Nuclear Power:
Editor’s Note: Though it took an ex- for a meeting with a nuclear power official
tended period of time, THE HIGHACRES could not be arranged. We would like to
COLLEGIAN has gathered the in- express our thanks to Dr. Frankel and Mr.
formation on the nuclear power question. Keifer for their help in collecting the
Unfortunately the evidence for the pro- evidence for the con-argument,
argument had to be taken from various There can be no final judgment whether
pamphlets distributed by the Susquehanna nuclear power is good or bad; only time
Power Plant and the Atomic Energy w m tell. But for us, the next generation,
Commission, because a convenient time nuclear power is closer to home than you
think.
Nuclear Power: Pro
Nuclear power is rapidly becoming as
much a part of modern day energy
production as the coal was in the past. But
whereas coal was a relatively clean form
of fuel, nuclear fuel cannot be handled and
can contaminate our environment. This
hands-off feature of nuclear power has
confused and frightened many people.
At the present time, nuclear power
supplies 7 percent of the country’s electric
generating capacity. There are 55 nuclear
power plants operating in the country, and
plans are being made to build many more.
In spite of this, most of the populous does
not know how a nuclear power plant
produces energy. This process is explained
in this excerpt from a pamphlet
distributed by the Atomic Industrial
Forum Inc.:
“Electricity is produced at all power
plants by spinning the shaft of a huge
generator, in which coils of wire and
magnetic fields interact to create elec
tricity. In most plants (thermal or steam
electric stations) this spinning is done by
high pressure steam blowing the propeller
like blades of a turbine connected to the
generator shaft. Heat to boil water into
steam at these plants is produced in either
of two ways; by burning coal, oil, or gas—
the fossil fuels—in a furnace or by splitting
certain atoms of uranium in a nuclear
reactor. Nothing is burned or exploded in
these power reactors. There fuel consists
of many tons of ceramic pellets made from
an oxide of uranium or other fissionable
metal. The cylindrical pellets,.each about
the size of your little finger, are carefully
organized in long, vertical tubes within the
reactor. Inserted throughout bundles of
these fuel tubes are many control rods.
These rods regulate a process that results
in atoms invisibly flying apart, or
fissioning. As the atomic pieces plow
through the fuel pellets, they generate heat
by a kind of friction, something like the
heat you generate when you rub your
CAMPUS
i
BOOKSTORE
tyte ham j card 4 and
ifd itemb ~o ! t tyfcn
Closer To Home Than You Think
hands together.
The atoms involved are those of uranium
metal within the ceramic fuel. As the
nucleus of each atom fission, it shoots out
particles called neutrons, which cause
mire fissions when they hit the nuclei of
other uranium atoms. This sequence ot one
fission triggering others, and those
triggering still more is called a chain
reaction.
A nuclear power plant, then, is nothing
than a steam-electric generating station in
which a nuclear reaction takes the place of
a furnace and the heat comes from the
fissioning of uranium fuel rather than
from the burning of fossil fuel.
The knowledge of the use and production
of radioactive particles has created many
fears within the population. The fears of
nuclear accident, unmanageability of
nuclear wastes, nuclear blackmail, and
radioactive contamination are stigmas It i sthe complex combining of fear of the nuclear power,” according to Frankel. If
connected to nuclear power. unknown, misunderstanding of available the President of the U.S. can be attacked
As for nuclear accidents, or in other informati6n anc j the suspicion that the and killed with security guards all around
words the fallout of nuclear particles due Atomic Energy Commission is lying about why can’t a pile of nuclear elements be
to a failure of some system at the P° certain aspects of nuclear energy, with the stolen?
plant, the nuclear community assures real danger of nudear fue j has led to the Frankel’s main reason for opposing
protection of the public by a philosop y p U | > || c > s confusion and subsequent outcry nuclear power is that “there is no
known as defense-in-depth. The protection against nuc i ear power. satisfactory way of disposing of nuclear
begins in the designing of a nuclear power Thg nuc i ear power industry, in co- wastes. They will be around for millions of
plant. The nuclear engineer designs the ation with the Atomic Energy Com- years with dangerous radioactivity. There
plan for accidents, piey are made to mission has tried to ease the public mind is on ly so much ground the government
withstand 300 mph tornados, the mpst publishing pamphlets about all phases can bury wastes under until there is no
severe earthquake, and the pro a of the nuc i ear power plants and providing more space.
maximum flood. Only test proven tourg of established p i an ts. But, for every Another opponent of nuclear power, who
equipment is used m the construction of- itemofproofofthesafetyofnuclearpower is mainly concerned with the en
the plant. A typical , that the nuclear industry provides, op- vironmental aspect is Robert Keifer, a
hard, dense ceramic full pellets which . f „ have an eauallv logical microbologist who resides in Hazleton.
Keifer .» . ..udee. « Hi g h.er ? Jeer
ducts within zereomum alloy tubes nan an con^nues years ago and was president of the Biology
inch in diameter contained in a 750 ton Frankel biology professor at Club (now the Outings Club) and presented
pressure vessel with still walls four to nine Highacresisone ’ individual whois opposed a case against nuclear power bases on
inches thick surrounded by a Primary t 0 the useof nuclear power. “I’d rather see evidence he found by testing the water m
containment structure of six-toot tmcK us for the next 30 yearg or however the Susquehanna near the power plant. He
reinforced concrete lined with more sreei take to develop an efficient power is mainly concerned with the effect the
enveloped by the steel an ° concrete gource on coa] than Qn nuclear power.” dumping of hot water, used to cool
continued on page t Frankel has seve ral reasons upon which radioactive wastes, will have on the river
his opinion is founded. life. He is afraid the bacteria already in
The Atomic Energy Commission cites as the water because of pollution will
one of the reasons for the development of multiply faster because of the rise in water
nuclear power the fact that the fossil fuels temperature and thus, speed up the
such as coal and oil are “running out”, pollution of the river.
Nuclear power plants use uranium as its Also he feels that the small amount of
fuel source and Frankel asserts, “In the radioactive particles the plant officials
long run, it’s not going to last. It uses claim will escape may be enough to cause
depletable resources and eventually will mutations in the fish that inhabit these
have to be replaced.” Presently, uranium waters. If these fish are eaten or the water
is stockpiled across the nation waters for used by people downstream who knows
use but not too long ago tons of coal were what will happen to them?
waiting underground. Keifer feels that the use of the river by
The fear of radioactive contamination the plant “will affect the river faster and
from a nuclear power plant explosion is differently than they say.”
prevalent in the public mind and Frankel He feels they should have done more and
admits this is one of his fears, too. “The better preliminary testing and have kept
Atomic Energy Commission is checking the people informed as to what is hap
for safety, but how safe is that?” com- pening. “My attitude would change if they
ments Frankel. Government agencies would have meetings for people and show
have been known to fail in their duties concrete results of tests. If I saw an
before as evidenced in the collapse of grain Atomic Energy Commission, federal
silos a few months ago. government, and state sanctification of a
Atomic weaponry is featured in the plant I might learn to live with that.”
“arms race” issue and the possibility of If the nation does not develop nuclear
using the fuel used in nuclear plants and power what should it do? Some alter
the wastes produced by them to create natives given by these two gentlemen were
weapons worries Frankel and other op- to continue to use coal with the best en
ponents of nuclear power. “Any country vironmental controls possible while the
that has peaceful nuclear power plants money currently used for nuclear power is
also has the possibility of making nuclear used to produce hydrofusion reactors and
weapons,” states Frankel. solar power. Or, if nuclear power is to be
Even if and perhaps, worse, if the nation developed the public should be kept in
did not want the nuclear elements for use formed of how things are going, whether
in weapons, someone else may. “There is they are happening as predicted or if
no way to contain the orolifaration of changes will have to be made.
OPEN DAILY
8 a.m.-4 p.m
A view of the new Susquehanna Nuclear Plant as seen from the Council Cup
Overlook shows the great size of one of the two cooling towers to be built at the site
near Berwick. The plant is expected to be in operation by 1980. (Photo by David
Kraft)
Nuclear Power: Con
s—The Highacres Collegian, Friday, February 10, 1978