Abstract
My technical paper and STS research are directly connected in the subject of nuclear energy, but are also related in their shared concern for the consequences of an expanding nuclear energy sector. With nonrenewable energy use on the rise, nuclear energy represents an underutilized solution to long-term energy concerns. However, nuclear energy is still less supported that either wind or solar energy despite its higher reliability and energy output, mainly due to safety and waste concerns. The papers completed here aim to ease these concerns by detailing how nuclear operations can be safer through ethical actions and how nuclear waste levels can be reduced. Thus, both the main background and ultimate goals of the papers are aligned, even though the subject matters differ between the two. My technical paper discusses a potential pyroprocessing plant that could be built and implemented into a nuclear powerplant. Pyroprocessing is the process of isolating uranium and plutonium metal from the rare earth and fission product material that is in spent nuclear fuel rods. By isolating uranium and plutonium, we are able to recover the main ingredients for nuclear energy fuel rods. This process also substantially reduces the stored nuclear waste and reusing it in the process, making nuclear energy plants much more sustainable. My capstone group was able to outline the technical details of the plant, as well as its economic feasibility with social, environmental, and safety implications explored. My STS research paper analyzes the Three Mile Island Nuclear Powerplant meltdown that occurred in 1979. Specifically, my paper identifies and pinpoints the specific actors that played a role in this meltdown and how their lacking ethics worsened the initial problem. The ethics were analyzed under the lens of Kantian duty ethics. My claim is that the engineers of the powerplant acted immorally in their lack of communication with plant operators, leading to the accident and worsening the response. This claim is substantiated by government reports and the timeline of the accident. While my technical and research papers serve different purposes and cover different topics, the completion of both in tandem provided great perspective for each paper. My STS paper gave me a greater respect for the necessity of safety systems for a plant not just in the process, but built into the employee culture and across the company. My technical paper gave me a greater idea of the background on the science of the accident, which in turn increased the motivation I felt towards completing the STS paper and being accurate and precise in my analysis. Therefore, completing each paper greatly improved my overall understanding of nuclear energy and the ways it can be enhanced for everyone’s gain.
