The movie Pandora’s Promise, offered a great in depth insight into the world of nuclear energy and how clean and reliable it is as a source of energy. The film making was great because it began with many people being anti-nuclear because of their misconceptions of how the nuclear energy industry actually worked. These people did have a change of heart once they began to research and dive deeper into what actually went on within the nuclear reactors and how little radiation and pollution the emitted.

One of the main points of the movie was to disprove the common misconceptions the public has on the nuclear power industry. When disasters such as Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi happen, the news skews the event to make it sound like the reason for so many deaths and cases of cancer in those areas was because of the nuclear disasters. However, the real reasons behind the large number of deaths was due to natural causes or from a natural disaster such as the earth quake and tsunami in Fukushima. Another misconception many people have is that the nuclear power industry is one that is using the nuclear power to create weapons, which in some cases is true, but that is not the main goal by any means. The main goal and focus is to create a reliable and efficient source of energy without emitting large amounts of carbon or radiation into the atmosphere.

The few environmentalists, and other highlighted people in the film, were pleasantly surprised to learn of the minimal harm done to the atmosphere and environment by the nuclear power plants and the radiation itself.

What I found to be the most interesting was the radiation detector they used in many shots around the world as well as directly in and around nuclear plants and old plants that had experienced disasters. It was fascinating to see that a small beach in Brazil, I believe it was, had an enormous amount of natural radiation. That beach had nearly 50 times the radiation, in sieverts, that Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi had.

The Keystone XL Pipeline is a massive project that is a possible 1,180 mile long pipeline that links oil sands from Alberta to Nebraska. There in Nebraska, the pipeline would connect with an existing pipeline that would continue the transportation of oil down into Texas. This pipeline is estimated to transport around 830,000 barrels of oil on a daily basis. This pipeline has proven to be a highly disputed project because of the massive construction and potential pollution that would go on in the creating of it.

A few of the pros that may come with the construction of the XL pipeline include an increased supply of oil from Canada, the landlocked Alberta in particular, a reduced dependency from Middle Eastern oil, making for an overall quicker and cheaper transportation of large amounts of oil, and it would create a huge amount of jobs for both America and Canada. With this pipeline, Canada would be able to almost double their oil exportation to the U.S., therefore nearly doubling their profit from the oil extraction. With more oil being produced and transported domestically, the U.S. would be able to become less dependent on the Middle East for their oil which will save the country, and its citizens, money in the long run.

On the other hand, there are many cons that come with the production of this pipeline. The main cons are an increase in greenhouse gas emissions, a possible decrease in jobs created, and a large amount of stress put on the environment. The Keystone pipeline is estimated to produce enough carbon and other greenhouse emissions that we could possibly raise the earth’s temperature by around 2 degrees celsius. While the creation of the pipeline could potentially create a large amount of jobs for hard working Americans, it has shown that in the past few years, major oil and energy companies have actually been cutting down on the number of people they have employed by around 11,000 people. Along with a lack of jobs created, the Keystone pipeline will have a huge environmental strain.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-30103078

http://keystone-xl.com/five-reasons-why-keystone-xl-benefits-the-u-s/

5 Reasons Why the Keystone Pipeline is Bad for the Economy

Last Friday we broke into groups and were given the opportunity to think and come up with our own experiment to present to the class. Our experiment would then be done by two other classmates from another group at the end of the semester.

First, we explored on the internet for some basic ideas to build off of. Our first idea was to build our own battery. One way we thought of doing this was to create a current and voltage by using different liquids that are capable of doing so. Salt water, Coke, and vinegar were the first and main three liquids we though of that would give us the most current. Another way we thought of creating our own battery was by converting the heat in our hands into electricity. We would have used copper and aluminum plates to measure the difference in voltage and current created by the two different materials.

Next, we thought of making our own electromagnets and comparing them to regular magnets. We thought of comparing three different materials: iron, copper, and ferrite. Along with comparing the different materials we would compare the difference in voltage input into the electromagnets ad how much they affected the magnetic field. We ended up deciding on creating this experiment because it gives a large range of information from the results and we can see how much different materials and different energy input can change the strength of a magnet.

On Friday 11/6 we had the opportunity to tour the nuclear reactor laboratory on the campus of MIT. Upon arriving we were all assigned a special monitor that measure the amount of radiation we were being exposed to while we were inside the reactor building. We were then given a very informative power point presentation about what exactly goes on inside the nuclear reactor. We learned how the process of fission was created and used to perform experiments and produce energy within the reactor. Before the walking tour of the reactor, we were given a visual tour and representation of how the reactor worked and how the different pieces and precautions were implemented into the reactor. Although nuclear reactors can be used to create energy, we learned that the MIT reactor was specifically used for experimental purposes only.

Inside the core of the reactor, there were 27 slots within a hexagonal tube where fuel or experiments were placed to observe. Around each side of the hexagonal tube, there were 6 blades being held in place by electromagnets that are used to shut off the experiments in under 1 second. These blades keep the core from overheating and combusting if there was ever a problem or a loss of power. If the blades are needed they are released by the electromagnets and keep the heat generated by the fission process from getting out of the core to eliminate the possibility of over heating and creating a disaster like the one in Fukushima Daiichi.

Under the reactor core itself, the control room was where everything was monitored and kept in check. All the bells and whistles gave the technician the capability to control everything that goes on within the confines of the reactor. Throughout the reactor, radiation monitors are placed on the walls to ensure the safety of those inside from being exposed to too much radiation. Each monitor is then connected to the control room where the radiation levels are displayed. Inside the control room, there are many buttons and monitors that were used to keep the reactor and the scientists safe when the reactor was in use and experiments were being done.

The in-class solar cell experiment we went through was one that examined and allowed us to understand the amount of voltage created in relation to the intensity of light. In other words, we were discovering how much energy was created/transferred through light and differing distances. We also were experimenting with how different wavelengths (colors) of light affected the voltage created/transferred.

When we were experimenting with the different distances, we first began holding the light directly onto the solar cell for 30 sec. and averaging the voltage received by the solar cell. In the following four trials, we held the light 2, 4, 6, and 8cm away from the solar cell to observe the difference in light intensity in relation to voltage received by the solar cell.

We then began experimenting with the different wavelengths of light and how the affected the voltage received by the solar cell. For these four trials we held the light directly onto the solar cell; however, we had a transparent sheet of colored plastic between the light and the solar cell to change the wavelength of the light being absorbed by the solar cell.

As much of the world is becoming more aware of how harmful the burning of fossil fuels is, most of the world’s major green house gas emitters have been turning to the many alternatives of renewable energy sources. Among them, solar has proven to be one of the most popular sources although it is one of the most expensive to build solar and photovoltaic cells to capture the suns rays to convert into electricity. But in order to keep our green house gas emissions from increasing over the years, many countries are making strong efforts and investments in the renewable energy sources and solar energy in particular.

Three of the major solar energy consumers and producers in the world today are Germany (35.5 GW), China (18.3 GW), and Italy (17.6 GW).

Germany: Even dating back to 2010, Germany was the world leader in solar energy production and consumption. To this day they continue their dominance in the solar power industry by a large margin. Although Germany is not the sunniest country they have been smart and efficient in how they use the sun’s energy. As of June 2014, Germany was able to produce nearly 50% of their electricity. By 2050, they are setting a goal to produce 100% of their electricity through solar powered means.

China: Coming in second to Germany in the solar power production rankings in the world, China had set out and soared higher than their original goals they had put into action in 2009. In 2009, China had drawn up a new 5-year plan, envisioning a goal of producing 5 GW of solar energy. They met this goal in such a short amount of time that they had to go back to the drawing board and set their sights a lot higher. By the end of their new 5-year plan, they are expecting to exceed their goal of 45 GW and over take Germany in the “solar power race.” Farther down the line, by 2020, China is estimating their solar energy production to hit triple digits.

Italy: By the end of 2013, Italy had risen from 5th to 3rd place in solar energy production and as of September of 2014, about 10% of their country’s electricity was being produced through solar powered means. Using the large, 50 billion Euro, investment, Italy has been able to continue their solar energy growth.

http://pureenergies.com/us/blog/top-10-countries-using-solar-power/

http://theweek.com/speedreads/451299/germany-gets-50-percent-electricity-from-solar-first-time

China 2020 Solar Energy Target = 200 Gigawatts (Rumor)

Nearly 10% of Italy’s Electricity Produced by PV Solar

Nuclear energy and the nuclear fission process had first been discovered and developed between the years of 1895 and 1945. The energy created from the nuclear fission process is a highly efficient and powerful energy. The main element used in the fission reaction is Uranium-235. The process involves inserting a single neutron into the U-235, which then becomes an unstable form of Uranium, U-236. This causes the fission to occur and yields two separate neutrons, a Krypton-92 atom, and a Barium-142 atom. Those spare neutrons released can then be absorbed into other U-235 atoms to continue the fission process. This chain reaction is controlled by rods within the nuclear reactor where the heat from the fission is used to heat water inside the reactor to create steam that is forced through a turbine that is connected to a generator.

There are many advantages and risks that come with nuclear fission and nuclear power plants. Some of the advantages include having a large energy source because the energy in just one pound of the enriched Uranium compares to roughly 1 million gallons of gasoline and one million times the amount of energy contained in one pound of coal. 17% of the world’s energy comes from nuclear production. Finally, nuclear energy reduces the emission of 5.1 million tons of sulfur, 2.4 million tons of nitrogen oxide, and 164 metric tons of carbon.

On the other hand, nuclear power plants have the possibility of emitting radioactive material into the air or into the oceans when the dispose of materials irresponsibly. As we found out about Fukushima Daiichi, power plants have the risk of being compromised and shut down incorrectly, causing nuclear disasters that could put a large amount of the population in danger of radiation. Although these risks remain present, nuclear power plants are extremely cautious of how they dispose of their waste to ensure that the public is not exposed to highly radioactive materials.

Following a massive earthquake and tsunami off the northeastern coast of Japan on March 11, 2011, three nuclear reactors were severely damaged in the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactor. The overflow of water in the nuclear power plant caused the power from the grid and majority of the back up generators to be cut off which subsequently caused the power to be shut off from the heat exchanges that disposed of the reactor heat waste and nuclear waste into the sea. The main problem was that three units lost power and lost the control of their reactor cooling and water circulation functions, ultimately causing the meltdown of the units.

Although the reactors had shut down in response to the earth quake warnings, they were still extremely hot due to the reactions being done before they had been shut down. The back up diesel generators had kicked in and initially began the cool down process; however, once the first waves of the tsunami hit, those generators were flooded and lost their power. Because the tsunami had caused the most damage to the roads and maintenance routes in and around the power plant, there was no quick or easy way into the heart of the problem to fix it.

With the melting of the three units, the temperatures inside were very high and hydrogen was being created and released into the air. This all led to multiple explosions and radioactive shrapnel and debris to be emitted into the air. Along with the radioactive emissions, there was quite a bit of radioactive waste being leaked into the sea, contaminating the water.

Although the earth quake and tsunami took the lives of around 20,000 people, this nuclear disaster did not cause any severe effects to the people on the ground in the area as they were all evacuated immediately. A lot of the area around the power plant was quarantined off to the public for nearly a year following the accident to ensure everyone’s safety. Some specific areas remain quarantined to this day. While much of the radioactive material in the sea has been controlled and reduced, there is still a large number of animals that show signs of contamination. The Japanese government’s swift and effective observation of the incident and the areas affected proved to save many lives and keep the public safe from consuming radioactive run off from the disaster.

In the past few years following the Fukushima Daiici disaster, Japan has been reflecting on how they will be producing energy in the future. They have been coming up with new strategies in order to increase efficiency in energy production while decreasing the risk for another disaster and other nuclear problems. With these new strategies, Japan is going to continue to rely heavily on nuclear power, while implementing other renewable sources, such as wind and solar, more.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/fukushima-accident/

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b0/Towns_evacuated_around_Fukushima_on_April_11th,_2011.png

“. . . We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations.” – President Obama

In 2009, President Obama pledged that by 2020 we would reduce our carbon emission levels below the level they were at in 2005. This means he pledged to reduce emissions by 17% by 2020, but he needed all other major economies to buy into his plan and also reduce their emissions. I agree with President Obama on his idea that we are morally obligated to leave behind a planet that is habitable and is not damaged or polluted beyond fixing because future generations do not deserve to have that kind of pressure and responsibility to fix that amount of pollution. After presenting the problem and his goals, President Obama laid out three essential steps to his plan.

1) Cut Carbon Pollution in America:

In 2012, the carbon emission levels had dropped lower than they had been in the past twenty years despite the continuously expanding economy. With the levels of emission so low, President Obama sought to maintain those levels or even drop them further to help keep the American people safer and pose as an example for other major economies to mirror. President Obama made moves to cut major carbon emissions from power plants because of their large concentrated sources of emissions. With many clean, alternative sources of energy, he believed that with the help from states and local governments we can continue to reduce our emissions from power plants along with providing reliable and affordable power to the further expand our economy. President Obama also set out to increase the fuel economy standards of our day to day transportation systems, as well as cutting down on the energy waste within our homes and businesses.

2) Prepare the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change:

With the change in our climate due to the emissions polluting our atmosphere, President Obama and his administration have set out to prepare the American people for this climate change by rebuilding and strengthening our roads, bridges, and shorelines. In doing this, President Obama is being proactive to ensure the public’s safety from the potential of sever weather changes due to the change in the climate. Along with creating a stronger infrastructure for a climate change, other actions are being taken such as: hospitals are being built bigger with more capacity, disaster relief centers are being created in more areas, we are working to maintain our agricultural stability, launching a climate data initiative, and overall getting the American people mentally prepared for a drastic climate change in which a disaster could occur.

3) Lead International Efforts to Combat Global Climate Change and Prepare for its Impacts:

Because the whole world, not just America, is at risk of the climate change, we all need to come together and put forth a combined effort to combat climate change and prepare for its impacts. President Obama and his administration are working to take their domestic plans and workings to combat climate change to an international level. By including other major economies in the climate change initiatives, President Obama hopes to support the efforts put forth in the U.S. and others to achieve his goal by 2020 and continue that trend of emission reduction post-2020. In combining efforts with the other major economies of the world, Obama plans to cut energy waste by expanding clean and renewable energy use, as well as strengthening global resilience to climate change overall.

In the “Conserving at Home” exhibit in the Museum of Science, we learned about various ways we can converse energy while at home. We were able to experiment with a device that allowed us to see the difference in energy consumed between different household appliances (I believe they were a washing machine, hair dryer, and dishwasher). It was very eye-opening seeing just how much energy is used when everyday, basic household appliances are being used. Both the dishwasher and washing machine used nearly three times the amount of energy that the hair dryer used. In another portion of the exhibit, we were able to examine the amount of heat within a house and how much escapes without us even realizing it. Cracks around the windows and door frames, as well as the quality of insulation used contribute most to the heat energy wasted in our homes on a daily basis. This exhibit taught me that a higher awareness of what I use, to generate heat energy or power an electrical appliance, and how I use it are essential for being able to reduce my consumption rate.

In the “Catching the Wind” exhibit we examined the role played by the production of wind powered energy as a renewable source. First and most important, the location of the wind turbines is essential to the amount of energy produced. Turbines in locations that do not have enough, or powerful enough wind throughout the year will not be efficient producers of energy. Turbines need to be located in areas that receive a lot of wind and a lot of strong wind in order to produce a great amount energy. Along with location, the turbines need to be placed in an economically friendly area that the community will feel comfortable with having them. However, not all these needs can be met so compromises must be made.

In the “Energized” exhibit, we learned how big of an impact our daily lives and daily consumption of energy has on the environment. In particular, the exhibit focused on how we can get away from fossil fuels and other non-renewable energy sources and create other self-sufficient alternatives. Some of the alternatives shown in the exhibit were solar, wind, hydro, and other methods in which manure or other forms of decaying bacteria are used to produce a gas to power a generator. All of these alternatives will possibly allow us to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels in the near future.