Review of Atomic Awakening

I recently read a very interesting book on the history of nuclear power and its possible future, Atomic Awakening: A New Look at the History and Future of Nuclear Power by James Mahaffey. Something like 90% of the book was history, the history of physics, nuclear physics, the Manhattan project, the nuclear bombs, the nuclear tests, nuclear reactors, etc.

About 10% of the book examined the viability of nuclear power and discussed the public’s fear of it. His approach to that is something like; well, no wonder people are afraid of nuclear power, look at the history. However, that fear is still irrational. The awesome power of nuclear power can give us safe and clean energy, replace fossil fuels and fight global warming, and also take us to the stars. He points out that nuclear reactions are millions of times more powerful than chemical reactions.

What Are Isotopes?

I should explain what an isotope is. Atoms consist of a nucleus and electrons surrounding the nucleus. In the nucleus there are protons and neutrons (and some other stuff). Neutral atoms have an equal amount of electrons and protons, which determines what kind of element it is. Hydrogen has one electron and one proton. Helium has two electrons and two protons. Oxygen has eight electrons and eight protons, etc. The number of protons/electrons is called the atomic number of the element.

The number of protons plus the number of neutrons is called the mass number. Atoms of the same element but different number of neutrons are called isotopes. Uranium-235 or U-235 has 92 protons and 235 – 92 = 143 neutrons. The number if protons/electrons determine the chemical properties of the element. The number of neutrons determines nuclear properties such as the stability of the nucleus, radioactivity, etc., as well as the weight. Therefore U-238 and U-235 are identical chemically and look and feel the same, but U-235 is more radioactive, and you can use U-235 for fission but not U-238.

Illustration of nuclear chain reaction. Uranium-235 fission.
This is an illustration of a chain reaction with fission of a Uranium-235 isotope. Notice the atomic number (number of protons) is incorrectly stated as 95 in the picture. It is 92.  When I have time, I will fix that. Shutterstock Asset id: 73714504 by Mpanchenko.

Cesium-137 in my Pocket

Before I continue with my review of the book I am going to tell a story about my crazy adventure with a Cesium-137, a very radioactive and dangerous isotope. In fact, Atomic Awakening claims that Cesium-137 and Strontium-90 are the two isotopes of the greatest concern with regards to nuclear waste.

Once when I was a young student of engineering physics, I was around 20 years old, we were doing experiments with radioactivity. We were using Cesium-137. There were signs on the walls warning about radioactivity and the Cesium-137 sample was enclosed in a little house built from lead bricks. We were supposed to quickly remove the lead bricks, take out the sample, do the experiment quickly, put the sample back and enclose it with the lead bricks. However, I got distracted by something and put the Cesium-137 sample in the back pocket of my jeans.

I walked around school with the Cesium-137 sample in my back pocket the whole day and after school I went shopping at the grocery store still having it in my back pocket. I discovered it once I got back to my room. I put in a drawer and stayed as far away from it as I could. The next day I woke up early, put the sample in my bag, went to the lab at school and when no one was looking I put the sample back in the lead brick house.

No, I don’t have any extra heads growing out of my buttocks, and I did not turn into the Hulk, but so much for nuclear safety.

Atomic Awakening Formats

Atomic Awakening: A New Look at the History and Future of Nuclear Power by James Mahaffey comes in four formats. I bought the hardback format.

  • Hardcover –  Publisher : Pegasus Books (June 23, 2009), ASIN : 1605980404, ISBN-13 : 978-1605980409, 352 pages, item weight : 1.42 pounds, dimensions : ‎ 6.4 x 1.2 x 9.3 inches, it costs $49.29 on US Amazon. Click here to order it from Amazon.com.
  • Paperback –  Publisher – Pegasus Books (October 15, 2010), ISBN-10 : 1605981273, ISBN-13 : 978-1605981277, 368 pages, item weight : 12.8 ounces, dimensions : ‎ 6 x 0.92 x 9 inches, it costs $15.63 on US Amazon. Click here to order it from Amazon.com.
  • Kindle –  Publisher : Pegasus Books (October 15, 2010), ASIN : B004GUS68I, ISBN-13 : 978-1605982038, Item 369 pages, it costs $13.99 on US Amazon. Click here to order it from Amazon.com.
  • Audio–  Publisher : Audible Studios (September 24, 2013), Listening Length : 11 hours and 44 minutes, ASIN : B00FBPGS78, it costs $21.83 on US Amazon. Click here to order it from Amazon.com.
Front cover of hardback format of the book Atomic Awakening: A New Look at the History and Future of Nuclear Power By James Mahaffey
Front cover of hardback format of the book Atomic Awakening: A New Look at the History and Future of Nuclear Power. Click on the image to go to the Amazon page for the hardcover version of the book.

Amazon’s Description of Atomic Awakening

Nuclear power is a paradox of danger and salvation―how is it that the renewable energy source our society so desperately needs is the one we are most afraid to use?

The American public’s introduction to nuclear technology was manifested in destruction and death. With Hiroshima and the Cold War still ringing in our ears, our perception of all things nuclear is seen through the lens of weapons development. Nuclear power is full of mind-bending theories, deep secrets, and the misdirection of public consciousness, some deliberate, some accidental. The result of this fixation on bombs and fallout is that the development of a non-polluting, renewable energy source stands frozen in time.

It has been said that if gasoline were first used to make napalm bombs, we would all be driving electric cars. Our skewed perception of nuclear power is what makes James Mahaffey’s new look at the extraordinary paradox of nuclear power so compelling. From medieval alchemy to Marie Curie, Albert Einstein, and the Manhattan Project, atomic science is far from the spawn of a wicked weapons program. The discovery that the atom can be split brought forth the ultimate puzzle of the modern age: Now that the energy of the universe is available to us, how do we use it? For death and destruction? Or as a fuel for our society that has a minimal impact on the environment and future generations?

Outlining nuclear energy’s discovery and applications throughout history, Mahaffey’s brilliant and accessible book is essential to understanding the astounding phenomenon of nuclear power in an age where renewable energy and climate change have become the defining concerns of the twenty-first century.

My five-star review for Atomic Awakening

The Amazing History of Everything Nuclear

The book is divided into three parts with five chapters each. The first third of the book (titled the Fantasy) recounts the history of physics, electromagnetics, light, the Michelson-Morley experiment, relativity, the nonexistence of simultaneous events, Einstein’s miraculous year, atoms, spectrometry, atomic models, isotopes, the photoelectric effect, radioactivity, quantum physics, nuclear physics, nuclear decay, fission, fusion, and why nuclear reactions are millions of times more energetic than chemical reactions. I already knew a lot of this history having a degree in physics, but I did not know all of it and the way it was written made it very interesting.

The second third of the book (titled the Puzzle) describes the discovery of fission and fusion and it is explained why the isotopes Uranium-235 and Plutonium-239 (among 3000+ isotopes) were perfect for fission. The author provides an account of the Manhattan Project’s history, and he explains in a general sense how a nuclear reactor and a nuclear bomb work. This section reminded me of the movie Oppenheimer. He describes a bit about the various nuclear reactor designs and how the first nuclear submarine came into existence.

This part of the book is filled with interesting and surprising anecdotes about the various scientists. The first part of the book also contained many interesting anecdotes, but this part of the book really has some very interesting and crazy stories to tell. The author points out that because of Hitler there were many Jewish top scientist and other top scientists who had to flee Europe to the US, thus turning the United States into the scientific superpower it wasn’t before. He explains why the Germans did not have a chance creating a nuclear bomb. I found it interesting that the Soviets deduced that the US was working on a nuclear bomb from the fact that so many US. physicist stopped publishing in physics journals. Apparently, the Germans and the Japanese did not figure this out. However, silence is suspicious, very suspicious.

The third part of the book (titled the Paradox) is about what came after the Second World War. The author describes the development of better and safer nuclear reactors (BWR, PWR, CANDU, etc.) as well as giving us an overview of many nuclear accidents, one of them being the terrible Chernobyl accident, which largely happened because of the extremely dangerous and bad reactor design, a so called RBMK reactor. RBMK reactors are monsters that cannot be built in the West. He recounts the development of new nuclear bomb technology, such as thermonuclear bombs, more popularly called hydrogen bombs.

He also tells us about the large number of nuclear tests performed including the detonation of Tsar Bomba, the Soviet 50 Megaton bomb. It was 3,300 times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb. He makes it clear that there were thousands of nuclear bomb tests, but he did not specify an exact number, but I looked it up. There’s been more than 2,000 nuclear tests corresponding to a yield of 42,000 Hiroshima bombs. Many of the tests were not military. For example, project plowshare was about making a bigger and deeper Panama Canal by blowing a series of deep holes through Panama using hydrogen bombs. There were 35 nuclear bombs tests to determine the feasibility of creating giant holes with hydrogen bombs. He also explains how a nuclear bomb driven spaceship works and how we could have used it for interstellar space travel (Project Orion).

Towards the end of the book, he successfully makes the case that modern Nuclear Power (not the RBMK of course) is safe and clean. We avoid pollution, and it can be used to fight global warming. The same is true for solar and wind. However, he argues that the base power source must be constantly running, high-output nuclear stations. He argues that the public got a very bad impression of anything nuclear because of how it all started with nuclear bombs, nuclear tests, bad reactor designs and accidents, and how misinformation and miscalculations added to the bad impression. We often ignore the many tens of millions of victims of fossil fuels, and the hundreds of thousands of deaths from hydro, while exaggerating the dangers of nuclear power.

However, in nuclear power we have an immense power source that we are eventually bound to start using. That’s the Atomic Awakening. One of the shocking statements in this part of the book is that “all the medical and industrial radioisotopes, used daily in impressive quantities in the United States, are made in one reactor in Canada”. He blamed this on irrational fear of nuclear power. I checked whether this scary situation still existed today. Luckily, it is not as bad. Medical and industrial radioisotopes are still all imported but they also come from Europe and Australia. It is not just one reactor in Canada. He states that “the Paradox of Nuclear Power is that far more people die each year of radiation-induced disease from standing out in the sun than have ever died from the application of nuclear power” (page 223).

There were a few things that I did not like about the book. The first is that the author often describes complex experimental setups, designs, or tools that really could be better understood with an illustration, or a picture, but there were none. I found a typo on page 308, where he refers to fission as fusion in the third sentence. I think he spent too little space on the feasibility of Nuclear Power in the modern world and maybe too much on the history of physics. Nuclear Power seems to be what the book should be about and yet this topic was concentrated to the last 10% of the book and I don’t think he made his case as well as he could have. The end of the book seems rushed. On the other hand, it was a fascinating journey before we got there. Overall, I think this book is extremely interesting, it was a fun to read, and it was fact filled and a great learning experience. I loved reading this book, so even though I have a few misgivings I still think it is a five-star book. I highly recommend it.

Back cover of hardback format of the book Atomic Awakening: A New Look at the History and Future of Nuclear Power By James Mahaffey
Back cover of hardback format of the book Atomic Awakening: A New Look at the History and Future of Nuclear Power. Click on the image to go to the Amazon page for the paperback version of the book.

Other Nuclear Related Posts


To see the Super Facts click here

Nonsense and Rumors About Wind Power

“Nonsense and Rumors About Wind Power” is not a super-fact post but just what I consider interesting information regarding nonsense and rumors about wind power.

Wind power has been on the receiving end of false claims, nonsense, and strange rumors for a while. It is not the only energy source maligned by false information. Another example is Nuclear Power. However, this post is about some of the incorrect claims about wind power that I have come across. I am starting out with three bizarre claims.

Nonsense and Rumors About Wind Power
Photo by Kervin Edward Lara on Pexels.com

False claim : Wind Power requires an additional power source to operate (like a diesel engine)

This bizarre claim is akin to saying that sailboats need a diesel motor to sail. If you get something to rotate (a turbine), whether it is pushed by running water, wind, or an engine, and you connect it to a coil in a magnetic field (generator), you get electricity. This is high school physics. You don’t need anything else. It is the principle behind hydro power, nuclear power, coal power, gas power, and wind power.

For a wind power station, the moving air rotates the wind turbine’s blades. That turning motion spins a generator just downwind from the blades (or rotor) in the nacelle, which also stores all the other working parts of a turbine. The generator produces electricity. When you read about how wind power works it says nothing about an additional power source needed (or click here).

For fun let’s also ask Google AI : Does wind power use other energy sources while operating?

Google AI: No, wind power itself does not use any other energy sources while operating; it solely harnesses the kinetic energy from the wind to generate electricity, meaning it only relies on wind to function as its primary energy source.

However, it should be noted that wind power is intermittent, so if it is part of a power grid other power sources or energy storage/batteries may need to be used more when wind speeds are too low to generate electricity.

Also, as is true with any power source, energy is needed when constructing wind power plants. In addition, a small amount of external electricity may be needed for startup and maintenance. It is possible that these facts were misunderstood and turned into “Wind Power requires an additional power source to operate” by confused listeners.

Nonsense and Rumors About Wind Power
Photo by Nitin Sharma on Pexels.com

False claim : Wind Power generates less power than it consumes

This is another bizarre claim made by confused politicians (here in Texas). If wind power generated less power than it consumed, why would anyone invest in it?

The Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) states that the average wind farm will pay back the energy that was used in its manufacture within 3-5 months of operation. This article in the journal Renewable Energy found that the average windfarm produces 20-25 times more energy during its operational life than was used to construct and install its turbines. It included data from 119 turbines across 50 sites going back 30 years.

For fun let’s ask ChatGPT this question : Does wind Power generate less power than it consumes?

ChatGPT : Wind power does not consume more energy than it generates. In fact, wind power is one of the most efficient and sustainable energy sources available. The energy required to manufacture, install, and maintain wind turbines is small compared to the energy they produce over their lifespan. This is known as their energy return on investment (EROI), which is quite favorable for wind energy.

Nonsense and Rumors About Wind Power
Photo by Andrew Del Castilho on Pexels.com

False claim : The sound from wind power stations cause cancer

Donald Trump stated on April 2, 2019, in a speech to the National Republican Congressional Committee that “The noise (from windmills) causes cancer.” A poll was conducted in Iowa, a state where wind power is thriving and only 1% of registered voters agreed with Trump that wind turbines cause cancer, 84% disagreed and 15% did not know. So, it is not a widespread belief, but it does exist. The claim was quickly debunked by the American Cancer Society.

On the contrary, the pollution from the fossil fuel power plants that wind power will likely replace causes cancer.

Just for fun let’s ask ChatGPT this question : Does windpower cause cancer?

ChatGPT : No, wind power does not cause cancer. There is no scientific evidence to support the claim that wind turbines or wind energy have any connection to causing cancer. This misconception might stem from misinformation or misunderstandings about how wind turbines work. Wind power is a clean and renewable energy source, and studies have shown that it does not pose significant health risks.

Some people have raised concerns about possible health effects from wind turbines, such as “wind turbine syndrome,” which includes symptoms like headaches or sleep disturbances attributed to the noise or vibrations of turbines. However, extensive studies have not found conclusive evidence to support these claims either. The noise levels and vibrations from wind turbines are generally well within safety limits set by health and environmental standards.

Solar panels and wind turbines.
Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

Next, I am going to focus on three claims which are partially true but that are greatly exaggerated and need to be understood in context.

False claim : Wind power kills an enormous amount of birds causing an environmental disaster

Wind power killing birds is often presented as if it is a huge environmental problem and only a problem for wind power. When presented this way it is false. A study made in 2012 claimed that fossil fuels killed 24 million birds per year in the US, which correspond to 35 times more birds per GWh than wind power kills. That means that wind power saves the life of birds as it replaces fossil fuels.

In addition, the biggest bird killer is not fossil fuels but cats. Cats kill 5,600 times more birds than wind power stations and 77 times more birds than fossil fuels. See the graph from Wikipedia below. The problem with wind power plants killing birds should be addressed (and has been addressed) but let’s be honest about the scale of the problem.

The graph shows that Wind Turbines kill 328,000 birds per year in the US, Electrocutions kill 6,250,000 birds, Collisions with powerlines kill 32,500,000 birds, Poison kills 72,000,000 birds, Vehicle collisions kill 214,500,000 birds, Collisions with glass kill 676,500,000 birds, and cats kill 1,850,700,000 birds per year in the US.
From Wikipedia: Universiteit van Nederland, CC BY 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0&gt;, via Wikimedia Commons

False claim : Wind power is only a marginal energy source

Wind power currently accounts for around 7.8%  of the world’s electricity up from 3.5% in 2015 and 1.63% in 2010. Wind power accounts for 10% of US electricity and 57.7% of Denmark’s electricity. It may also some as a surprise to some that in the fossil fuel capital of the world, the great state of Texas, where I live, wind represented 28.6 percent of the energy generation in 2023, second only to natural gas (41.8 percent). That is not a marginal energy source.

I can add that Texans are in general not favorable towards wind, and the local politicians are hostile towards wind. Fossil fuel is after all our bread and butter. Why wind power is so prominent in Texas is because of the Texas ERCOT system in which energy sources compete on price and the cheapest always goes first. In practice that means wind goes first.

Wind turbines, sunset in the background.
Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

False claim : Wind power is extremely expensive

Wind power used to be expensive. It has been and still is subsidized by the government, but that is basically true for all energy sources, not just wind. Below is the average unsubsidized levelized cost of energy according to Lazard (from Wikipedia). Notice that the light blue line indicates that wind power is pretty cheap.

The image shows 8 graphs representing the price of Nuclear, Gas (peaker), Thermal Solar, Coal, Geothermal, Natural Gas, Solar Panels, and Wind. Today Wind is the cheapest.
Mir-445511, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0&gt;, via Wikimedia Commons.

To see the Super Facts click here