The Future of Nuclear Engineering?

[tysonwil]

I am just finishing up my Freshman year at UW-Madison and have to decide what I want to do in the College of Engineering. Currently my intended major is nuclear engineering, however given the recent events at Fukushima, I am unsure about its future. Would it be smart to change to Electrical Engineering instead? Renewable Energy sources like solar and wind seem to have a brighter futures.

 

[PhanthomJay]

If you are talking about the future of nuclear power in regard to its use for electric generation to supply the electrical demand of the United States, well, in my estimation, forget about it. As you may know, nuclear power for the purpose of electric generation died in the US nearly 25 years ago, after the Three Mile Island and Chenobyl disasters, lack of a nuclear waste management transportation and storage plan, and lack of a workable Evacuation plan. President Obama tried to revive nuclear power, shortly after he was elected, as a means, combined with renewable energy resources such as wind and solar, to reduce our dependence on the fossil fuels and save the environment. However, there is still no workable Waste Management or emergency Evacuation plans, even after some 50+ years of nuclear power in this country. And the Japan tragedy has put yet another nail in its coffin. It's comeback in the US is very unlikely in the foreseeable future. And with wind power also being opposed, and Solar power not quite there yet, coal and gas will continue to dominate as the fuels of choice.

In other countries, most notably China, up to now, nuclear power has been still very much alive, but i don't know how the Japan disaster will affect this.

Of course, nuclear engineering is not all about nuclear generation.. nuclear medicine for example...others may be able to respond in these other uses.

 

[Astronuc]

Fukushima has had an adverse effect on nuclear energy for the time being and near term.

For nuclear engineering majors, I'd strongly advise either course work in other engineering disciplines (mech engineering, EE, material science & eng) or doing a double major. I do know of a student who did a double major in NucEng and EE. The broader one's portfolio, the better employment opportunities there will be.

There are many folks retiring in the nuclear energy field, so there will be a demand for younger folk.

It appears the Vogtle 3&4 (AP1000) units will be built. The twin ABWRs at South Texas have come to an indefinite halt when the main utility, NRG, stopped funding and wrote off about $331 million already invested.

March 22, 2011 - http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN-Japan_crisis_impacts_US_project-2203114.html
March 23, 2011 - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703410604576216990115610336.html
April 20, 2011 - http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/newsarticle.aspx?id=29896

Two years ago - http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN-CPS_Energy_sees_need_for_new_STP_units-3006095.html

Engineers should consider diversifying their skills. Besides EE, consider thermodynamics, mechanics of materials, and fluid mechanics/dynamics. Computational physics (basically knowing how to solve systems of time-dependent highly-coupled linear and nonlinear PDEs) is becoming increasingly important for engineering.

There is a lot of pressure for the US to develop indigenous energy sources - even coal, oil and natural gas. Nuclear is also part of that, even with the concerns over Fukushima. Solar and wind are also part of the mix. More efficient processes (less energy for given utility) for home, business and industry are also required.

 

[AlephZero]

On the other hand, the effects may be transient, and are certainly country dependent.

Results from public opinion polls in the UK have been more of less unchanged since 2007 and two opinion polls within the last week show no change after Fukushima.

80% were either fully supportive of nuclear as the best way to tackle climate change, or thought it has some role to play.
16% were opposed to nuclear any circumstances.

In a poll last week, 35% were in favour of building new nuclear plants, 30% against.
A week later, 42% in favour, 31% against.

The UK government's Committee on Climate Change has recently (post Fukushima) increased its recommendation from 12 new reactors on 7 sites during 2018-2025, to 14 reactors.

Source: Financial Times newpaper, 9 May 9 2011.

 

[twofish-quant]

In China there hasn't been a huge backlash against nuclear power. There is something of an growing environmental movement, but the air pollution and environmental damage from coal is so obvious that nuclear is seen as a solution rather than as a problem.

 

[AlephZero]

There is something of an growing environmental movement, but the air pollution and environmental damage from coal is so obvious that nuclear is seen as a solution rather than as a problem.

The Green movement in Germany is just waking up to the fact that after the knee-jerk reaction of shutting down some old nuclear stations, CO2 emissions from German electricity usage have increased by 10%, because they are now importing power from even older coal fired generators in Eastern Europe.

I would draw an analogy with the aviation industry here. Flying doesn't stop (except in the very short term) when there is a major air disaster. The industry just puts more effort into figuring out safer ways to design build and operate planes.

 

[edgepflow]

Nuclear engineering is a very solid engineering education that gives you a wide range of tools. Having said that, and in-light of what others mentioned, I would recommend mechanical engineering (ME) with a minor in nuclear engineering (NE). Your ME program will give you the thermodynamics, fluid dynamics, and heat transfer just as the NE program would. In your NE minor, focus on reactor physics courses. Then season your studies with 3D solid modelling, structural engineering, instrumentation, control theory, and programming. You will then be in good shape.

 

[Dmytry]

I'd recommend solid discipline, like mechanical engineering, as the major. A lot of people I know have disdain for 'specialized' disciplines, even in the field. E.g. preferring physics or math major (CS minor) to CS major for a high level programming job when both do equally well on interview.
Not sure if it applies to nuclear but if you will want a job outside nuclear, you probably will have mechanical engineer or electrical engineer as the person deciding to hire or not to hire you.

 

[Astronuc]

Nuclear engineering is a very solid engineering education that gives you a wide range of tools. Having said that, and in-light of what others mentioned, I would recommend mechanical engineering (ME) with a minor in nuclear engineering (NE). Your ME program will give you the thermodynamics, fluid dynamics, and heat transfer just as the NE program would. In your NE minor, focus on reactor physics courses. Then season your studies with 3D solid modelling, structural engineering, instrumentation, control theory, and programming. You will then be in good shape.

Nuclear engineering is mostly mechanical engineering (thermodynamics, fluid dynamics, and heat transfer) and some EE (circuits, power electronics, control theory) with some basic nuclear physics (radiation, radiation interaction with matter, some SR and QM), reactor physics (neutron physics), and perhaps some radiation safety or environmental engineering. I would definitely recommend developing skills in 3D solid modelling (being able to take SolidWork or Pro/E into ANSYS/ABAQUS or other FEA structural or CFD (CFX/Star-CCM) program is a big plus), structural engineering, instrumentation, control theory, and programming.

These days, computational physics or multiphysics simulation is the hot area.

www.inl.gov/technicalpublications/Documents/4336141.pdf[/URL]
http://www.osti.gov/estsc/details.jsp?rcdid=4622

Knowing how to solve sets of strongly-coupled nonlinear time-dependent PDEs is becoming an increasingly important skill in many engineering and scientific fields.

 

[Ahab]

Nuclear engineering is easily one of the most diverse engineering disciplines out there. I am a 4th year Georgia Tech undergrad in NRE. It is diverse in the sense that as stated in previous posts it combines ME, EE, reactor physics, radiation physics, and fusion(needed to be a REAL nuke).
However its diversity also spreads to programming which is left off above, at school we use FORTRAN(dead I know), MATLAB, and a few excel expansions such as TK Solver. However at my current job I had to using C languages and VBA(seems weird I know, but is great for Logic programming).
Nuclear is one of the top 2 or 3 most difficult engineering curiculums due to physics depth(only physics majors go deeper). If you think all nuclear is is just boiling water, grow a brain.
But jobs are not everywhere for nukes, if you get picky on location, prepare to stay unemployed. If though you are willing to build Chinese plants, you will have a job with good pay for the indefinitly foreseeable future. They are throwing them up over there and if Americans/Europeans do not seek to work, the Chinese will do it all themselves.
It all comes down to two things when nuke jobs are concerned, public perception and average IQ(lower IQ yielding less nuclear jobs).

 

[daveb]

If you can do the NE with a lot of environmental engineering, THAT would be a huge bonus.

 

[russ_watters]

The Green movement in Germany is just waking up to the fact that after the knee-jerk reaction of shutting down some old nuclear stations, CO2 emissions from German electricity usage have increased by 10%, because they are now importing power from even older coal fired generators in Eastern Europe.

I would draw an analogy with the aviation industry here. Flying doesn't stop (except in the very short term) when there is a major air disaster. The industry just puts more effort into figuring out safer ways to design build and operate planes.

I tend to agree and expect a major nuclear rennasance in the US. The problem is the timeframe: It may not happen fast enough for someone graduating in the next few years to have decent career prospects for the next decade. The payoff from toughing it out could be enormous, but so is the near term risk.