U.S. nuclear plants are among the most inspected, best maintained industrial facilities in existence. Because of the inspection level required by federal regulators, they are inevitably clean and orderly.
A friend and I were driving through Ohio and the Carolinas on the way to a wedding one night. I don't remember where we were, exactly. It had started as pretty country, but became too dark to tell, really.
Then suddenly, we rounded a corner and crested a hill, and there was this glorious light up ahead, and this marvelous scene of people and vehicles moving around in some orderly but inexplicable dance. And the light also gave us a great view of the trees and the mountains and the river nearby.
It was the local nuclear plant; and the sight was literally awe-inspiring. Nearly two decades later, I can still see that scene in my head.
You never know what people will find interesting. One of the ladies who works in the library had relatives visiting from France; the thing they wanted to see most was a car dealership! They spent a whole day going from one to another.
From what I understand, working for a nuclear plant is so mundane and boring for some employees, that giving tours is quite healthy for them.
It's supposed to be as boring as manning an ICBM missile silo. You sit at the control panel, and basically do nothing.
Then again, the boredom problem is a very good problem to have, considering the the Russians dealt with it by getting drunk. Hey, that worked out well, eh?
If your readers would like an insider tour of a nuclear plant full of all the scuttlebutt, politics and other zany happenings, my website offers one, at no cost to readers (and no financial gain to me or any advertisers.) I've been an engineer at US nuclear sites over twenty years. I've written it as a fictional account, but it gives you a good picture of the good and bad of this wacky energy source. See "Rad Decision" at
Not quite the same thing, but I really enjoyed the tour we took of the hydroelectric plant inside Glen Canyon Dam, back in the early 80s. We were on the Great American Roadtrip out west, but we didn't know anything about the dam. The only reason we decided to take the tour was because we pulled over to take a picture, and noticed that the highway was vibrating, despite it's distance from the dam. We figured there was probably something kinda interesting going on there.
Speaking as a nuclear worker to some of the above comments:
It's very unlikely that a member of the public can now get a tour of a US nuclear plant. 9/11 tightened up security considerably. (Even before that, there was a lot of paperwork involved and each guide could take only a few people and had to keep them in site at all times.)
Work in a nuclear plant is not typically any more boring and mundane that any other job. It is not sitting at a control panel doing nothing. There can be a lot of paperwork, however.
Alcohol wasn't an issue in the Chernobyl disaster (though I won't claim it's not a problem in the former USSR).
As noted above, you can get an entertaining tour in my book "Rad Decision" at RadDecision.blogspot.com. It covers Chernobyl, day to day activities, and how an "unpleasant event" might be handled.
James, I have a few questions if you don't mind. I'm not assuming you have all the answers, but I'm genuinely interested in nuclear power and I'm thrilled to run into you.
1. Do those that work in operations act as heroes and avoid disasters? Disasters that would happen if these people were not on top of things?
3. Do you think the Integral Fast Reactor design will ever see widespread use?
4. What is your opinion about the use of nuclear power for large scale hydrogen production?
5. Would you invest in GE because of their new Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor, if you had extra money?
You're right, I don't have all the answers. I've very wary of energy experts who seem to think they do.
1. Depends on what you mean. Moment by moment - no. Nuclear plants are designed to chug along and shut down automatically with no Operator action for ten minutes. After that, there are things they must do. There is also lots more they can do on the front end to keep things running smoothly. But it's not like the watchman on the Titanic who has to warn of icebergs 24/7 or else there's a big problem. Reading the book will give you a better idea.
2. No idea. I've focused on the current generation of nuclear plants, because that's what I know. I suspect you don't know the real answer until you've actually built and tried to operate a few.
3. Hydrogen, of course, is not an energy source, it is an energy storage mechanism. So it has one advantage over electricity, which can't be stored well and must be used the moment it's produced. The energy source used to make H2 will depend on where you are and what economics and environmental effects are considered the most important. Wind, solar cell, wave power, fossil fuels, biofuels (switchgrass), geothermal, nuclear - depends on what you want. Its a societal decision as much as anything.
4. No idea. A similar answer to 2.
I'd encourage you to read "Rad Decision" to get more perspective on the general nuclear issue. There's also a paperback version. (I get no royalities.)
10.30.2007 12:13pm
Commenting on Dean's World is a privilege, not a right. Dean is your host, you are his guest, and you should behave in that fashion. Dean is not your babysitter, nor is he your punching bag. Please remember this. In general, you are free to disagree with anyone on any subject you wish, but abusive behavior will not be tolerated.
Of course we all lose our tempers now and then. Dean freely admits to being imperfect in this regard, which is why regulars to this establishment will generally be cut more slack than people who we don't know very well.
Still: behave like an adult, or go find somewhere else to play. Thanks.
A friend and I were driving through Ohio and the Carolinas on the way to a wedding one night. I don't remember where we were, exactly. It had started as pretty country, but became too dark to tell, really.
Then suddenly, we rounded a corner and crested a hill, and there was this glorious light up ahead, and this marvelous scene of people and vehicles moving around in some orderly but inexplicable dance. And the light also gave us a great view of the trees and the mountains and the river nearby.
It was the local nuclear plant; and the sight was literally awe-inspiring. Nearly two decades later, I can still see that scene in my head.
Go figure.
It's supposed to be as boring as manning an ICBM missile silo. You sit at the control panel, and basically do nothing.
Then again, the boredom problem is a very good problem to have, considering the the Russians dealt with it by getting drunk. Hey, that worked out well, eh?
It's very unlikely that a member of the public can now get a tour of a US nuclear plant. 9/11 tightened up security considerably. (Even before that, there was a lot of paperwork involved and each guide could take only a few people and had to keep them in site at all times.)
Work in a nuclear plant is not typically any more boring and mundane that any other job. It is not sitting at a control panel doing nothing. There can be a lot of paperwork, however.
Alcohol wasn't an issue in the Chernobyl disaster (though I won't claim it's not a problem in the former USSR).
As noted above, you can get an entertaining tour in my book "Rad Decision" at RadDecision.blogspot.com. It covers Chernobyl, day to day activities, and how an "unpleasant event" might be handled.
1. Do those that work in operations act as heroes and avoid disasters? Disasters that would happen if these people were not on top of things?
3. Do you think the Integral Fast Reactor design will ever see widespread use?
4. What is your opinion about the use of nuclear power for large scale hydrogen production?
5. Would you invest in GE because of their new Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor, if you had extra money?
You're right, I don't have all the answers. I've very wary of energy experts who seem to think they do.
1. Depends on what you mean. Moment by moment - no. Nuclear plants are designed to chug along and shut down automatically with no Operator action for ten minutes. After that, there are things they must do. There is also lots more they can do on the front end to keep things running smoothly. But it's not like the watchman on the Titanic who has to warn of icebergs 24/7 or else there's a big problem. Reading the book will give you a better idea.
2. No idea. I've focused on the current generation of nuclear plants, because that's what I know. I suspect you don't know the real answer until you've actually built and tried to operate a few.
3. Hydrogen, of course, is not an energy source, it is an energy storage mechanism. So it has one advantage over electricity, which can't be stored well and must be used the moment it's produced. The energy source used to make H2 will depend on where you are and what economics and environmental effects are considered the most important. Wind, solar cell, wave power, fossil fuels, biofuels (switchgrass), geothermal, nuclear - depends on what you want. Its a societal decision as much as anything.
4. No idea. A similar answer to 2.
I'd encourage you to read "Rad Decision" to get more perspective on the general nuclear issue. There's also a paperback version. (I get no royalities.)
Of course we all lose our tempers now and then. Dean freely admits to being imperfect in this regard, which is why regulars to this establishment will generally be cut more slack than people who we don't know very well.
Still: behave like an adult, or go find somewhere else to play. Thanks.