I was at a branch of the University of Texas of the Permian Basin for seven years working on an advanced nuclear reactor. Generation IV nuclear reactors. Radiation safety. Nuclear fusion. Since moved into government nuclear work.
Drew the laboratory design for a Generation IV nuclear research reactor Doctoral research on stellar nuclear fusion reactions if your question is on fusion power.
Ph.D. in physics (nuclear physics), Duke University. Taught physics, radiation safety, and nuclear engineering courses at UTPB for 7 years before moving into government work.
9000 meters is a standard altitude, and it won't make much of a difference unless the altitude is small compared to the actual area of the lake that is contaminated. In short, no. You can't just assume
That's a lengthy follow-up, and I'm on travel. I'll answer it, because these seem pretty simple, but try to split these questions into separate queries. 1) The Ural question. 40 Ci/km^2 is generally
Thank you for asking this question, because it allows me several opportunities. The first being to allay your fears completely, and I'm as skittish about real radiation doses as science tells me I should
Well, oil and greases don't have a lot to do with a nuclear power plant, except maybe in the bearings of the steam turbines. And steam turbines are pretty well understood by this point. Since they typically
I would stop reading "news" from that site entirely. They're talking about fCi/m^3. The gross alpha standard is actually 15 pCi/liter ( http://www.epa.gov/dwreginfo/radionuclides-rule). A pCi is 1000
Answers by Expert: