Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

Nuclear Power

Nuclear Power

In the middle of the Fukushima disaster, I thought it was important to educate a bit fellow students about the ins and outs of nuclear power, to oppose the mainstream media alternating terror and ridiculous assertions.

Matti Schneider

April 01, 2011
Tweet

More Decks by Matti Schneider

Other Decks in Technology

Transcript

  1. Nuclear power
    Fabien Brossier
    Matti Schneider

    View Slide

  2. Nuclear Power
    I. Technology
    II. Opportunities
    III. Risks

    View Slide

  3. I. Nuclear technology

    View Slide

  4. History: research

    View Slide

  5. History: research
    • 1896: Becquerel discovers
    radioactivity

    View Slide

  6. History: research
    • 1896: Becquerel discovers
    radioactivity
    • 1903: Pierre & Marie
    Curie get a Nobel prize

    View Slide

  7. History: research
    • 1896: Becquerel discovers
    radioactivity
    • 1903: Pierre & Marie
    Curie get a Nobel prize
    • 1942: Manhattan project

    View Slide

  8. U235
    Fission reaction

    View Slide

  9. U235
    n
    Fission reaction

    View Slide

  10. 2 to 3
    neutrons
    fission
    product
    fission
    product
    Fission reaction

    View Slide

  11. 2 to 3
    neutrons
    fission
    product
    fission
    product
    E = mc2
    Fission reaction

    View Slide

  12. 2 to 3
    neutrons
    fission
    product
    fission
    product
    energy
    E = mc2
    Fission reaction

    View Slide

  13. History: usage

    View Slide

  14. History: usage
    • 1945: Little Boy & Fat Man

    View Slide

  15. History: usage
    • 1945: Little Boy & Fat Man
    • 1951: EBR-1 produces 100 kW

    View Slide

  16. History: usage
    • 1945: Little Boy & Fat Man
    • 1951: EBR-1 produces 100 kW
    • 1954: Obninsk produces 5 MW

    View Slide

  17. U235
    Chain reaction

    View Slide

  18. Chain reaction

    View Slide

  19. Chain reaction

    View Slide

  20. Chain reaction

    View Slide

  21. Usage of the reaction

    View Slide

  22. Usage of the reaction
    •Military

    View Slide

  23. Usage of the reaction
    •Military
    •chain reaction

    View Slide

  24. Usage of the reaction
    •Military
    •chain reaction
    •as much energy as
    possible on the
    shortest time

    View Slide

  25. Usage of the reaction
    •Military
    •chain reaction
    •as much energy as
    possible on the
    shortest time
    •boom.

    View Slide

  26. Usage of the reaction
    •Military
    •chain reaction
    •as much energy as
    possible on the
    shortest time
    •boom.
    •Civilian

    View Slide

  27. Usage of the reaction
    •Military
    •chain reaction
    •as much energy as
    possible on the
    shortest time
    •boom.
    •Civilian
    •controlled
    reaction

    View Slide

  28. Usage of the reaction
    •Military
    •chain reaction
    •as much energy as
    possible on the
    shortest time
    •boom.
    •Civilian
    •controlled
    reaction
    •generate
    electricity

    View Slide

  29. Usage of the reaction
    •Military
    •chain reaction
    •as much energy as
    possible on the
    shortest time
    •boom.
    •Civilian
    •controlled
    reaction
    •generate
    electricity
    •…boil water

    View Slide

  30. Nuclear reactor

    View Slide

  31. Nuclear reactor

    View Slide

  32. II. Opportunities

    View Slide

  33. Fuel

    View Slide

  34. Fuel
    Uraninite, or
    “Pitchblende”

    View Slide

  35. Fuel
    “Yellowcake”
    Uranium dioxyde
    Uraninite, or
    “Pitchblende”

    View Slide

  36. Fuel
    “Yellowcake”
    Uranium dioxyde
    Uraninite, or
    “Pitchblende”
    Fuel pellets

    View Slide

  37. Fuel
    “Yellowcake”
    Uranium dioxyde
    Uraninite, or
    “Pitchblende”
    Fuel pellets
    Fuel rods

    View Slide

  38. Fuel
    “Yellowcake”
    Uranium dioxyde
    Uraninite, or
    “Pitchblende”
    Fuel pellets
    Fuel rods
    Assembly

    View Slide

  39. Fuel

    View Slide

  40. Fuel

    View Slide

  41. Fuel comparison

    View Slide

  42. Fuel comparison
    1 kg uranium

    View Slide

  43. Fuel comparison
    10 T oil
    1 kg uranium

    View Slide

  44. Fuel comparison
    10 T oil
    14 T coal
    1 kg uranium

    View Slide

  45. Renewables

    View Slide

  46. Renewables
    • 1 GW: one standard nuclear reactor

    View Slide

  47. Renewables
    • 1 GW: one standard nuclear reactor
    • several reactors in a plant

    View Slide

  48. Renewables
    • 1 GW: one standard nuclear reactor
    • several reactors in a plant
    • ~ 6000 wind turbines

    View Slide

  49. Renewables
    • 1 GW: one standard nuclear reactor
    • several reactors in a plant
    • ~ 6000 wind turbines
    • ~ 10 km2 of solar panels

    View Slide

  50. Renewables
    • 1 GW: one standard nuclear reactor
    • several reactors in a plant
    • ~ 6000 wind turbines
    • ~ 10 km2 of solar panels
    • lots of research in renewables

    View Slide

  51. Production
    2007 worldwide production (~214 plants)
    Thermal
    Hydraulic
    Renewables
    Nuclear

    View Slide

  52. Production
    2007 worldwide production (~214 plants)
    67!%
    Thermal
    Hydraulic
    Renewables
    Nuclear

    View Slide

  53. Production
    2007 worldwide production (~214 plants)
    16!%
    67!%
    Thermal
    Hydraulic
    Renewables
    Nuclear

    View Slide

  54. Production
    2007 worldwide production (~214 plants)
    3!%
    16!%
    67!%
    Thermal
    Hydraulic
    Renewables
    Nuclear

    View Slide

  55. Production
    2007 worldwide production (~214 plants)
    14!%
    3!%
    16!%
    67!%
    Thermal
    Hydraulic
    Renewables
    Nuclear

    View Slide

  56. Greenhouse effect

    View Slide

  57. Greenhouse effect

    View Slide

  58. Greenhouse effect
    • “smoke” from reactors:
    steam (water)

    View Slide

  59. Greenhouse effect
    • “smoke” from reactors:
    steam (water)
    • valuable solution against
    climate change

    View Slide

  60. III. Risks

    View Slide

  61. A long-term problem…

    View Slide

  62. A long-term problem…
    • “Short life” waste needs a
    few years to deteriorate

    View Slide

  63. A long-term problem…
    • “Short life” waste needs a
    few years to deteriorate
    • tools, scrap, rubbles…

    View Slide

  64. A long-term problem…
    • “Short life” waste needs a
    few years to deteriorate
    • tools, scrap, rubbles…
    • “Long life” waste needs
    several million years!

    View Slide

  65. A long-term problem…
    • “Short life” waste needs a
    few years to deteriorate
    • tools, scrap, rubbles…
    • “Long life” waste needs
    several million years!
    • reactor's core elements

    View Slide

  66. A long-term problem…
    • “Short life” waste needs a
    few years to deteriorate
    • tools, scrap, rubbles…
    • “Long life” waste needs
    several million years!
    • reactor's core elements
    • most dangerous: used fuel

    View Slide

  67. A long-term problem…
    • “Short life” waste needs a
    few years to deteriorate
    • tools, scrap, rubbles…
    • “Long life” waste needs
    several million years!
    • reactor's core elements
    • most dangerous: used fuel
    • 250 000 tons in 2008

    View Slide

  68. …with temporary solutions

    View Slide

  69. …with temporary solutions
    • 1950: Sea storage in concrete
    containers

    View Slide

  70. …with temporary solutions
    • 1950: Sea storage in concrete
    containers

    View Slide

  71. …with temporary solutions
    • 1950: Sea storage in concrete
    containers

    View Slide

  72. …with temporary solutions
    • 1950: Sea storage in concrete
    containers
    • more than 100 000 tons until 1982

    View Slide

  73. …with temporary solutions
    • 1950: Sea storage in concrete
    containers
    • more than 100 000 tons until 1982
    • cracks after 30 years

    View Slide

  74. …with temporary solutions
    • 1950: Sea storage in concrete
    containers
    • more than 100 000 tons until 1982
    • cracks after 30 years

    View Slide

  75. …with temporary solutions
    • 1950: Sea storage in concrete
    containers
    • more than 100 000 tons until 1982
    • cracks after 30 years

    View Slide

  76. …with temporary solutions
    • 1950: Sea storage in concrete
    containers
    • more than 100 000 tons until 1982
    • cracks after 30 years

    View Slide

  77. …with temporary solutions
    • 1950: Sea storage in concrete
    containers
    • more than 100 000 tons until 1982
    • cracks after 30 years
    • Now: Deep earth burial
    (300~500 m)

    View Slide

  78. …with temporary solutions
    • 1950: Sea storage in concrete
    containers
    • more than 100 000 tons until 1982
    • cracks after 30 years
    • Now: Deep earth burial
    (300~500 m)
    • large stable, dense, and tight area

    View Slide

  79. …with temporary solutions
    • 1950: Sea storage in concrete
    containers
    • more than 100 000 tons until 1982
    • cracks after 30 years
    • Now: Deep earth burial
    (300~500 m)
    • large stable, dense, and tight area
    • 150 000 ! / T

    View Slide

  80. …with temporary solutions
    • 1950: Sea storage in concrete
    containers
    • more than 100 000 tons until 1982
    • cracks after 30 years
    • Now: Deep earth burial
    (300~500 m)
    • large stable, dense, and tight area
    • 150 000 ! / T

    View Slide

  81. …with temporary solutions
    • 1950: Sea storage in concrete
    containers
    • more than 100 000 tons until 1982
    • cracks after 30 years
    • Now: Deep earth burial
    (300~500 m)
    • large stable, dense, and tight area
    • 150 000 ! / T

    View Slide

  82. …with temporary solutions
    • 1950: Sea storage in concrete
    containers
    • more than 100 000 tons until 1982
    • cracks after 30 years
    • Now: Deep earth burial
    (300~500 m)
    • large stable, dense, and tight area
    • 150 000 ! / T

    View Slide

  83. …and future “solutions”?

    View Slide

  84. …and future “solutions”?
    • Tomorrow": Spatial evacuation"?

    View Slide

  85. …and future “solutions”?
    • Tomorrow": Spatial evacuation"?
    • more than 5 billion ! / year for
    France alone

    View Slide

  86. …and future “solutions”?
    • Tomorrow": Spatial evacuation"?
    • more than 5 billion ! / year for
    France alone
    • risk of explosion in the
    atmosphere

    View Slide

  87. …d’oh!

    View Slide

  88. Worst accidents
    International Nuclear Events Scale

    View Slide

  89. Worst accidents
    • ranked on the INES (7 grades)
    International Nuclear Events Scale

    View Slide

  90. Worst accidents
    • ranked on the INES (7 grades)
    • 1957: Kychtym, USSR (lvl 6)
    International Nuclear Events Scale

    View Slide

  91. Worst accidents
    • ranked on the INES (7 grades)
    • 1957: Kychtym, USSR (lvl 6)
    • Storage area explosion – Accident kept under secret
    International Nuclear Events Scale

    View Slide

  92. Worst accidents
    • ranked on the INES (7 grades)
    • 1957: Kychtym, USSR (lvl 6)
    • Storage area explosion – Accident kept under secret
    • 1979: Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania (lvl 5)
    International Nuclear Events Scale

    View Slide

  93. Worst accidents
    • ranked on the INES (7 grades)
    • 1957: Kychtym, USSR (lvl 6)
    • Storage area explosion – Accident kept under secret
    • 1979: Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania (lvl 5)
    • Core fusion – containment structure intact
    International Nuclear Events Scale

    View Slide

  94. Worst accidents
    • ranked on the INES (7 grades)
    • 1957: Kychtym, USSR (lvl 6)
    • Storage area explosion – Accident kept under secret
    • 1979: Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania (lvl 5)
    • Core fusion – containment structure intact
    • 1986: Tchernobyl, Ukrainia (lvl 7)
    International Nuclear Events Scale

    View Slide

  95. Worst accidents
    • ranked on the INES (7 grades)
    • 1957: Kychtym, USSR (lvl 6)
    • Storage area explosion – Accident kept under secret
    • 1979: Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania (lvl 5)
    • Core fusion – containment structure intact
    • 1986: Tchernobyl, Ukrainia (lvl 7)
    • Core explosion – 600 000 workers to “clean” the area
    International Nuclear Events Scale

    View Slide

  96. Fukushima

    View Slide

  97. Fukushima
    • level 6 (accident with large consequences)

    View Slide

  98. Fukushima
    • level 6 (accident with large consequences)
    • cooling system failure after tsunami

    View Slide

  99. Fukushima
    • level 6 (accident with large consequences)
    • cooling system failure after tsunami
    • three reactor cores currently in fusion

    View Slide

  100. Fukushima
    • level 6 (accident with large consequences)
    • cooling system failure after tsunami
    • three reactor cores currently in fusion
    • controlled (more or less) with water hoses

    View Slide

  101. Fukushima
    • level 6 (accident with large consequences)
    • cooling system failure after tsunami
    • three reactor cores currently in fusion
    • controlled (more or less) with water hoses
    • several injured workers

    View Slide

  102. Fukushima
    • level 6 (accident with large consequences)
    • cooling system failure after tsunami
    • three reactor cores currently in fusion
    • controlled (more or less) with water hoses
    • several injured workers
    • environmental contamination

    View Slide

  103. Fukushima
    • level 6 (accident with large consequences)
    • cooling system failure after tsunami
    • three reactor cores currently in fusion
    • controlled (more or less) with water hoses
    • several injured workers
    • environmental contamination
    • food, ocean, soil…

    View Slide

  104. Fukushima
    • level 6 (accident with large consequences)
    • cooling system failure after tsunami
    • three reactor cores currently in fusion
    • controlled (more or less) with water hoses
    • several injured workers
    • environmental contamination
    • food, ocean, soil…
    • …for now :-/

    View Slide

  105. Conclusion: nuclear power

    View Slide

  106. Conclusion: nuclear power
    • electricity production

    View Slide

  107. Conclusion: nuclear power
    • electricity production
    • very efficient

    View Slide

  108. Conclusion: nuclear power
    • electricity production
    • very efficient
    • a solution against climate change

    View Slide

  109. Conclusion: nuclear power
    • electricity production
    • very efficient
    • a solution against climate change
    • new long-term, large-sized pollution risks

    View Slide

  110. Conclusion: nuclear power
    • electricity production
    • very efficient
    • a solution against climate change
    • new long-term, large-sized pollution risks
    • changed humankind vision

    View Slide

  111. Conclusion: nuclear power
    • electricity production
    • very efficient
    • a solution against climate change
    • new long-term, large-sized pollution risks
    • changed humankind vision
    • we are able to destroy the whole world
    • several times

    View Slide

  112. Conclusion: nuclear power
    • electricity production
    • very efficient
    • a solution against climate change
    • new long-term, large-sized pollution risks
    • changed humankind vision
    • we are able to destroy the whole world
    • several times
    • whole countries can be made unlivable for longer than
    our lives

    View Slide

  113. Thanks for your attention!
    Any questions?
    • Sources
    • Wikipédia
    • previous knowledge

    View Slide