Will Smith Chemistry

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

Late at night on April 25, 1986, workers at the nuclear power plant began to run a test on Reactor 4. This test would show them how long the turbines would run and create energy after a power loss. This energy would be used to pump through cold water to cool down the core. After around 45 seconds, a backup power source would kick in, but they needed the reactor to be able to produce enough energy to keep the water pumping for those 45 seconds. 1. At 1:23 in the morning, the reactor slowly slowed down. However as the momentum slowed down, the liquid coolant (water), started becoming bubbles (steam voids). In the reactor, the water not only served as a coolant for the core, but also absorbed neutrons. Since the water started becoming bubbles, there were becoming less neutrons absorbed. Since the water was absorbing less neutrons, the unused water turned into more steam, which led to an increase of power. The increase of power with the limited amount of coolant led to a increased core temperature. After the power increase and the increased temperature of the core, the on site workers panicked. It is said that the workers were very inexperienced and not well informed about emergency procedures. During this panic, a button was pressed that caused an emergency shutdown (SCRAM), on the reactor. The emergency shutdown lowered the control rods into the core, then inserted neutron-absorbing material to absorb the radioactive material. However there was a problem with the design of these control rods. The tip of the control rods was graphite. Before the control rods entered the core, it supposedly displaced some of the coolant, which led to an explosion.3. The combination of the power increase due to the bubbles, an increase of the core temperature, and a shortage of coolant caused the core to explode.

The consequences of this explosion were very extreme. After the explosion, a ongoing fire lasted for 10 days. This fire produced a smoke that contained large amounts of radioactive iodine and Cesium. The iodine only lasted for about 8 days after the fire, however the cesium is still able to be found in some foods and soil in Europe. One of the main consequences of the radioactive leak was thyroid cancer, which was main an effect of the iodine.2. Thyroid cancer would cause deforms to you children and some adults. The radioactive material mainly spread to areas in the Soviet Union, but some did reach farther distances.5. Only a couple of deaths actually occurred from the explosion, which were the on site workers. On September 6, 2005 the World Health Organization said that 50 deaths occurred from the entire disaster including the ones from the direct explosion. 4,000 children were diagnosed with Thyroid Cancer, however it has been reported that only 9 deaths actually occurred from the Cancer.4. Since the accident, approximately 600,000 people have been involved with the emergency, containment, clean-up, and recovery procedures. 5
The Japanese and Chernobyl Nuclear Reactor problems had some similarities, but were also different. Both reactors had problems with cooling the core, which in the Chernobyl disaster, caused an explosion. However the Chernobyl reactors also had many other problems go wrong. The Japanese reactors also have other problems other than the cooling problems, but none as catastrophic as Chernobyl's. In my opinion, the biggest difference between these two disasters is how they happened, and how the were fixed. The Chernobyl disaster definitely could have been prevented with more experienced technicians. In the Japanese disaster, there was no way they could have preventing an earth quake from damaging the reactors.6 Since the Japanese disaster happened in a more modern era, they clean-up process is going a lot more smoothly even though there is not even close to as much radiation leakage as Chernobyl had. Overall I would say there is not anything to worry about. It does not seem as if there will be an even close amount of radiation leakage as there was at Chernobyl's, and so far the radioactive containment process has gone well. 6.

Works Cited
1)"Chernobyl | Chernobyl Accident | Chernobyl Disaster." World Nuclear Association | Nuclear Power - a Sustainable Energy Resource. Web. 06 Apr. 2011. <http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/chernobyl/inf07.html>.
2)"Chernobyl Disaster." ICRIN Home. Web. 06 Apr. 2011. <http://chernobyl.info/>.
3) "Chernobyl." Chernobyl, A Nuclear Disaster. Web. 06 Apr. 2011. <http://library.thinkquest.org/3426/>.
4 "Chernobyl Disaster." Formal Reasoning Group. Web. 06 Apr. 2011. <http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/chernobyl.html>.
5. "Scientific Facts on the Chernobyl Nuclear Accident." GreenFacts - Facts on Health and the Environment. Web. 06 Apr. 2011. <http://www.greenfacts.org/en/chernobyl/index.htm>.
6. Wolchover, Natalie. "Earthquakes Put Japan's Nuclear Reactors on Red Alert - FoxNews.com." FoxNews.com - Breaking News | Latest News | Current News. Web. 06 Apr. 2011. <http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/03/11/earthquakes-japans-nuclear-reactors-red-alert/>
7. "You Can Stop Worrying About A Radiation Disaster In Japan -- Here's Why." Business Insider. Web. 06 Apr. 2011. <http://www.businessinsider.com/japan-reactors-pose-no-risk-2011-3>.

This is a picture of the rising smoke containing the radioactive material.

This is a picture of a child with a deformity from Thyroid Cancer

This is a nuclear reactor.

Here is a picture of the damage from the explosion.

Photos and Videos

http://www.freedomforfission.org.uk/img/pwrreactor.gif
http://www.personal.psu.edu/lmt193/blogs/lauren_thomas_ukr_100/chernobyl%201.jpg
http://www.solcomhouse.com/images/111chexp.gif
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/images/chernobyl_hydroceph.jpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NlP2-Sbl9w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSRC1_OZPIg

Sunday, January 30, 2011

Creative Chemistry

HAIKU
Covalent Compound
Electrons shared equally
To have noble gas

Molecular Shapes
Linear- Dumbell

Bent - Letter L

Trigonal Pyramidal- Pyramid

Trigonal Planar- Pizza stop (skiing)

Tetrehedral- Rocket Ship

Thursday, December 16, 2010

If Your Cat took Chemistry, would she Eat this stuff?

1. Jif Creamy Peanut butter- Magnesium Oxide- MgO

2. Delmonte Diced Tomatoes- Calcium Chloride-

3. Cambell's Chicken Noodle Soup- Sodium Phosphate-

$\100dpi \inline \large Na_{3}PO_{4}$

4. Progresso Chicken and Dumplings- Potassium Chloride- KCl

5.Flinstones Sour Gummies- Potassium Iodide- KI

6. Ibuprofen- Iron (II) Oxide- FeO

7. Science Diet Dog Food - Copper (II) Sulfate-

$\100dpi \inline \large CuSO_{4}$

8.Oreo's- Calcium Phosphate-

$\100dpi \inline \large K_{3}PO_{4}$

9. Innergize Sports Drink- Sodium Chloride- NaCl

10. Wheaties- Calcium Carbonate-

$\100dpi \inline \large CaCO_{3}$

11.Old Spice Body Wash- Sodium Sulfate-

$\100dpi \inline \large Na_{2}SO_{4}$

12.Premium Dog Food, Chicken- Zinc Oxide- ZnO

13. Crest Toothpaste- Sodium Fluoride- NaF

14. Theraflu- Calcium Phosphate-

$\100dpi \inline \large Ca_{3}(PO_{4})_{2}$

15. Clorox Bleach- Hydrogen Peroxide-

$\100dpi \inline \large H_{2}O_{2}$

16. Water- Hydrogen Oxide-

$\100dpi \inline \large H_{2}O$

17. Fire Extinguisher- Ammonium Sulfate-

$\100dpi \inline \large (NH_{4})_{2}SO_{4}$

18. Power Bar- Potassium Phosphate-

$\100dpi \inline \large K_{3}PO_{4}$

19. Tropicana Orange Juice- Calcium Hydroxide-

$\100dpi \inline \large CaOH_{2}$

20. Craft Macaroni and Cheese- Iron (II) Sulfate-

$\100dpi \inline \large FeSO_{4}$

Thursday, November 11, 2010

Review packet #13

Q: Explain the difference between precision and accuracy. Suppose you make three different mass measurements of a sugar sample you knew to have a mass of 1 gram. How would you know whether or not the measurements were accurate? How would you know whether or not they were precise? Could the three measurements be precise, but not accurate? Explain.

A: Accuracy is how close a measurement comes to the true value of something; or correctness Precision is how close a series of measurements are to each other. If you knew the mass of sugar was 1 gram and got values of 1,1.02, and .96, these measurements would be accurate but not precise. They are accurate because they are close to 1, however they are not as close to each other. Lets say you get values of 2, 2.01, and 2.01. These values would be precise because they are so close to each other, but not correct or accurate. The values are precise if they are all close to each other. The values are accurate if they are all close to the known CORRECT value:

Here is a picture to help:

Tuesday, October 5, 2010

Rutherford's Gold Foil Experiment

Rutherford's Gold Foil experiment was very important in the discovery of the atomic make-up. For more information, here is my Glog:

Work Cited:
1) "Rutherford's Experiment and Atomic Model." The Worlds of David Darling. Web. 07 Oct. 2010. <http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/R/Rutherfords_experiment_and_atomic_model.html>

2) "Molecular Expressions: Electricity and Magnetism: Interactive Java Tutorial - The Rutherford Experiment." Molecular Expressions: Images from the Microscope. Web. 07 Oct. 2010. <http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/electromag/java/rutherford/>.
3)"YouTube - Rutherford's Experiment: Nuclear Atom." YouTube - Broadcast Yourself. Web. 07 Oct. 2010. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pZj0u_XMbc>.

4) https://reich-chemistry.wikispaces.com/file/view/plum_pudding_model.gif/31487327/plum_pudding_model.gif

5) http://www.cfo.doe.gov/me70/manhattan/images/AtomLabeledLarge.gif