Nuclear Discussions

Best Engineering Resumes, Cover Letters and Career Advice

Best Engineering Resumes, Cover Letters and Career Advice
Premium engineering resumes, engineering cover letters and career advice. Tailored to engineers and technical professionals. Our products are created with input from engineering and technical hiring managers. Powerful and easy to use.
Best Engineering Resumes, Cover Letters and Career Advice

Small Engine Repair Made Easy
Ex-Military Aircraft mechanic spills the beans on how to repair small engines. Make those pesky small engine repairs a snap with this simple how to guide. Service is going beyond the repair. Affiliates http://jimsmallengine.com/affiliates
Small Engine Repair Made Easy


Discarding Techniques of Radioactive Materials From Nuclear Power Plant

Discarding Techniques of Radioactive Materials From Nuclear Power Plant

This paper deals with different methods of disposing high-level nuclear waste. There are two main ways in which high level nuclear waste is disposed, they are underground repositories and under ocean repositories. Consideration of the ethical aspect of disposing high level nuclear waste underground or under the ocean will also be discussed since this issue plays a major role in how these wastes are perceived by the public, thus it affects how to dispose them.

Solutions

There are many proposals for disposing high level nuclear wastes. However the most favored solution for the disposal of these wastes is isolating radioactive waste from man and biosphere for a period of time such that any possible subsequent release of radio nuclides from the waste repository will not result in undue radiation exposure. The basic idea behind this is to use stable geological environments that have retained their integrity for millions of years to provide a suitable isolation capacity for the long time periods require. The reasons for relying on such geological environments are based on the following main considerations:

Ø       Geological media is an entirely passive disposal system with no requirement for continuing human involvement for its safety. It can be abandoned after closure with no need for continuing surveillance or monitoring.

Ø       The safety of the system is based on multiple barriers, both engineered and natural, the main one being the geological barrier itself.

One way of disposing high level nuclear waste materials which meets the above condition is the concept of disposing these wastes by burial in suitable geologic media beneath the deep ocean floor, which is called seabed disposal. Seabed disposal is different from sea dumping which does not involve isolation of low level radioactive waste within geological strata.

In the seabed concept, a multicarrier system would be involved, including a suitable waste form such as glass and the use of corrosion resistant packages. A deep seabed sediment formation would be chosen in order to contain radio nuclides after the waste package fails through corrosion and the radio nuclides are released from the waste by leaching. Such sediments would be made of very fine grained particles with the ability to absorb and impede the movement of most waste radio nuclides. Sites in the ocean would have to be chosen on the basis of the characteristics of the seabed sediments. They would need to be free from erosion and located away from the edges of tectonic plates where seismic or volcanic movements could disrupt a repository and exposes the waste packages.

Disposal of long-lived radioactive waste in deep ocean sediments is assumed to be conceivable in isolated ocean regions under water at least 4,000 meters deep. Potential disposal sites must possess thick, weak, relatively homogenous sediments of very fine particles. The objective of proper emplacement is to implant waste packages beneath the sea floor in such a way that the barrier properties of sediments can isolate the radio nuclides for thousands of years. Many concepts have been proposed for emplacing radioactive waste under the ocean floor. Two representative examples of emplacement concepts are the emplacement of strings of waste canisters in drilled holes and the burial in the sea floor by free falling penetrators.

The design of waste packages suitable for seabed disposal is an important technical aspect. The waste package contains the waste form which can be high level waste from fuel reprocessing and spent fuel: barrier materials, the canister and any additional container. Barrier materials should be strong, tough , creep and corrosion resistance. The target of barrier materials is to ensure containment for at least 500 years. As for the waste canisters, they should incorporate pressure-resistant and corrosion-resistant construction to minimize the size of the waste packages.

Details about cost and risk consideration can be found in volume one of the “Feasibility of Disposal of High-Level Radioactive waste into the Seabed”. In summary, the penetrator option appears to be less costly than the drilled emplacement by a factor equal to 2.5. Regardless of the adjustment made in design and cost estimates, seabed methods appear to have a small impact on the total cost of the electricity generated and compares favorably with the cost of alternative disposal methods.

The most widely proposed method of disposing high-level nuclear waste materials is to bury them in underground nuclear waste repository. An underground repository is designed so that it has the ability to permanently isolate high-level radioactive waste from the accessible environment for very long periods of time. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission set this time period to be 1,000 years and recommends consideration of performance for up to 100,000 years. On April 30, 1995, President Reagan decided to accept the Department of Energy’s recommendation that defense and commercial high-level radioactive wastes be commingled in a commercial repository on the basis of the projected cost advantage and the fact that no compelling requirement for a defense only repository was found.

Ethical Aspects

Ethical considerations play a major role in decision regarding how high-level nuclear wastes are disposed and handled. Because of popular skepticism and misperception about this issue, the public should be educated so that this problem can be resolved peacefully. Ethical considerations not only can but must provide a mediating framework for the resolution of such a popularized political controversy. Implicit in moral objections to proposals for permanent nuclear waste disposal are concerns about three ethical principles: fairness to individuals, equitable protection among diverse social groups and informed consent through due process and participation. Controversies over the production and disposal of nuclear wastes have come to serve as a volatile instrument for debating divergent agendas for the future of out affluent technological society. Moral objections to nuclear waste disposal bases its ground on the argument that:

-Nuclear wastes pose a unique threat of harm because they contain actinides and a few fission products with half-lives of millions of years.

-During this long period, one expect that the three proposed barriers (waste form, container, geological medium) designed to prevent reentry of radioactive poisons into the biosphere to be breached.

-Such leakage can be expected to potentially create grave hazards for human populations in the distant future since likelihood or leakage increases over a long time: hence, radiation exposure is inevitable. (However, with proper design and sitting this radiation exposure is likely to be small compared to that from typical uranium ore bodies.)

These moral assessments are based on the assumption that any error or accident entails catastrophic effect for unconsenting present and future generations. Nuclear technology is unique and incomparable precisely because there will be disastrous. A skeptical and distrustful public has yet to recognize and be persuaded by the fact the performance standards and licensing procedures required by EPA, NRC and DOE are not only achievable, both technically and economically, but more sufficient by ethical standards.

Conclusion

After examing two main methods of disposing high level nuclear waste materials, we see that there are both advantages and disadvantages. More research is needed to perfect each method. We also see that the public needs to be educated and informed about this issue so that there can be an understanding between the public, the government and the nuclear science community about this matter.

 

Assistant professor in lord venkateswara engineering college.I am doing phd in sathyabama university, Tamil Nadu,India.


Article from articlesbase.com


how would you sum this up?

Question by Brian S: how would you sum this up?
i need this summarized but i dont even know where to start. please help me, ill give you the best answer so you get your points.

Activities and Procedures: Delivering a Persuasive Speech The Procedure During class discussion, define and explain how people make decisions based on what they see and hear. Explain that sometimes we have to use skills to convince others about our positions. Have the students recall and list their own experiences trying to convince their friends about something, and then ask them to share these with the class. Have the students pick a proposition that not everyone would agree with such as: “nuclear power plants are superior energy sources.” Have them write a 6 to 8 – minute speech in outline form to persuade the class. Each student will then deliver this speech in front of the class while the rest of the students take notes and prepare to give the speaker feedback on the speech. The Lesson: The Voice and Body are the Best Tools Every student is a natural persuader! They have done it all their lives. Every time someone enters a conversation, he or she engages in elementary persuasion techniques. It is true, that any time students make a statement of fact, they are asserting its validity and assuming that their listener agrees. This speech goes further than a normal conversational assertion: now students have to assume that not everyone will agree with them from the start, and it is their job to make them see things their way. The goal of this speech is to change someone’s mind or way of thinking about a topic. This is not a speech to sell, as students do not ask that the listener do anything except to agree with them or to begin to listen to their way of thinking. Their message is, of course, very important in this speech, but their voice and body language are even more important. Here they will learn how their delivery can help. There are several important aspects of presentation to keep in mind; the academic elements of persuasion are:
1) Body language – make sure that they have a proper posture. If their shoulders are sagging and their legs are crossed, they will not appear as being sincere and people just will not accept their message.
2) Articulation – articulation means how their total vocal process works. There are several steps to this entire process. Students need to understand the process. First, they need air from the lungs, their vocal cords in their larynx must be working, their mouth and tongue must be in sync, and they have to make sure that they have got some saliva in their mouths to keep things oiled. They should be aware of their physical makeup to be able to understand how they speak.
3) Pronunciation – students need to pronounce each word. They must avoid slang, except to make a point, and not slur the words. They must avoid saying, “you know.”
4) Pitch – pitch refers to the highs and lows of the voice. Whatever they do, they must avoid a monotone!
5) Speed – the speed, or pace, is an important variable to control. Between 140-160 words per minute is the normal pace for a persuasive speech. Any faster and they may appear to be glib; any slower and they sound like they are lecturing. If they are not sure about their speed, tape them for one minute and then replay it and count the number of words they used in the minute! The human ear and brain can compile and decode over 400 spoken words per minute, so if they are going too slow their listeners’ minds are going to start to wander as the brains finds other ways to keep themselves occupied.
6) Pauses – the pause, or caesura, is a critical persuasive tool. When they want to emphasize a certain word, have them just pause for one second before; this highlights the word. If they really want to punch it, tell them to pause before and after the word!
7) Volume – volume is another good tool for a persuasive speech, but they should use it with caution. If they scream all the way through their speech, people will become accustomed to it and it will lose its effectiveness. On the other hand, a few well-timed shouts can liven up the speech! They must try to “project” or throw their voice out over the entire class – or speak to the last row. 8) Quality – quality of voice is gauged by the overall impact that their voice has on their listeners. Quality of voice is the net caliber of their voice, its character and attributes. They must try to keep the vocal quality high; it is what separates their voices from everyone else’s.
9) Variance – variance of vocal elements is the most important consideration of all! One of the most persuasive speakers in modern history was Winston Churchill. One of his most remarkable qualities was his ability to vary the elements of his voice. He would start with a slow, laconic voice and then switch gears to a more rapid pace. People were light-headed after listening to him! Even if they have no desire to run for political office, students can still use the tools of variance. Have them t

Best answer:

Answer by Jessica
The procedure to deliver a persuasive speech is as follows:Define and explain how people use what they see and here to make decisions. Tell how we use skills to tell convince others and tell about trying to convince friends. Write a 6 to 8 minute speech on “nuclear power plants are superior energy sources.” Deliver speech. the lesson is that everyone is a natural persuader. Use body language, articulation, pronunciation, pitch, speed, pauses, volume, quality, and variance to increase the quality of your speech.

This is just a little knock-up-job of a summary, but it’ll give you some key points that you can build on. I hope it helps. Warning, I’m not the best summarizer!

Give your answer to this question below!


Bush Administration Claims U.s. Military Can Police American Citizens

Bush Administration Claims U.s. Military Can Police American Citizens

BY MICHAEL WEBSTER: Syndicated Investigative Reporter: Dec 18, 2008 at 12:30 PM PST

The Bush administration claims that the use of the military to support civil authorities stems from core national values as expressed in the Constitution. Article I, Section 8. It states, “Congress shall have power… to provide for calling forth the Militia to execute laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections, and repel Invasions.” Article II, Section 3 states the President, “…shall take care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” The 10th Amendment reads, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it, are reserved to the States respectively…,” providing the basis that Federal government support, including DoD assistance, is provided in support of State and local authorities.

According to Gerry J. Gilmore of “Family Security Matters reports that Pentagon officials have established a new rapid-response joint task force and plan to create two more in coming years to bolster assistance to civil authorities following potential chemical, biological or nuclear attacks or natural disasters, a senior U.S. official said.

These new units will team with other federal agencies in support of local responders following chemical, biological or nuclear terror attacks on the homeland or during natural disasters, Paul McHale, assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense and Americas’ security affairs, told reporters recently.

The establishment of the new units “builds upon a decade of improving [Defense Department] capabilities to deal with a domestic terrorist attack involving a weapon of mass destruction,” McHale said.

The first new 4,700-member task force was assigned to a component of U.S. Northern Command on Oct. 1, 2008 McHale said. The new unit, he said, is built around a core of active-duty soldiers from the U.S. Army 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team based at Fort Stewart, Ga. This task force, he said, falls under the control of Northcom’s Joint Force Land Component Command, U.S. Army North, in San Antonio. Commanded by

Plans are to stand up the other two new joint task forces in 2010 and 2011, respectively, McHale said. These units, he said, mostly will comprise reserve component personnel from all the military services.

Each task force will be capable of performing tasks such as medical response, decontamination, technical rescue, patient evacuation, and communications and logistics support, to include air and land transportation assets for transport of supplies, people and equipment, according to U.S. Army North documents.

The task forces would be ordered into action by the president, McHale said, following requests for disaster-relief assistance from state governors.

The Bush administration indicates that the President is authorized by the Constitution and Title 10 (10 USC 331–334) to suppress insurrections, rebellions, and domestic violence. After issuing a Cease and Desist Order, the President issues an executive order that directs the Attorney General and the SECDEF to take appropriate steps to disperse insurgents and restore law and order. The Attorney General is then responsible to coordinate the federal response to domestic civil disturbances. The restrictions of the Posse Comitatus Act no longer apply to federal troops executing the orders of the President to quell the disturbance in accordance with Rules of the Use of Force (RUF) approved by the DoD General Counsel and the Attorney General.

Even though McHale said, the new units do not conduct law-enforcement missions. And further stated in the event of civil disturbances and some other types of national emergencies, other designated U.S. military units could be ordered by the president to help civil authorities establish order as part of the Garden Plot domestic security plan. However the USNORTHCOM Concept Plan (CONPLAN) 2502 (Civil Disturbance Operations), is the plan for supporting state and local authorities during civil disturbances. This plan serves as the foundation for any CDO operation and standardizes most activities and command relationships. Tasks performed by military forces may include joint patrolling with law enforcement officers; securing key buildings, memorials, intersections and bridges; and acting as a quick reaction force. The JTF commander, a general officer, coordinates all DoD support with the Senior Civilian Representative of the Attorney General (SCRAG). DoD will usually establish a JTF headquarters near where the Attorney General’s local representative is based.

Garden Plot is the DoD Civil Disturbance Plan, the generic Operations Plan [OPLAN] for military support related to domestic civil disturbances. The department of the Army Civil Disturbance Plan (DA GARDEN PLOT), is the governing publication for planning, deployment, employment, and redeployment of federal military resources involved in countering domestic civil disturbances. Military assistance to Federal, State, and local government (including government of U.S. territories) and their law enforcement agencies for civil disturbances and civil disturbance operations, including response to terrorist incidents, are referred to cumulatively as “Military Assistance for Civil Disturbances (MACDIS).”

The DoD Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support (2005) defines Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DSCA) as, “DoD support, including federal military forces, the Department’s career civilian and contractor personnel, and DoD agency and component assets, for domestic emergencies and for designated law enforcement and other activities.” It notes that DSCA is also often referred to as Civil Support. There has been discussion in some DoD offices of distinguishing between the two terms: Civil Support as a total force construct with DSCA involving Federal support only and not include the National Guard in Title 32 or State Active Duty status. But as of 2008 they remained essentially synonymous.

Civil disturbances are riots, acts of violence, insurrections, unlawful obstructions or assemblages, or other disorders prejudicial to public law and order. The term civil disturbance includes all domestic conditions requiring or likely to require the use of Federal Armed Forces pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 15 of Title 10, United States Code.

The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 (PCA), subsequent amendments and policy decisions prohibits the use of federal military forces (to include Reserve forces) to perform internal police functions. PCA thus restricts the type of support DoD can provide domestic law enforcement organizations. There are a wide variety of exceptions to the PCA and the law essentially gives the President all the authority he needs to employ DoD forces inside the U.S. although there may appropriately be political consequence that would inhibit such employment.

The term posse comitatus [po.si komitei.tAs, -tius , [med. (Anglo) L., force of the county: see prec. and county.] applies to the ‘The force of the county’; the body of men above the age of fifteen in a county (exclusive of peers, clergymen, and infirm persons), whom the sheriff may summon or ‘raise’ to repress a riot or for other purposes; also, a body of men actually so raised and commanded by the sheriff.

In the United States the posse comitatus was perhaps most important on the Western frontier (there known as a posse), but it has been preserved as an institution in many states. Sheriffs and other peace officers have the authority to summon the power of the county. In some counties it is a crime to refuse assistance. In general, members of a posse comitatus have been permitted to use force if necessary to achieve a posse’s legitimate ends, but state laws differ as to the legal liability of one who in good faith aids an officer himself acting beyond his authority.

Congress sought to terminate the prevalent use of federal soldiers in civilian law enforcement roles in the South during the Reconstruction Period following the Civil War. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 created general prohibition against use of military personnel in civilian law enforcement. The most renowned statutory exception has been traditionally referred to as The Insurrection Acts (10 USC 331–334) that were modified and renamed to Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order by the 2007 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The new language clarifies Presidential authority to invoke the acts for situations resulting from natural disasters and other emergencies.

Military resources may be employed in support of civilian law enforcement operations in the 50 States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the U.S. territories and possessions only in the parameters of the Constitution and laws of the United States and the authority of the President and the Secretary of Defense, including delegations of that authority through this Directive or other means.

The primary responsibility for protecting life and property and maintaining law and order in the civilian community is vested in the State and local governments. Supplementary responsibility is vested by statute in specific Agencies of the Federal Government other than the Department of Defense. The President has additional powers and responsibilities under the Constitution of the United States to ensure that law and order are maintained.

The mission at NORTHCOM is to anticipate events in the homeland and to be prepared to respond, to either prevent the attacks or defeat them if they occur and then to mitigate the consequences of those attacks should they occur. In addition, NORTHCOM has a secondary mission to provide defense support to civil authorities. It’s an old mission that the Army used to lump together under the Garden Plot scenario, in that there was always a brigade that was prepared to respond to civil disturbances.

“Our job at NORTHCOM is to ensure that if there’s a seam or a gap there that we’re thinking of how we could fill that with some other capability out of” the Defense Department “What that has forced us to do it is think about, ‘How do you solve that time/distance problem, even on a short-notice event. And so I have access to capabilities now that I didn’t have a year or two ago that I can move very quickly to fill that need. said Gen. Victor E. Renuart Jr., commander of United States Northern Command and the North American Aerospace Defense Commander.

“For example, if there were something that occurred in the El Paso area that the Texas National Guard might not have a capability immediately available to respond, but Fort Bliss did in an active-duty unit, then I would pull that active-duty unit out and make that available to the state to assist.”

They are being staged and immediately available as emergency  “on call” units for use against terrorist threats on the nation’s border and local disasters, said Gen. Renuart Jr.

Possibly the greatest challenge will be to support National Guard and reserve forces feeling the strain of repeated deployments that also have depleted equipment supplies. Guard units respond to natural disasters as well as bridge collapses and other human-caused incidents Renuart said.

The Coast Guard, as well as the other Services, is required to maintain support plans. GARDEN PLOT is the name applicable to such service plans. Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) of operational commanders should reflect guidance herein. Military assistance to civil authorities is a peacetime matter, not to be confused with military support of civil defense (MSCD), which is a wartime function.

DOD task force operations to quell civil disturbances off military property can be initiated only by Presidential order. Cases of such initiation in the past occurred during the urban political and racial unrest in the Vietnam era when federal troops were deployed on a number of occasions. GARDEN PLOT operations may include terrorist incidents, though the FBI, not the Army, will then be the lead agent. In the event of civil unrest upon the high seas and waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, where in the Coast Guard has standing statutory responsibility, Coast Guard units will in all likelihood be legitimately involved in law enforcement operations well before any Presidential invocation of civil disturbance plans. The Coast Guard character for law enforcement and cooperation with civil authorities is much broader than that of DOD services. DOD services are subject to law enforcement restrictions that are not applicable to the Coast Guard.

Cooperation with other services in GARDEN PLOT operations is paramount and requires particular understanding of task force constitution and chains of command. Civil disturbance planning cannot be deliberate in that force mix and locales are obviously indeterminate. Guidance herein will provide a basis for Coast Guard participation and related area and district supplemental instructions or other directives. Actual Coast Guard participation will in all likelihood be the logical extension of traditional law enforcement functions.

The Insurrection Act permitted the President to call the militia into Federal service to suppress insurrections and to enforce the law, including when State authorities were unable or unwilling to secure the Constitutional rights of their citizens. Rarely in U.S. history has this authority been employed. In fact, the National Guard has been federalized under the provisions of the Insurrection Act only ten (10) times since World War II.

It is believed by critic’s and other patriots that the U.S. Government plans to exercise these options and imprison citizen decedents.

America’s leading authority on Venture Capital/Equity Funding. A trustee on some of the nations largest trade Union funds. A noted Author, Lecturer, Educator, Emergency Manager, Counter-Terrorist, War on Drugs and War on Terrorist Specialist, Business Consultant, Newspaper Publisher. Radio News caster. Labor Law generalist, Teamster Union Business Agent, General Organizer, Union Rank and File Member Grievances Representative, NLRB Union Representative, Union Contract Negotiator, Workers Compensation Appeals Board Hearing Representative. Investigative Reporter for print, electronic and on-line News Agencies.


Article from articlesbase.com

Related Nuclear Career Discussion Articles


Isn’t it about time?

Question by ? Dea??n ? Knight: Isn’t it about time?
(CNN) — Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili has had a change of heart about gays in the military.

Shalikashvili, who was the top military man when President Clinton’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy became law in 1993, wrote in a recent New York Times editorial that he was convinced by gay service members that “don’t tell” can disappear.

“I now believe that if gay men and lesbians served openly in the United States military, they would not undermine the efficacy of the armed forces,” he wrote in the January 2 edition of the Times. “Our military has been stretched thin by our deployments in the Middle East, and we must welcome the service of any American who is willing and able to do the job.” (Watch to learn more about the retired general’s about-face )

The “don’t ask” means commanders are prohibited from questioning a service member about sexual orientation while “don’t tell” refers to the stipulation that gay and lesbian troops must keep their sexual orientation a secret.

President Clinton’s policy brought the highly charged issue of gays in the military to the center of public discussion. At the time, Shalikashvili, supported the policy, believing that openly gay servicemen and women would hurt the military’s cohesion.

With President Bush now calling for a larger military, the issue is sure to become fodder again for political and social debate. (Send us your thoughts on this issue)

Shalikashvili wrote that his position change came after meeting with gay troops, including “some with combat experience in Iraq, and an openly gay senior sailor who was serving effectively as a member of a nuclear submarine crew.

“These conversations showed me just how much the military has changed, and that gays and lesbians can be accepted by their peers.”

‘A political issue, not a military issue’
for the whole article click here

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/01/30/pysk.shalikashvili/index.html

Don’t you agree that anyone willing to fight and die for our country deserves the chance to do so regardless of sexual orientation?

Best answer:

Answer by Ludd_wants_your_imaginary_soul
I’d just be disappointed in them for joining the war-mongering army.

Add your own answer in the comments!


  • Site Search

  • Copyright © 1996-2010 Nuclear Jobs Online. All rights reserved.

    Home  |   About  |   Executive Construction Jobs   |   Terms  |   Privacy  |   Trade Jobs  |   Energy Jobs  |   Networking  |   Specials  |   Resources  |   Sitemap  |   Contact  |   Specials  |   Entries (RSS)  |   and Comments (RSS).







    © 2012 - Nuclear Jobs Online


    Hot topics include: nuclear power jobs, nuclear job, nuclear power plant jobs, nuclear energy job in beijing, nuclear careers, nuclear career, nuclear employment, nuclear plant jobs, nuclear job opportunities, nuclear engineer, nuclear medicine jobs, nuclear engineering, nuclear engineer, nuclear work, nuclear power plants jobs, nuclear power job, nuclear technician jobs, nuclear tech jobs, nuclear technologist jobs, nuclear reactor jobs, nuclear medicine tech jobs, nuclear medicine technologist jobs, nuclear medicine job, nuclear salary, nuclear engineering salary, nuclear engineer salary, nuclear plant jobs, nuclear construction jobs, alternative energy jobs, green energy jobs, clean energy jobs in beijing and nuclear resumes.