancer than non-smokers, but being a smoker may not mean that the chance of developing other cancers is so severely increased. The dose received on the space station, also mentioned in the video, will act on the entire body.

Different radionuclides (unstable elements) give off different ionizing radiation at different rates. There are countless books (and trust me when I say countless!) defining and equating the physics of dosimetry and suitable protective measures. We are lucky to have this knowledge today as it guides our use of radioactive material within research and dictates strict commercial practices. However, its complexity makes it seem like scary jargon.

Using the banana equivalent dose, as in the video and a previous article, is at least a little bit relatable, but it doesn’t portray the complexity of ionising radiation and can, I feel, mislead our understanding. Is that a problem? Does the public need to understand the reasons behind the risk? Do people really have the time? Or are we missing something in our explanations, is there not a better more relatable parallel than bananas…

Some of my favourite YouTubers:

Veritasium - 'The science video blog from atoms to astrophysics!' These are usually about common misconceptions and debunking myths. Some videos are pretty funny, but you'll often learn something new.

VSauce - 'Our World is Amazing.' In my opinion, this is one of the most well informed channels on Youtube. Michael Stevens is able to discuss any issue, be it scientific, artistic, historical etc... and often digresses into fascinating detail.

Periodic Videos / Sixty Symbols - Brady Haron asks professors and experts from (usually) The University of Nottingham questions relating to chemistry or physics, respectively. Any regular viewer of these channels will come to adore the professors and lecturers as they explain their fields with passion.

Minute Physics - As the name suggests, this is physics heavy. But it is generally good at explaining a lot of physical concepts with a whiteboard in a short space of time.

Kurzgesagt - With one upload per month, this channel is small, but dense with interesting content. It's also occasionally hilarious.

Radiation: The danger is in the dose.

noreply@blogger.com (Mark Williams) — Thu, 15 Jan 2015 12:40:00 +0000

By Mark Williams

After a slight reshuffle, Gunth passes the baton on to a new team of hitchhikers. This time, Mark attempts to pin down that invisible ubiquitous threat, radiation. - with footnotes!

Today, whilst checking my own ionising radiation exposure, I was reminded of when I visited a school to talk about radiotoxicity. I borrowed a friend’s outreach exercise, which uses the banana equivalent dose (BED) as a visual way of depicting radiation exposure using one of your five-a-day. After a short description of a bananas radioactive content, students were asked questions such as, what is the BED for taking a plane journey from London to New York? What about doing nuclear research for a year? What about living in the south-west of England for a year[1]?

One banana contains, on average, about 0.5 g of potassium. Right now you contain about 160 g of potassium which, along with sodium, control the electric potential across the synapses of every nerve cell in your body. However, potassium contains ~117 ppm of a radioactive isotope, potassium-40. That gives us 15.5 Bq per banana[2], Becquerels are the SI (or standard) units for activity. One Becquerel is equivalent to one decay per second. (Oh, and before you throw all your bananas out, half a pint of orange juice contains about 0.5 g of potassium too, so carries roughly the same activity.)[3]

The point of this yard-stick is that it highlights the ubiquity of ionising radiation. It is everywhere, and everyone is irradiated all the time. Your exposure is affected if you fly a lot, it will change depending on your local geology, and it will change if you work with radioactive material. So what are we exposed to on average in the UK? And how might this change if say, we lived near a recent nuclear incident zone? The average Brit has an annual exposure to ionising radiation comprised of 84.5% natural background radiation[4], 15% medical[5], 0.2% occupational and 0.2% from nuclear fallout[6], the remainder (<0.1%) is from discharge[7]and consumer products.[8]At this point it may be helpful to relate ionising radiation to UV-rays, that is the radiation we receive from the sun (and certain beds) that both age and burn the skin at high doses, but is also an important factor in helping to prevent skeletal disease and vitamin D deficiency.

Our background dose, radiation from our geology, food, atmosphere and the furthest reaches of space, has been present a lot longer than we have; our bodies have evolved to handle this steady dose. So what about an elevated exposure? What about Fukushima? Currently, your lifetime risk of getting cancer in the UK is approximately 45% for men, and it’s about 5% lower for women.[9]In Japan it’s 41% for men, but for those from the Fukushima province – lifetime risk is increase by 1%[10], totalling ~41.4% for men. This is certainly significant, but it is probably lower than most would have expected. For an excellent analysis of nuclear accidents in context, read our previous article.

This blog has previously stated the importance of demystifying the jargon, highlighting that a misunderstanding from poor communication can lead to feelings of a separation from science. The BED is one way we can try to do this, it is not an official scientific unit of measure, but it can help to explain the ubiquity of radiation - to highlight that its presence in life is normal.

So, what do you think? Feedback I got from the school kids was pretty mixed, some (OK, most) went away talking about telling their parents to stop buying bananas… I’ll explain it better next time, I thought.

[1]For more information on the differences in exposure dependent on where you live in the U.K, see this article: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0265931X14002598

[2] We start with 0.5 g of potassium, but since we only consider the radioactive K-40, we multiply first by 0.000117 and then by 1/40^th of a mole. 1.25 billion years (the half-life of K-40) is 3.9446x10¹⁶ seconds, so we write:
decays per second (Bq) = 6.1x10¹⁷ / 3.9446x10¹⁶= 15.5 Bq.

[3] 1 Becquerel is 1 disintegration/decay per second. The Grey is the absorbed dose, and the Sievert details the equivalent dose, in other words the actual dose a person receives. Having these different definitions is important when assessing our radiation exposure, but the conversion is not simple, we must know the type of radiation as well as the locality (a banana ingested, inhaled(?!) and held, all carry the same Becquerel but very different Sievert values).

[4]Background radiation comes from space, namely stars, like our sun.

[5]X-rays are a form of high energy radiation, and therefore ionising. CT scans also use x-rays, but in (much) larger quantities. These operations are localised and only effect the organ being examined. See herefor a nice infographic

[6]There have been many tests of nuclear weapons across the globe; these release radioactive material into the environment.

[7]The UK reprocesses its nuclear waste. The effluent is treated and then discharged into the Irish Sea.

[8]All of this data has been taken from J S Hughes et al. 2005 Review of the radiation exposure of the UK population

[9]Source: http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-info/cancerstats/incidence/risk/statistics-on-the-risk-of-developing-cancer

[10]WHO: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/78218/1/9789241505130_eng.pdf

Series 2 Episode 1 - Fusion & Wind

noreply@blogger.com (Mark Williams) — Mon, 10 Nov 2014 16:02:00 +0000

The nuclear hitchhiker team is back with a brand new series.

This month we discuss:

Lockheed Martin and the state of fusion. (1m 40s)
The UK's energy mix. (11m 33s)
A stumble through fast reactors. (36m 37s)
A collaboration between Manchester University and Warsaw Technical (39m 52s)

Nuclear Hitchhiker: Series 2 Episode 1 by Nuclear_Hitchhiker on Mixcloud

A Comment on Nuclear Ethics

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 02 Oct 2014 14:07:00 +0000

By Mark Williams

After a long absence due to us all writing up our dreaded theses, we're back! This week, Mark Williams discusses the nature of ethics within nuclear and questions whether we are doing enough within the community to educate and inform the wider public.

After a day of discussion around the ethics of nuclear, one thing seems to be clear: people want to know more about the risks, and they want dialogue with experts in the form of an open forum.Earlier this month in Manchester University’s School of Chemistry, 3 invited speakers, who have a range of expertise in energy mix economics, nuclear legislation and ethical studies, discussed their findings to a group of nuclear researchers. Rather than preaching to the choir about the benefits of nuclear, this was more of a critical assessment of how industrial and political actions can affect public perception. Dialogue ranged from the cyclical privatisation/nationalisation of energy markets to the building of another fence around Sellafield. Analysis ranged from the extensive engineered barriers to minimise radiation exposure to workers, to the perceived tarnishing impact of being born in a prefecture with a nuclear contaminant history.

Are Sellafield's security measures
symbolic of a loss of public transparency?

Take tightening security at Sellafield, for example; “anywhere with an electrified fence sandwiched between two razor sharp fences is going to make passers-by believe there is something very dodgy going on inside,” said one speaker. Interestingly, 25 years ago people were being shown around the site by tour guides; all visitor facilities have now been closed off, however. Is this a required security precaution in the light of increased terror alerts post-9/11, or is it a considerable loss of public transparency?

What of the people of the Fukishima prefecture? Parents in the region worry for their children’s future marital eligibility, but are these anxieties a result of their misunderstanding of the radiation risks? More likely it is the societal objectivity of a ‘contaminated’ community based upon a fairly global misunderstanding of radiation risks.

I’m concerned for a nuclear-curious public who have very limited public access to the nuclear industry. Politicians have been strongly in favour of nuclear since January 2008, with Gordon Brown stating “more than ever before, nuclear power has a key role to play as part of the UK’s energy mix” in the government white paper of that year. Then, just months after Fukishima, the current government said “we need […] a new generation of nuclear stations.” But with lacklustre incentives to entice private sector investment and the retraction of proposed carbon cost hikes to curb gas and coal [2011 white paper], nothing has been built and projections predict new build to be connected to the grid no earlier than 2025.

The talk subsequently focused on what can be done about public engagement. Other countries successfully engage with the public via open forums to discuss nuclear plans with respect to waste disposal (France) but little action takes place in the U.K. Perhaps some responsibility lies with nuclear specialists and researchers to try to engage the public in an unassuming, honest way, as opposed to allegedly acting like a fenced-off community, which people should be wary of.

Podcast Twelve - Godzilla, the EU Earthquake and ITER

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 05 Jun 2014 09:32:00 +0000

Hi guys!

Once again, we've been away for a while but we're back, stomping onto the scene with a Gojira-size of a show!!

This month we discuss recent developments in Russo-Iranian relations, nuclear fusion at ITER, the ramifications for nuclear after the recent European elections and the new Godzilla movie (SPOILERS!!).

We've got two new speakers on the show, Mark Williams and Liz Hope-Parker. Along the way we discover rollercoasters like breaking down, Godzilla may be a radioactive diabetic and Kate is campaigning for Downing Street.

(Apologies, I've noticed, only after uploading, that our theme tune has played over the music in one section)

Enjoy!!!

Download Podcast

The song played on this months show is 'Charming' by Derek Clegg.

(Charming (Derek Clegg) / CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)

A Nuclear Timeline - Another NIA infographic

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 09 Apr 2014 15:22:00 +0000

It seems those chaps over at the Nuclear Industry Association (NIA) have been at it again with their infographic wizardry, producing this colourful timeline of nuclear power. From Rontgen's accidental discovery of X-rays to the formation of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), it's all here for your viewing pleasure.

I must admit this timeline offers a striking reminder of how fast public stances have changed on nuclear, as well as the technology itself.

You can get more information on the NIA's activities, in addition to all their handy infographics, at www.niauk.org .

UK Public Opinion on Nuclear - NIA Infogrpahic

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 10 Feb 2014 10:32:00 +0000

We tend to like our infographics here at Nuclear Hitchhiker and it appears another one has recently cropped up on the intersphere. The Nuclear Industry Association (NIA) has published a piece which canvasses UK public opinion on nuclear energy, highlighting some of the concerns and conceptions around the energy source. A trade organisation for the civil nuclear industry, the NIA has conducted this poll via YouGov in November 2013.

I'll leave the infographic below (as well as a link if it isn't clear) for you all to peruse over but what do you think? Do you agree with the statistics? Are there other positives/negatives regarding nuclear not indicated on the chart? Let us know what you think!

Here's a link also to the NIA website where you can find a wealth of information on a number of nuclear issues.

NIA UK website

NIA Facts and Resources Page

High Res Image

Podcast Eleven - Top Five Nuclear Stories of 2013

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 30 Jan 2014 09:53:00 +0000

Hi guys,

It seems like a lifetime ago since we've posted a new episode on the site and, finally, a new show is here! This month we discuss what we believe to be the top five news stories from 2013; including Iran, hijinks at Hinkley Point, repository retractions, nuclear waste resigned to Davy Jones' locker and a review of the film "Pandora's Promise".

Enjoy the show guys!!

Gunth

Download Podcast

The song played on the show is called 'Beautiful Surprise' by The Twin Atlas.

(Beautiful Surpise (The Twin Atlas) / CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)

"Pandora's Promise" Review

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 04 Dec 2013 11:48:00 +0000

By Lizzie Murray

Well there we were crowded into the theatre, 150 nuclear energy specialists. The phrase ‘preaching to the converted’ couldn’t be more apt as - despite its suggestive title - 'Pandora’s Promise' is actually a film about nuclear power.

The film recounts the history of atomic energy, from the production of the atom bomb through to its present role as a vital contender for meeting the world’s escalating energy demands. Along the way it connects all of the major milestones, from decommissioning to the new design Gen-IV reactors via all the major nuclear accidents.

The story is told through interviews with men and women who have had incredibly varied experiences of nuclear energy. Two that stand out are Mark Lynas and Gwyneth Cravens; two ex-anti-nuclear activists who have done a complete U-turn from picketing nuclear power plants dressed as the grim reaper to singing the praises of nuclear energy.

The director, Robert Stone, explained afterwards that their stories reflected his own change of opinion; in his early career he produced an Oscar-nominated anti-nuclear documentary which is surprising considering how overtly pro-nuclear this film is.

At first I had my doubts; there were far too many jaunty-angle camera zooms and edgy artsy blurs for my liking. Also, there were an awful lot of shots of the interviewee staring meaningfully out to sea, as though they were waiting for a huge pro-nuclear sea monster to pop up. However, the interviews are broken up by interesting historical footage of various nuclear protests and post-accident analysis; even Margaret Thatcher popped up for good measure. However, all of this set to haunting music did sometimes make me feel I was watching an episode of Panorama.

Despite being aware of most of the long-standing misapprehensions around nuclear power that the film explores, I found the film contained plenty of interesting and emotive material. For example, it explains the decision to select PWR reactors for commercial production rather than the much more efficient and environmentally friendly breeder reactors. It is also touching to see how the residents of Chernobyl, with true Baltic spirit, refused to obey the evacuation procedure and lived on in their much-loved town. A bit of radiation? Pah!

Dosimeter on tour.... I'd be more concerned about how
foggy LA looks.

One of the highlights for me was the world tour of the radiation dosimeter. The reading on a dosimeter is shown on screen in various locations around the world, from 0.13 µSv/hour in Oxford to 15 µSv/hour on a Brazilian beach. You’ll just have to watch the film to find out the results for Chernobyl and Fukushima…you may be surprised! It must be said the director did receive criticism for this section afterwards, however, due to the excessive and unwarranted use of air travel.

To sum up, some aspects of the film were extremely enlightening and, at times, very emotive. I would vaguely recommend this if you’re an advocate of nuclear power and strongly if you’re not.

The Nuclear Institute Congress (21-22 October 2013)

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 11 Nov 2013 11:16:00 +0000

By Matt Gunther

They say "timing is everything" and the Nuclear Institute's inaugural national Congress event could not have come at a more opportune moment. Taking place within Manchester Central, delegates - fueled by excess coffee and danish pastries - appeared buoyant after the weekend announcement that Chinese investment would aid construction at Hinkley Point.

With in excess of 200 in attendance, Congress 2013 boasted presentations on all aspects of the fuel cycle. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) and European Nuclear Society (ENS) were among those promoting a vision of an industry escaping from its tangled past and driving forward with clarity.

Alongside the main speakers, a labyrinth of exhibits were situated in the Central's main hall. AMEC, Rolls-Royce, GE Hitachi and the University of Manchester's Dalton Nuclear Institute all vied for the attention of delegates.

On the University's Dalton Nuclear Institute stand, we promoted the core values of the Institute and some of the activities we have been engaged in over the past twelve months. With two eye-opening demonstrations, we seemed to attract a broad range of people over the course of the two day conference.

Me attempting to point at a television monitor,

while a delegate is feeling the pressure (no pun intended)

during the reactor simulation.

The electrical engineering & robotics team brought along their underwater characterisation robot, which is guided along a trajectory by detecting colour contrast (in this case a red ball against a dark coloured flooring). Aimed to be used in radioactive hotspots which cannot be navigated by conventional cameras, the robot reiterates the need for advanced detection technology in decommissioning applications.

Developed by the Dalton Nuclear Institute, our second exhibit was the "nuclear reactor simulator game". Targeted primarily at children in secondary education the game enables pupils to operate a simulated nuclear reactor. In order to obtain the maximum number of points, the participant has to match the reactor's power output to national demand. Enhanced with online leaderboards and further information on reactor technology, the simulation went down a storm. The Institute brought the reactor simulation to the Congress in order to generate feedback from industry and their insight has been invaluable to aid with further game development. The stand also featured a plasma screen displaying a 360 degree virtual fly-through of the University’s Dalton Cumbrian Facility.

Once the exhibits were packed away and all of the danish pastries had been consumed, we reflected back on the impact of the event. Conferences such as these, in my opinion, simply reinforce the notion that more investment is required in nuclear power going forward; especially in the wake of recent developments. With The University of Manchester positioning itself as a global leader in nuclear research, however, nuclear energy will remain at the heart of this city and John Dalton can rest assured his legacy remains central to the University's ethos going forward.

Destruction, Disarmament & Data

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 09 Sep 2013 09:57:00 +0000

Sourced from "GradSchoolHub"

During public engagement excursions, many nuclear researchers tend to get asked a myriad of questions on the nuclear bomb. It's rather a grim issue - which is enveloped in a torrent of moral arguments - but is one we shouldn't shy away from tackling. However, if you even attempt to delve into the facts & figures surrounding weapons stockpiles and their potential impact it can leave you feeling like you've entered the Aztec Zone of the Crystal Maze.

Well, if you've ever wanted to take that plunge the folks over at "GradSchoolHub" have formulated this quirky infographic on the atomic age to get you started. The graphic contains all sorts of statistics from the breadth of international stockpiles to the escalating scale of weapons design.

Even though some of the sources are attributed to that dreaded site of questionable authenticity, Wikipedia, you can most certainly glean some basic info from this very neat diagram! For instance, the figures associated with Megaton yield and casualties are broadly correct. However, the analogies used, along with the slightly skewed physical processes, do not aid the image's veracity. This infographic definitely raises the issue of how we can use a set of discrete data to project any number of views on a certain issue. Debate in the comments below!!

If you're also curious as to how many "bombs have been dropped" as it were, I've linked a time-lapse video of every nuclear explosion since 1945... It's actually pretty eye-opening!

Let me know your thoughts on weapons, disarmament policy and lies, damn lies & statistics?!

Full-size image

Source: The Grim Facts About Global Nuclear Stockpiles

Midsummer Meltdown

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 14 Aug 2013 10:05:00 +0000

Hi everyone!!

Once again it appears we have left it a while since our last post. Unfortunately, due to the nature of postgrad research (amongst other things) we've been seriously snowed under the past few months - figuratively speaking of course!

If you follow us on twitter, we have been tweeting a ridonkulous array of news stories ranging from the extended fallout of French nuclear weapons testing in the 1960s to the Liberal Democrats conducting a Conservative-inspired U-turn in terms of nuclear policy. Trident has also come under fire once again, with the Lib Dems claiming it's a waste of money and many others stating it's a critical part of our country's defense strategy. Oh, and the Queen had prepared a speech in the event of impending nuclear annihilation?!!

So, it appears we've once again got a shedload to discuss and debate on the upcoming episode and I hope you'll join us for the ride! We are sorry once again for the delay in getting this content to you but, if you haven't already, follow us on twitter where we'll keep you up to date with the latest nuclear news!!

See you in a few!

Gunth

Podcast Ten - We Need to Talk About Korea?!

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 07 May 2013 13:22:00 +0000

Hullo everyone!

Hope you have been soaking up the rarity that is the British summer season!! How about listening to this months show whilst having an impromptu BBQ or when sipping on a lukewarm Pimms in a ridonkulously overcrowded beer garden? We've certainly got everything covered! We'll be talking about EDF vs the Government, 1970s Anglo-German waste policy (or lack thereof), a mysterious facility in Germany and North Korea! Hope you enjoy the show!

Gunth

(NB. Correction - I mention America financing Al-Qaeda during the 1980s Afghan Conflict. It was, in fact, the Mujahideen which received weapons and training. Splinter groups of the Mujahideen later formed Al-Qaeda).

Download Podcast

Podcast Preview: We Need To Talk About North Korea

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 18 Apr 2013 10:36:00 +0000

Hey guys!!

Our new episode will be going up at the beginning of May, so I just thought I'd give you a taster of what's going to be on the show!

At the risk of my repeating myself, nuclear appears to have fallen down a rocky road in recent weeks (NB. It seems quite ironic I've used rocky road as a negative as I loved those flapjacks at Uni!). Anyway, we'll be talking about the investment tightrope the Government has been walking these past few weeks in not yet reaching an electricity strike price deal with EDF Energy. This may well have huge implications!! In addition to the obvious impact on our CO2 emissions, foreign firms may not be confident in investing in future UK infrastructure projects due to the Government's ambivalence towards their own energy policy.

We'll also be discussing the mysterious closure of a manufacturing plant in Germany, which was backed by a former Iranian minister and may have possible ties to the nuclear black market. My own personal passion - nuclear waste - will also feature, as a number of containers from the 1950's have been found at the bottom of the English Channel. Furthermore, we'll discuss the recent developments at the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear plant.

As we can't seem to avoid western media outlets' information assault on a small country in East Asia, I believe we need to talk about North Korea. With John Sweeney (BBC Panorama) going on an ethically-upstanding visit to the People's Republic - one in which the Beeb in no way damaged academic integrity with unstable foreign nations - it's about time we have a discussion on how we've arrived at this juncture with Kim Jong-un! So, there's plenty to look forward to on the show and if you have any questions for the recording don't hesitate to tweet us!!!

By the way, the Panorama investigation on North Korea is embedded below! Let us know what you think. Did it tell you anything you didn't know already? Was it worth placing the London School of Economics in disrepute? Oh, and you may have heard of the journalist John Sweeney before.... There's a reason for that. He channeled the power of Zeus during a debate with Tommy Davis (a Scientologist) on a previous Panorama investigation.

Catch you hitchhiking down the road,
Gunth

Maximum Warp: Nuclear Power and Space Exploration

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 27 Mar 2013 16:37:00 +0000

By Guest Blogger, Nathan Edge

This month Nathan Edge discusses the nature and operation of nuclear devices being used in unmanned space operations. As an aside, I can't believe I wasn't the first person to type into Google, "nuclear engine...USS Enterprise"?! Nathan provides links to sites for more information throughout the piece. Anyway, on with the article!

-------------------------------------------------

Nuclear power isn’t just applicable to terrestrial electricity generation; it has also been used in space travel since 1961 – whereby it is still a tremendous source of potential for propulsion mechanisms. Many well known space vehicles such as the deep space probes Voyagers 1 & 2 – which are over 18,000,000,000 and 15,000,000,000 km from Earth respectively – rely on nuclear power. It is even being used on NASA’s Curiosity Rover, which made a spectacular touchdown on Mars last year.

Voyager 2. One of the most distant man-made objects in existence.

The popularised spacecraft don’t actually use conventional nuclear reactors. Radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs) - which harness Plutonium-238 as fuel - are the primary propulsion source. These so-called “nuclear batteries” exploit the principle that plutonium undergoes alpha-decay to produce heat. This is subsequently converted in to electricity using thermoelectric generators. Since they have no moving parts, RTGs are very reliable; the RTG on Voyager 2 has worked continuously since 1977, and is expected to continue working until 2025.

A general RTG configuration

This is not to say, however, traditional nuclear reactors have not also been used in space operations in the past … albeit with some serious modifications. For example, the Soviet RORSAT satellites used 90% enriched uranium fuel as a power source. The safety implications of using such a system in earth orbit are obvious, and any fears of utilising such a technology are not exactly unfounded. The nuclear-powered Cosmos 954 satellite, for instance, fell into Canada in 1978 after a systems failure, distributing

radioactive debris over 124,000 square kilometres.

Due to events like these, it is likely that any future reactors will be confined to deep space like RTGs. However, this does not mean that they will only be used for unmanned exploration probes. NASA has its eyes on a manned Mars mission, but traditional chemical rockets would take six to seven months to reach Mars. A 1MW fission reactor powering 100-400 kW electric ion thrusters would take 3 months, thus limiting the health degradation astronauts face on long space journeys.

Modern RTGs are designed to survive the possible accidents which could befall it during operation, including propellant fires during launch and land/water impacts. Reassuringly, RTGs cannot explode like nuclear weapons: the plutonium associated with weapons is Pu-239, not Pu-238. A similar safety feature which has been specified for nuclear reactor propulsion tech is that they are not activated until they are confirmed to have reached space successfully. Ultimately, this is to ensure fission fragments and other components of nuclear waste are not present if failure occurs during launch.

Space: The future of waste disposal?

Lastly, when using an RTG some additional thought must be applied to the disposal of the spacecraft when they come to the end of their working life. This is not just a nuclear issue: it’s important not to disturb any areas which potentially harbour extraterrestrial life. For example the RTG-powered Galileo spacecraft was sent into Jupiter’s atmosphere and destroyed to stop it crashing into a potential ocean under Europa’s crust. The disposal of RTGs and future nuclear reactors actually touch on one of the more outlandish proposals for dealing with nuclear waste: firing it out of the solar system.

In short, the space and nuclear industry have a surprising legacy: nuclear power has already been used successfully for near-earth and deep space missions in the past, and its use has continued into the cutting edge-missions of today. Only time will tell whether or not it is the key to future exploration, both manned and unmanned, into our universe.

DOCUMENT LINKS (IN ORDER OF APPEARANCE)

NASA, 2013 Where are the Voyagers? [online]. Available at: http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/where/index.html [Accessed 02/02/2013]

Atmos, J. 2012. Curiosity rover made near-perfect landing [online]. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19219782 [Accessed 02/02/2013]

Snyder, G.J. Small Thermoelectric Generators [pdf]. Available at: http://www.electrochem.org/dl/interface/fal/fal08/fal08_p54-56.pdf [Accessed 02/02/2013]

NASA, 2013. Voyager – Spacecraft Lifetime [online].Available at: http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/spacecraft/spacecraftlife.html [Accessed 03/02/2013]

Encyclopaedia of Science, 2013. RORSAT (Radar Ocean Reconnaissance Satellite [online]. Available at: http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/R/RORSAT.html [Accessed 03/02/2013]

HackCanada, 2013. Cosmos 954 Satellite Crash [online]. Available at: http://www.hackcanada.com/canadian/other/cosmos954.html [Accessed 10/02/2013]

King, L, 2012. Manned Mars mission still on track [online]. Available at: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/story/2012/09/12/manned-mars-mission-still-on-track/57767950/1 [Accessed 11/02/2013]

Rousseau, I.M. 2007. Analysis of a High Temperature Supercritical Brayton Cycle for Space Exploration [pdf]. Available at: http://web.mit.edu/rsi/www/pdfs/papers/2005/2005-ianr.pdf [Accessed 01/10/2012]

Discovery, 2013. Known effects of long-term space flights on the human body [online]. Available at: http://www.racetomars.ca/mars/article_effects.jsp [Accessed 10/02/2013].

US Department of Energy, 1982. Nuclear Safety Criteria and Specifications for Space Nuclear Reactors [pdf]. Available at: http://www.fas.org/nuke/space/osnp-1.pdf [Accessed 20/02/2013].

NASA, 2013. Solar system exploration -Galileo Legacy Site [online]. Available at: http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/galileo/ [Accessed 21/02/2013].

The Space Review, 2013. Nuclear waste in space? [online]. Available at: http://www.thespacereview.com/article/437/1 [Accessed 22/02/2013]

IMAGES

Space Today Online, 2011. Voyagers are leaving the Solar System [online]. Available at: http://www.spacetoday.org/SolSys/Voyagers20years.html [Accessed 02/02/2013].

Wikipedia, Radioisotope thermoelectric generator [online]. Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator [Accessed 02/02/2013]

Gunter’s Space Page, 2013. US-A [online]. Available at: http://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sdat/us-a.htm [Accessed 05/02/2013]

The Space Review, 2013. Nuclear waste in space? [online]. Available at: http://www.thespacereview.com/article/437/1 [Accessed 22/02/2013]

Podcast Nine - The Nuclear Nostradamus

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 16:13:00 +0000

It's finally here!! Apologies once again for the delay in getting this out to you all. With that said, on this months show we discover Steve has an affection for Destiny's Child, Gunth likes chatting about Caroline Lucas (again) and wind turbines are prone to falling over.......in the wind. The news stories are the Centrica pullout, the Cumbria nuclear waste repository pullout and Sellafield running up a rather large bill.

Download Podcast

Podcast Preview - A Nuclear Nostradamus?

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:27:00 +0000

Hi everyone!!

Gunth here. Sorry for not updating the site since our Christmas episode but we've unfortunately been very busy as of late with research and what not. However, we will be recording our next episode within the following fortnight and it's going to be a show of Nostradamian proportions.

I think it's safe to say that nuclear has been getting a bit of a battering in the press over the past few weeks. With news stories such as the Centrica pull-out, the Cumbrian County Council pull-out and a Sellafield nuclear decommissioning bill as long as Bilbo Baggins' Dwarven contract, it promises to be a hotly-debated episode. With that, we thought it prudent not to include a discussion this month - as we'll probably be ranting incessantly on these issues at length.

Once again - to all our listeners - apologies for the delay in getting content out to you but we'll be back on the podcast-o-sphere in the next few weeks. Remember if you have any questions for the show, do not hesitate to tweet us @Nuke_Hitchhiker. In the mean time, here's Destiny's Child flying the nuclear flag with their aptly-titled new single "Nuclear";

See you at the end of Feb folks!!!

Episode Eight - A Nuclear Christmas

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sun, 23 Dec 2012 19:55:00 +0000

On this months show we discuss what we love and loathe about this festive time of year. We quickly discover that Lizzie lives in fear of brussel sprouts, presents are always better when bundled into a pillow case and Mike detests mulled wine?!!!

Our guest speakers on this months show are Lizzie, Mike Daly, Nick and Stephen. Merry Christmas everyone!!!

Download Podcast

Plants and Algae: Nature's Radioactive Vacuum Cleaners

noreply@blogger.com (Nuclear Hitchhiker) — Mon, 26 Nov 2012 10:39:00 +0000

By Guest Blogger, Matt Gunther

This month, Gunther discusses what is arguably the most glamourous organism in the scientific world: algae. The bane of pond-owners with clogged-up fiter pumps, algae has some very exotic properties, which make it the perfect candidate for sucking up radioactive contamination in the world's rivers and oceans. They also seem to get a kick out of smothering people in foam?!

------------------------------------

Clearly this foam party got out of hand?!

Say the word 'algae' to anyone and I'd imagine the descriptions of 'scum', 'crap' and 'yuccy slime' will come to mind. Although they're an annoyance to anyone with a pond full of over-priced fish, these organisms' properties can result in some very bizarre natural phenomena occurring; including what has befallen the young chap in the image above.

The tidal wave of foam chasing the boy down is believed to be as a result of algae, which has not received enough energy from the Sun. These algal colonies of the so-called Phaeocystis Globosa family eventually die and - like all organic matter - decay. Swept up by the wind, the organic detritus is consequently churned up at shorelines, thereby producing the thick foam you see before you - almost like detergent in a washing machine. Although, the image above proves to be rather amusing, I suppose you're wondering why in God's name I'm bringing it up. Well, this algae thrives, as it were, on electromagnetic radiation from the Sun in the form of light.

Algae fluorescing on a dive in the Red Sea.

In a similar fashion to light, algae also has the ability to absorb and consume other sources of radiation, as well as radioactive compounds. For instance, many bio-organisms have the ability to absorb UV and re-emit radiation at a different wavelength. This process is commonly known as fluorescence. Whilst providing us with some very pretty pictures, this mechanism can provide us with detailed information on the structure and chemical composition of marine biotic life, using techniques such as fluorescence spectroscopy.

Particular algal species, as I've mentioned, also have the potential to absorb radioactive isotopes. This may prove to be of vital importance in the nuclear industry, whereby possible contamination in water supplies are hard problems to tackle without damaging a local ecosystem.

1950s nuclear paranoia led to people checking for strontium
in their milk.......which was in a thick-walled glass bottle....
Hhhmmm (baby produces a sceptical face)

The Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan is currently attempting to tackle this very problem and they're dealing with a very nasty radioisotope called Strontium-90. Known as the "bone seeker", strontium has a lot of very similar biochemical characteristics to the "friendly-neighbourhood" element of the periodic table: calcium. Like calcium, if strontium-90 is ingested through the consumption of liquid, the vast majority of the radioactive atoms are absorbed by your teeth and bone marrow. With strontium (a strong beta emitter) also having a long half-life relative to the average human lifespan, an ingestion of it may lead to the contraction of cancer in later life and other serious health problems.

C. Moniliferum. The banana-shaped algae with a
penchant for chomping on strontium.

Unfortunately for the chaps in Japan, there is approximately ten billion times as much calcium as there is strontium emitted during a typical nuclear plant leak into local rivers/oceans. Due to the similar characteristics of both elements, it's very hard to remove one without removing the other. Cue C. moniliferum.

Not content with the ability to fluoresce, this superhero species loves to collect barium. As strontium is halfway between calcium and barium in terms of size, the algae collects strontium and crystallises it out, forming an easy-to-remove solid substance containing barium enriched with strontium [1]. Furthermore, calcium is different enough, in terms of it's chemical size, to not be absorbed by the moniliferum species [1]. It is incredible a natural organism can be so efficient in removing some nasty contaminants from the sea and its all the more staggering due to the elegant simplicity of the process..... Not forgetting its cheap too!

There are many more examples of using bio-organisms to remove contamination from the soil, as well as from the air and oceans. It is a branch of science which is fancifully known as phytoremediation. A low-cost and effective way of repairing polluted areas, phytoremediation has been used to accumulate and degrade contamination surrounding Chernobyl, as well as being used in the coal mining industry to treat discharges.

What is truly wonderful about this method of removing contaminants, is that we are using the power of nature in order to solve a man-made problem. It is truly one of the reasons why I find science such a fascinating subject. No matter how technology advances and continues to dazzle us in its complexity, you just can not beat the beauty, dexterity and simplicity of nature.

REFERENCES

[1] R. Lovett, "Algae Holds Promise For Nuclear Clean-Up" (Nature, 2011), http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110330/full/news.2011.195.html

Images taken from; http://cfb.unh.edu/phycokey/Choices/Prymnesiophyceae/PHAEOCYSTIS/Phaeocystis_Image_page.html, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2165450/The-red-green-blue-yellow-sea-Neon-lights-turn-the-Red-Sea-sponge-disco.html, http://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2010/10/26/where-has-all-the-strontium-gone/, http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110330/full/news.2011.195.html

Episode Seven - The Nuclear Waste Problem

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 11:36:00 +0000

On this months show we discuss a little problem called nuclear waste and what the UK are doing to solve it in Cumbria. On our magical mystery tour (terrible film by the way) we discover Toby wasn't the only one who liked rollercoasters, everyone is ugly when exposed to the UV spectrum and faking one's death is rather hard to achieve in the Navy.

Our guest speakers this month are Lizzie Murray, Steve Cockerell and Jon Mann!

The track played on this episode was "Harkin On" by Squarehead from the album Live on Liz Berg's Show on WFMU 11/22/12 (Squarehead) / CC BY-NC-ND 3.0

Click on the "Read More" tab below to access the podcast.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Download Podcast

News

Horizons venture crumbling (since our report was recorded Hitachi are now intending to buy into the venture)
Predicted electricity shortages by 2015
Cancer Research UK launch the R UV Ugly? campaign
An American Nuclear Submarine Commander has reportedly faked his own death to fool his mistress

Manchester Science Spectacular

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 30 Oct 2012 09:25:00 +0000

A short post about the Manchester Science Spectacular on Saturday. The University of Manchester Dalton Nuclear Institute had a stand along with lots of other groups, armed with boxes of free stuff. If you missed it there'll be lots more events like this where you can chat to nuclear scientists and engineers and have the opportunity to play with Dalton's reactor simulator game.

Episode Six - There's Something About Iran

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 27 Sep 2012 20:43:00 +0000

On this months show we discuss a little-known country called Iran and the nature of their nuclear programme. On our journey of whimsy we discover that mice may well communicate to humans through mobile phones, the Power Rangers may be called upon to face a new threat in Japan, there isn't a weapons-grade nuclear device on the Curiosity rover and the purpose of dodgeball is to avoid dislocating your thumb!

Our guest speakers this month are Craig Morrison and Maureen Haverty!

The track played on this episode was "Computer" by State Shirt from the album This is Old.

Computer (State Shirt) / CC BY-NC-SA 3.0

Click on the "Read More" tab below to access the podcast.

----------------------------------------------------

Download Podcast

Intro
News

Mutated butterflies in Japan
Mobile phone radiation - Are there any health risks?
How the Curiosity rover is powered by Plutonium-238
Israel's ultimatum to Iran

Discussion - Iran

The "Tawkon" app - discussed on the show - can be found at the Google Play store.