Future of Nuclear Power in the United States

“Our work has changed the conditions in which men live, but the use made of these changes is the problem of governments, not of scientists.”

J. Robert Oppenheimer, nuclear physicist, 1904-1967

Nuclear energy, the peaceful descendant of the atomic bomb, has been a divisive issue among scientists, governments, and communities for several decades. This is especially true in the United States, home of nearly a quarter of the world’s nuclear power facilities. Oppenheimer, one of many midwives present at the birth of the atomic age, saw the hand-off of nuclear responsibility from scientists to the government. Would he have been pleased or dismayed to see that half a century later, new scientists would return to the now-adolescent industry on the brink between sustainable energy and political quagmire? This paper will summarize the past, explain the present, and assess the future potential of nuclear power in the United States.

How it works

Nuclear power is created from the splitting of atoms--usually a uranium isotope--resulting in the discharge of neutrons and heat. The heat is converted to steam, which then powers a turbine, converting the heat energy into electricity. The structure of a nuclear reactor can be simplified into the following elements: fuel to create the reaction (ceramic uranium pellets encased in zirconium alloy rods), coolant to keep the reaction from overheating (often just water), a moderator to slow or stabilize the release of neutrons and the speed of the reaction (again, plain old water), highly pressurized pipes to shuttle all the water and coolant, a steam generator (basically a heat exchanger) and a protective containment structure, usually three to four feet of concrete (Nuclear Energy Institute, 2016). A large nuclear power plant (think Homer Simpson’s fictional facility in Springfield) would consist of several reactors working side-by-side, and can generate up to 1,400 megawatts (MW) of power.

FDA Cosmetics Approval Process

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not approve cosmetics, but does have regulatory authority2. However, the line between cosmetics and drugs, as defined by the agency, can get blurry. A cosmetic is anything we smear, rub or otherwise apply to our bodies to clean ourselves or to change our appearance. A drug is a substance consumed in order to treat or mitigate a disease or condition3. Some cosmetics can be classified as drugs due to their intended use. For example, a substance marketed as an anti-aging moisturizer is a cosmetic, but if it claims to “boost collagen production” or “encourage growth of new skin cells” then you’re heading into drug territory.

The largest area of overlap between drugs and cosmetics is in products like anti-dandruff shampoo, sunscreens, and antiperspirants. These products fall into the category of over-the-counter (OTC) drugs, and as long as they adhere to predefined strengths, uses and applications, require no special approvals.

As with many regulatory bodies, the instigating event that led to the formation of the FDA, as we know now it, was a tragic one.

The Holidays and the Heart of Darkness

For some, the autumnal equinox is a time of celebration. The increasingly shorter days usher in

Voted best beer in which to drown holiday sorrows.

holidays in October, November and December in a blur of festive celebration with family and friends. For others however, the September solstice represents the start of a dark season, both literally and figuratively for people suffering from seasonal affective disorder (SAD). While others revel in holiday spirit, those afflicted with SAD experience profound mental and emotional changes as a result of the changing amount of daylight.