Tag: Super Facts

Carbon Capture and Storage an Unfulfilled Promise

Superfact 99: Carbon capture is the process of separating carbon dioxide from industrial emissions. Even though it works and could be helpful it isn’t used very much, at least not the right way.

Esther’s writing prompt: April 29, 2026: Capture

Click here or here  to join in.

Carbon capture and storage is the process of separating carbon dioxide (CO2) from industrial emissions to prevent it from entering the atmosphere and contributing to climate change. There are also systems that can remove carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere, but this is expensive. After capturing the carbon dioxide, it is compressed and stored permanently underground or used in products.

Capturing carbon dioxide from concentrated sources like ethanol or natural gas plants can cost as little as $15–$25 per ton, which should be compared to the huge cost from the damage to health and the environment caused by carbon dioxide added to atmosphere. This cost ranges from several hundred dollars per ton, to thousands of dollars per ton, and even one hundred thousand dollars per ton according to some estimates. Yet it has only captured about 0.1% of global emissions, making its overall climate impact negligible. Instead of storing the captured carbon dioxide it is often injected into nearly depleted oil wells to force out the remaining oil.

If you have not heard about carbon capture before, its existence may be a surprise to you. If you do know about carbon capture it is likely to come as a surprise to you that it is a potentially promising technology that is underutilized and not used correctly. The facts around this technology are surprising, which is why I call it a super fact.

The illustration shows a geological cross section and includes an ethanol plant, and a coal fired power plant capturing emissions buried below earth’s surface. | Carbon Capture and Storage an Unfulfilled Promise
With CCS, carbon dioxide is captured from a point source, such as an ethanol refinery. It is usually transported via pipelines and then either used to extract oil or stored in a dedicated geologic formation. Congressional Budget Office, U.S. Federal Government, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

Carbon dioxide and Global Warming

Global warming, or if you call it climate change, is happening and it is happening very fast. We also know that it is caused by us primarily as a result of our burning of fossil fuels. The primary culprit is carbon dioxide. There is a long-standing scientific consensus on these two/three facts because the evidence is conclusive. Some organizations and contrarians have successfully confused the public, but that does not mean there is a serious scientific discussion on the issue. To read more about this click here.

The damage caused by carbon dioxide to human health and the environment is difficult to assess, but you can get an idea, and you can put a dollar price on it. The economist William Nordhaus did this and got the Nobel Prize in economy for it in 2018. See my review for his book The Climate Casino. Now the question is what to do about it, and carbon capture and storage is one potential option.

Graph showing possible causes for the observed temperature (blue), natural causes (volcanic, solar), human and natural causes (volcanic, solar, greenhouse gases, NO2, ozone depletion).
Natural causes for global warming / climate change would have cooled the planet, not warm it. Click here to visit this NASA web page regarding the causes behind global warming.

Carbon capture and storage an unfulfilled promise

The following is to a large degree my opinion, not just fact. Carbon capture and storage is a good idea. However, it adds costs to the production of energy, a cost someone must pay for. It seems like a no brainer that if carbon dioxide creates a social cost of several hundred dollars per ton, then paying much less than that to mitigate the emissions would be a good idea. However, the social cost that carbon dioxide imposes on all of us is imposed on all of us whether we are responsible for the emissions or not. Whereas the cost for carbon capture is a cost to a specific company or person responsible for the emissions.

Even though the cost for carbon capture may only be a few dollars added to the natural gas bill or a few cents per gallon on a gas tank it is a cost that is not incurred by your competitor who is not doing carbon capture. Unless the governments of the world either pay for carbon capture or put a price on carbon emissions, carbon capture isn’t going to be economically viable.

In addition, carbon capture and storage has been disappointing in other ways. It has been more difficult and expensive than expected. It has been used to extract more fossil fuels rather than removing carbon emissions. In addition, renewable energy has become so cheap that it is cheaper to use renewable energy instead of fossil fuels with carbon capture.

My Other Responses to Esther’s Prompts

To see the Other Super Facts click here

Smorgasbord Blog Magazine shares Superfact number 19

Please take a look at Smorgasbord Blog Magazine’s of my super fact #19 “An account impersonating you on Facebook does not mean you have been hacked“.

Smorgasbord Blog Magazine – Thomas Wikman’s Superfacts – An account impersonating you on Facebook doesn’t mean you were hacked
To see the other Super Facts click here

Mosquitos and Snakes Kill Hundreds of Thousands of People Annually

Super fact 98 : The deadliest animals in the world are mosquitos, snakes and dogs. Mosquitos kill an estimated 760,000 people each year. Snakes kill an estimated 100,000 people each year. Dogs kill an estimated 40,000 people each year. By comparison humans kill on average 600,000 other humans annually due to wars and violence.

The picture feature purple bar graphs with animal pictures and animal names. The numbers indicate the number of people killed each year (well 2023) by an animal. The numbers are Mosquitos 760,000, Humans 600,000, Snakes 100,000, Dogs 40,000, Freshwater Snails 14,000, Kissing bugs 8,000, Sandflies 5,000, Roundworms 4,000, Scorpions 3,000, Tapeworms 2,000, Tsetse flies 1,500, Elephants 1,000, Bees, wasps and hornets 500, Big cats 300, Crocodiles > 150, Jellyfish 100, Hippopotamuses > 50, Spiders 50, Bears 20, Sharks 6, Gray wolves 5.
Estimates for the number of humans killed by different animals in 2023. Note: This is not an exhaustive list. Estimates come with significant uncertainty and are used for relative magnitude comparisons. Figures have been rounded to not overstate accuracy. Data sources: IHME; GBD (2025); World Health Organization; CrocAttack; ISAF; and others. See the full documentation at https://docs.owid.io/projects/etl/analyses/deadliest_animals/   OurWorldInData –  Research and data to make progress against the world’s largest problems.  Licensed under CC-BY by the authors Hannah Ritchie and Fiona Spooner.

The first time I heard that the deadliest animal in the world was the mosquito I was surprised. After I heard that the reason was all the diseases that mosquitos spread, such as malaria, dengue fever, and yellow fever, it made more sense to me. I recently learned that snakes kill 100,000 people every year. It surprised me because it seemed like a lot to me.

I was also surprised to learn that our best friends the dogs, come in as number three on the list of deadliest animals, at an annual kill rate of 40,000 people. Even though scorpions are not at the top of the list they kill 3,000 people annually, while spiders only kill 50 people. We have both venomous spiders and scorpions where I live, but I’ve been worried about spiders, not scorpions. It is also surprising to me that sharks only kill about 6 people per year. I guess my super fact 98 is a collection of facts regarding “killer animals” rather than one specific fact. I am hoping that at least one of the facts will be surprising to you.

I should mention that the numbers vary over time and different sources give different statistics. Therefore, the numbers should be seen as ballpark numbers and not exactly. However, Our World in Data is considered one reputable and highly reliable data source that is frequently cited in scientific journals, and access is free.

Mosquitos Kill 760,000 People Each Year

Mosquitos are the biggest killers of humans by far. 80% of those deaths are the result of malaria which is transmitted and spread by the Anopheles mosquito. We have made progress against malaria, and it used to be worse. In the 20th century 150 to 200 million people died from malaria, which is more than one and half million people per year. Smallpox killed 300 million people in the 20th century, but it was entirely eradicated by 1977 thanks to the smallpox vaccine. The two existing vaccines for malaria are relatively recent (2021 & 2023), not as effective as the smallpox vaccine was, and not yet as widely used, which is one reason malaria is still a major health concern.

The picture shows a mosquito biting human skin. It is already filled up with blood. | Mosquitos and Snakes Kill Hundreds of Thousands of People Annually
The Aedes aegypti mosquito, which spreads dengue fever and yellow fever. Original author: US Department of Agriculture; then denoised rescaled, enhanced with adaptive denoising filters and minimal resharpening, then unscaled to original resolution, for easier refitting at various resolutions., Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

In addition, mosquitos spread other diseases killing more than 100,000 people every year. Dengue fever, yellow fever and Japanese encephalitis, are a few of the more dangerous mosquito borne diseases.

Snakes Kill 100,000 People Each Year

The death toll from venomous snakes is uncertain but it is likely to be 100,000 deaths per year. The World Health Organization estimates that snake bites kill between 81,410 and 137,880 each year.

The most venomous snake in the world is the Inland Taipan. Its venom can kill over 100 people in a single bite. However, due to its shy nature and remote Australian habitat, no human deaths have been attributed to it. The most dangerous snake to humans, in terms of fatalities, is often considered the Russell’s viper, responsible for 25,000 deaths annually. Other snakes that kill several thousand people every year are the saw-scaled viper, the common krait, the Indian cobra in Asia, and the black mamba.

The photo shows a brown speckled snake with a head that does not appear wider than the body unlike the head of vipers. | Mosquitos and Snakes Kill Hundreds of Thousands of People Annually
Inland Taipan. XLerate, CC BY-SA 3.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/, via Wikimedia Commons.
The photo shows a light brown snake with dark brown spots and triangular viper head. | Mosquitos and Snakes Kill Hundreds of Thousands of People Annually
Russel’s Viper in the CME Dapodi campus. Photographed by Abhinav Chawla (self). AChawla, CC BY-SA 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0, via Wikimedia Commons.
A beige spectacled cobra with flared hood looking into the camera. | Mosquitos and Snakes Kill Hundreds of Thousands of People Annually
The Indian Cobra, here photographed at Hoskote, Karnataka, is one of the most dangerous snakes in all of Asia. Pavan Kumar N, CC BY-SA 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0&gt;, via Wikimedia Commons.

Dogs Kill 40,000 People Each Year

Our mini-Australian Shepherd puppy Rollo is lying on a blanket.
Did you kill 40,000 people? Actually, our mini-Australian Shepherd Rollo did not kill anybody.

Even though there are some large and dangerous dogs, most deaths caused by dogs is from rabies resulting from being bitten by a rabies infected dog. See the horror movie Cujo.

Freshwater Snails, Kissing Bugs, Sandflies, Roundworms are Mass Killers

Other critters that kill thousand of people every year are freshwater snails, kissing bugs, sandflies, and roundworms. These critters kill people by infecting them with dangerous parasites or as in the case of roundworms, being a dangerous parasite.

Scorpions Kill 3,000 People Each Year but Spiders Only 50

I was at an overnight outing with the guys at work. I had just moved to Texas. We were standing or sitting around the fire drinking beer when I asked a question. I’ve heard about the scorpions in Texas, but I’ve never seen any. How common are scorpions?

A coworker named Gary told me to turn around, so I did. Behind me was a tree, and the tree was covered by crawling scorpions. Well, I was glad I did not lean on it. The scorpions I saw were the striped bark scorpion.

The reason scorpions kill a lot more people than spiders is that some scorpion species have a very potent and deadly venom. Some spiders are dangerous too, but spiders tend to have less potent venom.

A yellow, beige scorpion with light brown stripes.
Striped Bark Scorpion (Centruroides vittatus) Striped Bark Scorpion (Centruroides vittatus). Charles & Clint, CC BY 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

The Big Cats kill only 300 People Annually and Sharks Only 6

Would you prefer to stay in a room with a Tiger or with a mosquito? Mosquitos kill 760,000 people every year, whilst Tigers only kill a handful of people every year. However, Tigers don’t kill less people than mosquitos because they are less dangerous than mosquitos. The difference is exposure. Mosquitos are everywhere but not Tigers. If Tigers were as common as people and everywhere people were, the numbers probably would be different.

Bengal Tiger walking next to a forest.
Bengal tiger (Panthera tigris tigris) female, Kanha National Park, India. Attribution: Charles James Sharp.

Other Posts Related to Animals

To see the other Super Facts click here

Electrons Have Spin Without Spinning

Super fact 97 : Things that spin have an angular momentum and if electrically charged they also generate a magnetic field (magnetic dipole). This is true for electrons and many other elementary particles. However, electrons are not physically spinning. This “spin” is an intrinsic property like electrical charge or mass. In addition, the electron has “Spin 1/2,” meaning you must rotate its wave function 720 degrees (two full circles) to get back to where you started. Moreover, this half spin oddity makes the existence of matter possible.

The picture shows a red ball representing a particle with +1/2 spin and a blue particle with -1/2 spin. The red spinning ball creates a magnetic dipole with the north pointing up and the south down. The spinning blue ball does the opposite. | Electrons Have Spin Without Spinning
The electron behaves as if it were spinning about an axis, thereby generating a magnetic field whose direction depends on the direction of spin. Shutterstock asset id: 1945241416 by Fouad A. Saad.

An electron with spin +1/2 will align parallel with an external magnetic field while an electron with spin -1/2 will align in the opposite direction. The existence of intrinsic spin and the fact that the half spin property requires you to rotate the electron’s wave function twice to get back to where you started is very surprising. Particles with half spin (electrons, protons, positrons, muons, etc.) are called Fermions. It is also surprising that the half spin property makes the existence of matter possible. These true but surprising facts are important, which is why I consider this a super fact.

Angular Momentum and Magnetic Dipoles

On the left the illustration shows a man sitting on a rotating chair with his hands stretched out. In his hands he is holding dumbbells. The right side of the illustration depicts him bringing his hands close to his body resulting in the rotation speeding up. This is an example of the law of conservation of angular momentum.
The law of conservation of angular momentum. Shutterstock asset id: 1669028755 by DKN0049

The picture above gives an example of the law of conservation of angular momentum. Bringing weights closer to the body speeds up the rotation. Another example of the law of conservation of angular momentum is when you try to tip the axis of the rotation. This would be the man tipping over. You can’t do that without applying a force. The electron, and other subatomic particles with spin, display this gyroscopic effect, like a spinning top. As mentioned, charged particles such as the electron, positron or proton, also generate a magnetic field as if they were spinning. However, the strange fact is that despite that electrons and other particles with spin display these spin properties, they aren’t spinning.

Below is an overview of the elementary particles. An elementary particle is a fundamental subatomic building block of the universe that cannot be divided into smaller components. Notice that the proton and the neutron are not listed because they are not fundamental particles. They consist of three quarks. The top number is the mass (0.511 MeV/c2 for an electron). The number below that is the charge (-1 for an electron) and the bottom number is spin (1/2 for an electron). The diagram shows three intrinsic properties per particle.

This is periodic table style map showing the six quarks, six leptons and five bosons. | Electrons Have Spin Without Spinning
Elementary particles of the Standard Model from Wikipedia By Cush – Own work using:PBS NOVA [1], Fermilab, Office of Science, United States Department of Energy, Particle Data Group, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=4286964

Electron Orbitals

I should explain something about particles and waves. Subatomic particles are associated with quantum waves. This is quantum mechanics. For example, an electron is in a sense both a particle and a wave, or more correctly neither. However, it exhibits both point like particle characteristics and wave characteristics depending on circumstances. Below is a picture showing the standing quantum waves representing an electron in different orbitals (different states) in a Hydrogen atom.

Hydrogen atoms only have one electron, but that electron can exist in different orbitals (sort of different orbits). A standing wave is a wave that is not spreading out, like the waves going back and forth in a bathtub. You can’t really say that the electron is orbiting the nucleus like a planet. The standing quantum wave, or electron cloud, or orbital are more accurate ways to view it.

The standing quantum waves look like spheres, or ellipses, or drops, all kinds of strange shapes.
Hydrogen electron orbitals, the electron’s charge distribution around the atom’s nucleus, quantum mechanics, Orbital shell, atomic orbital, electron cloud or wave mechanics model. Shutterstock asset id: 2500396483 by Watthana Tirahimonchan.

There is some confusion as to what the standing quantum waves represent. The Copenhagen interpretation says that the electron exists in superposition, or all possible states, until measured. The quantum wave indicates the probability that you will find the electron in a certain place when you measure. The square of the amplitude of the wave is the probability that you will find the electron at that point. When you measure it and find out where the electron is the wave will collapse.

Other interpretations say that the electron is in a specific place, you just don’t know where, but again the square of the amplitude of the wave is the probability that you will find the electron at that point. Yet other interpretations say that the quantum wave is a real physical thing that guides the electron (pilot waves). The so called many-worlds-interpretation say that all possible outcomes of a measurement happens but in an infinite number of parallel universes (multi-verses).

Then some people say that the quantum wave does not exist at all, other than as a probability distribution. It represents what the observer knows about the system, nothing else. If you don’t know where the electron is, then the wave is all over the place. If you measure where it is then the wave collapses. Then we also have the you-don’t-know-what-you-are-talking-about-just-shut-up-and-calculate interpretation. The latter interpretation is focused on using the equations, for example the Schrödinger and Dirac equations, to make predictions and measurements and it ignores what’s behind the scenes. This interpretation is popular in college physics classes.

Whichever interpretation you prefer, the you-must-fully-rotate-the-wave-function-twice-to-get-back-to-start property leads to the Pauli exclusion principle.

The Pauli Exclusion Principle

The Pauli exclusion principle states that two identical fermions (such as electrons) cannot occupy the same quantum state simultaneously. For example, two electrons in the same orbital must have opposite spin +1/2 and -1/2 and you could never add a third electron. This adds structure to the atom and to the nucleus. If you did not have the Pauli exclusion principle everything could just fall into one point, and you could walk through walls. Matter as we know it could not exist. This is why fermions (electrons, muons, positrons, quarks, protons, neutrons, etc.) often are referred to as matter particles and bosons (photons, gluons, etc.) are referred to as radiation.

It turns out that that the Pauli exclusion principle is a direct result of the half spin of fermions, in other words, that you have to rotate the associated wave twice around to get back to the original.

Do you think this is confusing ? Don’t feel bad. Richard Feyman one of the most prominent pioneers of quantum mechanics and Nobel Prize winner in physics said, “I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics”.

Other Super Facts Related to Modern Physics

To see the other Super Facts click here

Nuclear Energy is Relatively Clean and Safe

Superfact 96: Nuclear power is a relatively clean and safe energy source that produces no atmospheric emissions during operation. However, there are some problems with nuclear power, but they are often overblown.

The photo shows the three mile island nuclear plant from the across the shore of Susquehanna River in Londonderry Township.
The Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant south of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. March 28, 1979, a nuclear accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant sent shockwaves across the world, raising fears about nuclear power. However, no one died, and no one was hurt. Shutterstock Asset id: 2512612545 by Aubrie K

Clean energy sources are often defamed by disinformation and misunderstandings. For example, wind power turbines are not bird killing machines. Contrary to what you often hear wind power is indeed a very clean, cheap and sustainable energy source. Nuclear power is another misunderstood energy source. Wind power, solar power, hydro, and nuclear power are all considered clean energy because they produce no greenhouse gases or air pollution during operation and they also have very low life-cycle emissions.

The graph below from Our World in Data depicting lifetime greenhouse gas emissions (construction, operation, disposal) and safety data for the European Union, show that the lifetime greenhouse gas emissions of coal power is 162 times higher than those of nuclear power and coal kill 820 times as many people as nuclear power. The lifetime greenhouse gas emissions of natural gas are 120 times higher than those of nuclear power and kill 613 times as many people as nuclear power. The difference is staggering.

The graph depicts death rates and greenhouse gas emissions per unit for different energy sources including coal, oil, natural gas, biomass, hydropower, wind, nuclear power, and solar. | Nuclear Energy is Relatively Clean and Safe
Death rates from fossil fuels and biomass are based on state-of-the art plants with pollution control in Europe and are based on older models of the impacts of air pollution on health. This means that these death rates are likely to be very conservative. For further discussion see our article: OurWorldinData.org/safest-sources-of-energy. Electricity shares are given for 2021. Data sources: Markandya & Wilkinson (2007); UNSCEAR (2008: 2018); Sovacol et al. (2016); IPCC AR5 (2014); UNECE (2022); Ember Energy (2001). OurWorldinData.org – Research and data to make progress against the world’s largest problems. Licensed under CC-BY by the authors Hannah Ritchie and Max Roser. Citation : Hannah Ritchie (2020) – “What are the safest and cleanest sources of energy?” Published online at OurWorldinData.org. Retrieved from: ‘https://archive.ourworldindata.org/20260202-100556/safest-sources-of-energy.html&#8217; [Online Resource] (archived on February 2, 2026).

In the graph above, greenhouse gas emissions are measured of CO2 equivalents per Gigawatt-hour of electricity over the lifecycle of the power plant. 1 Gigawatt-hour is the annual electricity consumption of 150 people in the EU. Death rate from accidents and air pollution is measured as deaths per Terawatt hour of electricity production. 1 terawatt hour is the annual electricity consumption of 150,000 people in the EU.

I should mention that there are problems with nuclear power that are not entirely covered by the graph above, including radioactive waste, a history of spectacular accidents, and a perceived connection to nuclear arms. However, as you will see later in this post, even though these problems get a lot of media attention, they are not as scary as one might think. However, it should be noted that nuclear power in its current form is not a cheap source of energy, but that is a different topic.

I consider this a super fact because nuclear power is often thought of as an extremely dangerous and dirty source of energy, which is not the case.

How Does Nuclear Power Work ?

From left to right : a neutron strikes a uranium nucleus, and it breaks apart into a Krypton and Barium isotope and release three neutrons, which strike three uranium nucleuses, causing three fission events and releasing nine neutrons in total, etc.
Illustration of nuclear chain reaction. Uranium-235 fission. Shutterstock asset id: 73714504 by Mpanchenko. Note I corrected an error in the picture.

The fuel (fuel rods) in a nuclear power station consists primarily of stacked ceramic pellets made of low enriched uranium dioxide housed inside sealed metal tubes. The uranium consists primarily of two uranium isotopes U-238, which has 92 protons and 146 neutrons and U-235, which has 92 protons and 143 neutrons. Uranium always has 92 protons. The isotope that is used for fission is U-235. Natural Uranium consists of 0.7% U-235, trace amounts of U-236 and the rest (99.3%) is U-238. The uranium in nuclear fuel rods is either natural (0.7% U-235) or a few percent of U-235 (low enriched uranium). This should be contrasted with a uranium atomic bomb which has at least 80% U-235 (highly enriched).

A nuclear power plant generates electricity using heat from nuclear reactions. Inside the reactor, atoms of fuel (uranium) undergo nuclear fission, where they split apart and release a large amount of heat. The fuel rods (see picture below) in a nuclear power station consist primarily of stacked ceramic pellets made of low enriched uranium dioxide housed inside sealed metal tubes. There are also control rods in a nuclear power station, which consist of materials with a high neutron absorption cross-section. The control rods are used to regulate the reaction. If they are fully inserted the reaction will stop. Also note that nuclear reactors have a containment shield (at least in western countries).

How a nuclear reactor generates electricity using fuel rods, control rods, steam, turbines, and generators diagram hand drawn schematic vector.
Fission generates heat, which generates high pressure steam, which pushes a turbine around, which turns a generator, which generates electricity, which is transformed to the right voltage and delivered to customers. Science educational illustration Shutterstock Asset id: 2658971563 by Alexander_P

Below is an alternative illustration.

Fission generates heat, which generates high pressure steam, which pushes a turbine around, which turns a generator, which generates electricity, which is transformed to the right voltage and delivered to customers. The picture also shows a cooling tower and illustrates how a nuclear plant uses water.
A nuclear power plant generates electricity by using heat from nuclear fission to produce steam, which drives turbines connected to electrical generators. This illustration also depicts the nuclear power plant’s use of water for cooling. Don’t worry, the water will not turn radioactive. It is a separate isolated loop. Shutterstock Asset id: 2525528665 by Papia Majumder.
The photo is taken in 2024 and shows the Three Mile Island Nuclear Plant with a nuclear reactor building and the associated coolant tower. | Nuclear Energy is Relatively Clean and Safe
Three Mile Island Nuclear Plant, located in Pennsylvania, is known for a partial meltdown in 1979 Shutterstock. This photo shows the reactor as well as the cooling tower. Asset id: 2520903273 by Amy Lutz.

What about Chernobyl ?

The Chernobyl disaster, which occurred on April 26, 1986, was the worst nuclear disaster in history. 50 people died as a direct result of the disaster and an estimated 4,000, perhaps 10,000 future cancer deaths are predicted from the disaster. However, it should be noted that an estimated half million people died from coal pollution in the United States over the first two decades of the 21st century. You have to compare.

Another, thing to keep in mind is that the Chernobyl reactors were RBMK reactors (Reaktor Bolshoy Moshchnosti Kanalnyy), an extremely flawed, old and dangerous design that only exists in Russia (or the former Soviet Union). Above I mentioned that the control rods slow down the nuclear reaction when inserted between the fuel rods and stop the reaction when fully inserted. In an RBMK reactor, it is the other way around. The control rods speed up the reaction when inserted. Add the fact that the Chernobyl reactor did not have a containment shield designed to contain a major release of radioactivity, unlike Western reactors and that the Soviet Union was an authoritarian and secretive regime that made things much worse. A nuclear disaster similar to Chernobyl is highly unlikely to happen in the West.

The Fukushima nuclear disaster was caused by a severe earthquake and a 15 meter tsunami. Around 2,300 died from the evacuation, and 15,000 people died from the Earthquake, but it is estimated that no one, or perhaps one person died as a direct result from the nuclear disaster itself. As mentioned no one died from the Three Mile Island accident.

What about Radioactive Waste?

Radioactive waste stored on-site at nuclear power stations (spent fuel) is often millions of times more radioactive than long-term disposal waste. It is important to remember that highly radioactive isotopes decay fast (that’s why they are dangerous), which means that long-term disposal waste is not very dangerous. We are surrounded by radioactivity and our by far largest exposure to ionizing radiation comes from the radon in our basements.

Does nuclear power for energy generation increase the risk for nuclear weapons proliferation?

While commercial nuclear energy and weapons programs share technology, they are distinct processes. The historical data and studies show that national nuclear energy programs in general don’t lead to the development of nuclear weapons. No country officially developed nuclear weapons based on a pre-existing commercial nuclear power industry. Typically, nuclear-armed nations developed dedicated, military-focused, and often secret reactors to produce plutonium or facilities to enrich uranium for weapons.  Also, the issue is mostly moot for countries that already have nuclear weapons, such as the United States.

Conclusion

Nuclear power is clean and safe. It might be our cleanest energy source that can provide baseload power. However, there are other concerns including the possibility of spectacular accidents, radioactive waste and the possibility that nuclear power for energy might aid nuclear weapons proliferation. Luckily, it appears that these concerns are overblown. It should be noted that nuclear power, as implemented today, is not cheap energy, but that is a different topic.

To see the Other Super Facts click here