Things YOU should fear instead of a nuclear power plant

NUCLEAR BOMB

Contrary to popular belief, the reactors inside a nuclear power facility are not nuclear bombs, and even if a meltdown does occur, the result will not be anything like the blast destruction capability of warheads. Reactors are built fairly deep underground to allow quite a bit of natural radiation shielding against a disaster.

RENEWABLE VS NUCLEAR DISPUTE
- Sad to say, this has been going on for years now. Finding the right solution for the future of mother earth has been exploited by the global giants of profitability. I can only imagine if these two can co-exist and work hand in hand.... It would be so much better if it is renewble&nuclear VS coal&fuel.....ahhhhh...

ISRAEL'S NUCLEAR WEAPON

Still the world keeps quiet about it. So much for your anti-terrorist propaganda America.

GLOBAL WARMING

Its happening and its happening really fast. The primary cause of global warming is Carbon Dioxide emissions. CO2 is being pumped into our atmosphere at an insane pace; 8 billion tons of CO2 entered the air last year. The rest, you do your math...

COAL AND FUEL POWER PLANTS

Currently in the world 40% of all CO2 emissions are caused by power plants. These are burning coal, natural gas and diesel fuel. Some power plants burn garbage. Some burn methane made from garbage.

LIVERPOOL GOING DOWN

Another defeat. By Blackpool??You have to be kidding me.. Whatever it is, in Hodgson I trust...YNWA

TERRY 'THE DOUCHE' JONES

Im not saying he is scary coz I would beat him with a single punch... Im just think that it is scary that the world we live in today are full of idiots like him....Btw, go shave man...that Hulk Hogan moustache of yours is the ONLY scary thing bout you....

LADY GAGA

I would rather die from a nuclear bomb than to see her face to face...This is scary....very...very...scary...



Addicts antidote:2

Chernobyl:The Chronology

the power plant before the disaster

• 1977: The first reactor of the power plant went online.
• 1978: The second reactor went online.
• 1981: The third went online.
• 1983: Unit no. 4 of the Chernobyl power plant comes on stream. 

1986: The year of the accident

• 26 April 1986, 1:23:00: A test of the cooling system begins in unit no. 4 of the Chernobyl power plant
• 26 April 1986, 1:23:40: The emergency shutdown fails.
• 26 April 1986, 1:23:44: The reactor in unit no. 4 runs out of control and explodes.
• 26 April 1986: In the town of Pripyat, 3 km away, there are 45 000 people, including 16 000 children. On 26 April 1986 they are enjoying the first warm Sunday of the spring.
• 26 April to 4 May 1986: Most of the radiation is released in the first ten days. At first, northerly and northwesterly winds predominate. At the end of April the wind switches to the south and southeast. There are frequent but local showers. This results in a very varied regional and local distribution of the radiation.
• 27 April to 5 May 1986: About 1800 helicopter flights deposit around 5000 tonnes of extinguishing materials such as sand and lead onto the burning reactor.
• 27 April 1986: The inhabitants of the Pripyat power plant settlement are evacuated.
• 28 April 1986, 21:00: The Soviet news agency Tass announces that there has been an accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power station and that there have been casualties. An investigative committee is established.
• 28 April 1986, 23:00: A Danish nuclear research laboratory announces that an MCA (maximum credible accident) has occurred in the Chernobyl nuclear reactor.
• 29 April 1986: The MCA at Chernobyl is first reported in German newscasts.
• Up to 5 May 1986: Over the ten days following the accident, 130 000 people are evacuated from a 30-km zone around the reactor.
• 6 May 1986: The release of radiation stops.
• 15 to 16 May 1986: New fires break out and more radiation is released.
• 23 May 1986: A Soviet government committee orders the distribution of iodine preparations. At this point, such prophylaxis is of no medical value. Radioactive iodine is only active for ten days, and will already have accumulated in the thyroid glands of the inhabitants of the contaminated territories.
• 15 November 1986: The concrete "sarcophagus" enclosing the destroyed reactor is completed. 

the concrete sarcaphogus built to contain radiation

From 1986 to 1990

• 22 December 1988: Soviet scientists announce that the sarcophagus now enclosing the reactor was designed for a lifetime of only 20 to 30 years.
• 1989: Start of the second resettlement phase. About 100 000 people have to leave their villages in the severely contaminated territories of Belarus, Ukraine and Russia.
• 20 April 1989: The Soviet government halts construction work on the fifth and sixth units of the Chernobyl nuclear power station.

From 1990 to 2000

• From 1990: Collaboration between Western scientists and experts from Belarus, Ukraine and Russia begins. A delegation of German scientists visits the Chernobyl nuclear power station and the affected regions.
• 12 October 1991: After a fire breaks out in the second Chernobyl reactor, this unit too has to be shut down for good.
• January to March 1993: Establishment of a thyroid centre in Gomel by the Otto Hug Strahleninstitut, Munich. Gomel is a large city with a population of 500 000 in the most severely contaminated region of Belarus.
• 11 November 1996: Cases of thyroid cancer among children in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia are up by roughly 200 per cent compared to the 1980s. The WHO estimates that around 4 million people in these three countries have been affected by the nuclear disaster. Roughly one million are undergoing medical treatment for consequential health impairments.
• November 1997: An international conference considers the condition of the sarcophagus. USD 350 million is pledged for stabilisation measures.
• 20 September 1999: Nobody is allowed to live permanently within 15 km of the power plant site. And yet, in the early 1990s, elderly people began to re-occupy their houses in the said zone. According to the authorities, there have been some 1500, two thirds of them women. About 50 people again took up residence in Chernobyl itself. This resettlement is being tolerated by the authorities. 

the entrance signboard of Pripyat

From 2000 until today

• 13 January 2000: The Ukrainian Government commissions an overall concept: parts of the Chernobyl area are to be re-cultivated.
• 5 July 2000: A second international pledging conference grants Ukraine USD 715 million to build a second "shelter".
• 12 December 2000: The Chernobyl reactor complex is shut down.
• April 2001: At an international conference, "Fifteen Years After the Chernobyl Accident - Lessons Learned" in Kiev, experts, UN organisations and the IAEA reach a minimal consensus in the evaluation of health effects. A direct link between the accident and thyroid cancer among children is recognised internationally. Indications for other consequences are being observed, however with limited resources.
• October 2001: After visiting the affected regions, a delegation of national and international experts sponsored by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) calls for a new approach in aid programmes. They recommend a developmental approach, shifting the emphasis from "help for victims" towards helping people to help themselves.
• March 2002: The German TV documentary "Tschernobyl - Der Millionensarg" triggers a debate on how much fuel still remains in the reactor beneath the sarcophagus. The movie claims that the new «sarcophagus» is unnecessary because there is hardly any remaining radioactive material.
• June 2002: Launch of the website www.chernobyl.info
• June 2003: The International Chernobyl Research and Information Network (ICRIN) was launched by the UN Inter-Agency Task Force on Chernobyl in Geneva on 27 June 2003. The objective of the international network is to make Chernobyl research results systematically accessible both to the affected population and to the authorities and decision-makers, and also to identify gaps in existing research findings.
  The chernobyl.info website serves as an information platform for ICRIN members and the public at large. The activities and addresses of scientific institutions and organisations can be accessed in a database on the chernobyl.info website.
  More information is available here.
• August 2003: The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) said it would give Ukraine USD 85 million this year to cover the gaping hole in reactor 4. The construction of the new shelter will start in 2004.
  More information about the shelter construction available at: http://www.ebrd.com
• 27 April 2004: On 27 April 2004 in New York, over 600 invited guests from numerous countries attended the first public viewing of the film "Chernobyl Heart" since it won this year's Academy Award for the best documentary two months ago.
  At the same occasion, Jan Egeland, the UN's Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, handed over responsibility for the Chernobyl portfolio to Mark Malloch Brown, head of the UN Development Programme (UNDP).
  "To help mitigate the long-term effects of the tragedy", Jan Egeland explained the shift of focal point, "the United Nations is now emphasizing long-term community redevelopment and empowerment in which the affected populations play a key role".
• 12 May 2005: At a pledging meeting on May 12 in London the European Commission announced an additional €49 million to the international Chernobyl Shelter Fund (CSF). The project is estimated to cost $1,091 million and will be completed by 2009. More information: http://www.ebrd.com
• 3 August 2005: An international donor conference pledges USD 7 million (EUR 5.8 million) to Ukraine for the processing of nuclear waste from the closed down Chernobyl power plant. The requisite plant is to be built within the next three years. There are also plans for building a storage site for this nuclear waste.
• 30 August 2005: The latest radiation measurements in the area immediately surrounding the Chernobyl nuclear power plant indicate that the levels of radioactive contamination are falling. Ukraine’s authorities are therefore opening some of the evacuation zone of 2,800 square kilometres, from where all inhabitants were relocated after the 1986 nuclear accident, for partial resettlement. However, those who return will lose the welfare benefits they have been entitled to so far.
• 6 September 2005: The study "Chernobyl’s Legacy: Health, Environmental and Socio-Economic Impacts" came to the conclusion that the health effects have been "far smaller than expected" (Chernobyl Forum Report 2005). Information about the report: http://www.iaea.org. The new report is criticised as "quite inappropriate" by radiation scientists and Chernobyl relief organisations. The report is accused of playing down the true dimension of the catastrophe. Some statements of the study are challenged as "demonstrably false". Experts are also concerned that the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency, may have had "too great an influence" on the study.

This will not happen to us again

Pripyat:today

 Trust me, this kind of event will not happen again. I understand why majority object the proposal of building a nuclear power plant in Malaysia. Therefore, awareness are needed. I am here to educate. I might not have right qualifications to spread knowledge about nuclear to you...but i will fight for what I think is right. I know nuclear is our future. Do not let the past haunt us. I believe our country is capable of handling it.

ONE NUCLEAR FOR ONE MALAYSIA

Tuesday Class re-cap!!!

OOOOpppppsss....i did it again...i know we are late with our posts but we will make it up for you addicts!
So, what have I learn during my Tuesday class? Frankly, the topics covered is kinda hard to digest but here is what I understand from my class that day.The focus of that day was on the moderator of a nuclear reactor.

Let me explain to you what is a moderator..

• part of a nuclear reactor

• reduces the speed of fast neutron; thereby turning them into thermal neutrons capable of sustaining a nuclear chain reaction involving uranium-235

• Commonly used moderators include regular (light) water (roughly 75% of the world's reactors), solid graphite heavy water (5% of reactors). Beryllium has also been used in some experimental types, and hydrocarbons have been suggested as another possibility.

Why do we need to reduce the speed of fast neutron?
Slower moving neutrons are more effective at keeping the chain reaction going by causing more uranium nuclei to break apart.

So what have I learned?
A moderator reduces the speed of fast neutrons. What will happen if over moderated happens??Reactors are usually designed to operate in  an under moderated condition so that the moderator temperature coefficient of reactivity is negative.

• over-moderated reactors will suffer under a simple thermal expansion.
• number of density of atoms is reduced due to moderator expansion.
• neutron mean free path and leakage will increase.
• thermal absorption goes down. 
• the additional heat raises the temperature in the cooling circuit and more steam is produced.
• more steam means less cooling and less neutron absorption, and the problem gets worse.

Thus,there must be something to override moderator expansion effects, right??So what can be done??
Mr.Syukri and Mr.Shamsul will kill me if I am wrong with this.....here we go....

• The process of Doppler broadening of resonance provides the needed feedback.
• The process is "prompt"....so it responds to the fuel temperature. 
• Moderator effects is a delayed effect.....because heat is transferred from fuel to the coolant.

There you go...I will stop here and let you addicts digest the informations above.For more info, you can always email us or leave a comment...Insya-allah, we can learn more.....

Annoucement!!!

Hey guys!

Anonymous comments are now enabled on this blog.


Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have a right to do and what is right to do.
Potter Stewart

Addicts lessons:1

So, what comes in mind when we mention the word "NUCLEAR"......my guess would be the bombs right? Why would'nt you think of that? Its symbolic.. The reason I brought this up is because of something that I've learned in class yesterday...Oh! btw, sorry that I went MIA for the past one week! So much for the commotions! My previous post nampak je macam semangat...last-last habuk pun takda sampai la ni! Ok...back to where we were....In class, we were discussing about reactivity. Basically reactivity is the functional change in neutron population per generation. In layman's term, reactivity is the rate where a chemical substance tends to undergo a chemical reaction. Why is this so important then??

Well, recognize this..... Uranium?? What happens if it goes under reactivity?But first,what is uranium?? In nature, uranium is found as uranium-238(99.284%), uranium-235 (0.711%) and a very small amount of uranium (0.0058%).The rest my fellow addicts, just googled it.........or browse through the ever wonderful wikipedia...

What interests me the most about yesterday's lecture is how reactivity influences the activity of neutrons of a reactor fuel....Oh, the reactor's fuel are uranium.....So, by manipulating the level of reactivity of the fuel, the Fatman and the Little Boy were born!!!! Ahhhhh......here is where I got very interested!
So, introducing the FATMAN!


hello everyone! Im cute but I'll bite!

And the lightweight LITTLE BOY!!

Im small but Im mean!...I mean it...

So, lets learn someting about this two bombs.....
Fat Man and Little Boy were very different bomb designs. Fat Man was an implosion device using plutonium. Little Boy was a simple gun design using enriched uranium (that is, the fraction of highly fissile U-235 compared to less fissile U-238 was increased compared to naturally occuring uranium.) Basically, a slug of uranium was fired into a target at the other end of the bomb to assemble the critical mass.

The designers were confident that the gun design for the uranium bomb would work. Also, there wasn't enough enriched U for a second bomb so a test of that one would be a waste. Tests with Pu determined that it was too reactive for the gun mechanism to work (the device would go off prematurely before developing its full yield, a so-called fizzle). So the implosion mechanism was the way to go. This, however, was not a sure thing. Since Pu was more plentiful, it was clear that the implosion mechanism would have to work. Before dropping an implosion-based weapon, they wanted to make sure it would work. Thus the Trinity test.


i may look like a mushroom but i dont taste like one!



The shapes of the bombs give away the mechanism. Little Boy was long and narrow along shape of the gun. Fat Man was... rotund.
Untuk disimpulkan dan dijadikan cerita, Fatman was created sebab plutonium 239 has such a fast spontaneous fission rate..This is covered yesterday by my super knowledgeble lecturer in the effect of delayed and prompt neutron on power changes..So, Seth Neddermeyer created an idea to compress a small sphere of plutonium quickly to a required density that will make the plutonim go critical and produce a nuclear explosion So, the Fatman is an improved version of the Little boy because the little boy is too slow to work with such isotope..... In the end, hail the technology and discovery......not to what it had done to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.....

Hrrrmmmmm..........now you know the differences between the Fatman and Little boy....How bout the differences between a nuclear bomb and a nuclear reactor???? Stay tuned! Thx for reading addicts!!!!

NUCLEAR NEWSFLASH!!!!

Oh bummer! Just got back from class and was just about to post something just like i promised in my previous post....but.... i just cant open certain files that I need to refer to... Any how, as a compensation; how about me leaving you addicts with the latest news on the nuclear world.....I was "googling" around the web and I came across this:
Hong Kong to replace coal with nuclear? 
Whoo....Hong Kong is climbing up the ladder? Malaysia......found your ladder yet??