Nuclear Power: A Very Short Introduction 1st Edition

Good overview. In chapter 6, "The cost of nuclear energy", the discussion could look at state-owned enterprises like EDF in France. In the US, construction costs and the competition with natural gas has led utilities to cancel many proposed nuclear power stations. Cost is the main barrier to new nuclear power.The effects of costs, though, aren't the major consideration in socialist or state-regulated economies. Cost won't be a serious issue when the national government pays for the costs of construction and operation. Most Democrats and Republicans support a larger Federal budget, with moderate to high deficit spending.Another hot topic is siting. There is no Federal law in the US about the optimal factors for siting nuclear power, and how to balance safety, remoteness, cost of power lines, and using different criteria for burner reactors and breeder reactors. Nor is there much discussion of using nuclear power for electric freight and passenger rail, battery powered cars, and hydrogen. While there are a lot of open issues with the future of nuclear energy, this book and the Very Short Introduction series provides the general public with a good amount of the information necessary for letter writing to Congress and voting. The science and engineering of nuclear power stations is so well established, and has been so successful in France, Japan, Russia, China, and the US that few economists and researchers doubt that nuclear energy will play an important role in powering the world.

The first chapter on nuclear physics was over my head, but the other chapters were a bit less theoretical and more easily understood. The author's chapter discussions of the risks of nuclear power, and the costs of nuclear power, were worthwhile and important to keep in mind. He generally downplays the risks, arguing that risk is more the misperception in people's minds caused by an alarmist media. I understand the argument, although I don't fully buy it. In the final two chapters the author considers the possibility and potential of nuclear fusion (as opposed to today's nuclear fission processes), and the need for energy and the critical role that nuclear power will play in the future. Overall, a decent overview.

As advertised

Simple editorial errors - leads me to believe no one proof read it.And, because no one apparently read it, there was no one to tell the author that his presentation of the material is not geared to his audience - a reader who wants to understand nuclear energy better. It seems like the author just wrote the next thing that came to his mind. Got it all done first pass and considered that a wrap. For example, there are countless sections and paragraphs where the author doesn't use a basic development approach - explaining new ideas introduced to build on. He just uses new terms and moves on. Up to us the reader to go look them up somewhere else. I am fairly technical and i didn't get them so i think most readers will find it harder than i did. Three stars because he knows his stuff and i guess it's all there, but I coulda given two stars.I have found this same editing criticism for other science books in this "A Very Short Introduction ..." series of books.

Review of ‘Nuclear Power: A Very Short Introduction’ by Maxwell Irvine.CITATION: Irvine, M (2011). Nuclear power: a very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Reviewer: Dr W. P. PalmerThis book is one of a large series of 250+ books with ‘a very short introduction’ generally being a part of the title. These books are available to provide a level of entry a little above beginner level and yet reaching a real level of knowledge of the area. To do this in 120 pages as this book does is difficult and involves compromises. I have found this book to be excellent, though I will mention what I consider to be a few of its shortcomings.The book contains a reasonable number of diagrams (23 illustrations and 10 tables), but the print size is very small; this is probably the most serious compromise as it will put off some potential readers.After a preface and an acknowledgements page, there eight chapters, a brief appendix, suggestions for further reading and a useful index. The chapters are as follows:1. A new science is born2. A new technology is developed3. Thermal nuclear reactors4. Nuclear fuel reprocessing and radioactive waste5. Nuclear safety6. The cost of nuclear power7. Nuclear fusion power8. The need for nuclear powerOver these eight chapters, Irvine develops a very strong (unanswerable?) case for firstly building more nuclear power stations to the latest design, which could produce more power, more cheaply and more safely than the majority of nuclear power stations that exist today. He looks at energy needs for the world in 2050 and concludes after examining each of the other sources of energy (which all have a part to play), he considers that only fusion power stations could produce the additional energy that the world will then need. However achieving fusion power may take twenty years: I remember a twenty year wait predicted thirty years ago. Programs of research into fusion power exist already but they need greater emphasis.Irvine has made all these points logically through facts and figures; unfortunately his vision is unlikely to be fulfilled as electorates and politicians do not have a forty year vision- we are lucky if they have a four year vision.An excellent book- read it and be convinced that action is necessary.BILL PALMER

This book does a good job of explaining the history and state of nuclear power, enough so that I can talk intelligently to my nuclear engineer friend. But I would have like more in-depth coverage of the physics and engineering aspects of power plants. Probably too much to ask of such a small volume.

This is an accurate, well-informed and apolitical introduction to atomic power. It touches on all the basic engineering/scientific considerations as well as the considerable politically driven misinformation available without 'taking sides'.

Not what I was looking for....more technical than I wanted.