1 answer
4
Questions
Updated
207 views
Question for a Nuclear Engineer:
Question for a Nuclear Engineer:
As a Nuclear Engineer, would I study how to reduce/ eliminate radioactive waste & create protective gear against radiation? If not, what field do I need to enter to study this or where else can I study this?
Login to comment
1 answer
Updated
Joseph’s Answer
Most nuclear engineering programmes will have at least a small module covering waste and decommissioning, yes. It's not the only thing you could study to end up working on these problems though; there's a lot of different fields of knowledge at play for various parts of these challenges, and studying almost any Science/Technology/Engineering/Mathematics (STEM) subject could eventually lead towards a job working on those things.
Personally, I studied a Physics with Astrophysics programme at undergraduate degree level, then shifted focus slightly at postgraduate level to do a Nuclear Physics / Nuclear Engineering Masters. Although I'd previously been taught the basic physics principles of shielding against radiation in physics classes, I learned the most about waste management and radiation protection from that Masters programme, and am now working in a career where I'm using that knowledge to work on very similar problems. My work is more about making accurate measurements of the waste we do have, rather than directly working to directly treat waste, reduce the amount generated, or design shielding, but these are the sorts of challenges some of my colleagues are working on.
In terms of those specific topics, I'll first make a couple of clarifications and distinctions that you should consider.
Firstly, the idea of reducing and eliminating waste: this actually touches two quite different kinds of work - you should be aware of the difference between the ideas of waste treatment, and waste minimisation.
Waste treatment is about taking wastes that we have already got and processing them to reduce hazards, often by separating out the parts with higher or longer-lived radioactivity from the less active parts that form the bulk of the waste. This sort of thing is something some nuclear engineers end up getting involved with, but it can also involve a lot of chemistry, so studying chemistry could be a better starting point if you want to work in waste treatment.
Waste minimisation, on the other hand, is improving processes so less waste is generated to begin with. This can involve a lot of areas - nuclear physicists and nuclear engineers will look at doing things like designing more efficient reactor types that generate more power from the same fuel (what we call "greater burnup") and thus produce less waste. This can also involve mathematicians and computing specialists working to improve simulations and predictions of fuel loading patterns or other optimisations that can lead to less waste. Meanwhile, other fields like chemists might look to improve their processes to minimise waste too. There's also a whole load of project management and planning work that goes into making sure things are efficiently done and that handling of radioactive materials is minimised to prevent the generation of too much low level waste like contaminated protective gear - so you'll also find a lot of admin roles contributing towards solving these challenges too.
Finally, the question about protective gear or PPE (personal protective equipment) - I already gave quite a bit of answer to in the comments on your previous question, but the distinction to be made here is whether you're protecting against radiation, or protecting against contamination. Radiation is what's coming out and doing damage, but once you're away from the source of radioactivity then it can't reach you any more, so radiation protection is often more about making sure you're away from radiation sources and minimising the time you're nearby, rather than wearing protective gear.
Conversely, contamination is where part of a radioactive material gets on you (or worse, in you), meaning you're taking it round with you and are therefore still getting new radiation dose from the contamination even when you're away from the rest of the radioactive stuff. That means it's really important to keep yourself clean from contamination - so most nuclear PPE is actually just regular PPE for keeping dirt and chemicals off and doesn't really require nuclear knowledge to design.
It's also important to remember what it takes to stop the various types of radiation. For a lot of alpha and beta radiation, these are easily stopped by thin layers like regular clothing and don't really need specific PPE. Other types of radiation like neutrons and high energy gammas will go straight through a lot of materials and you need heavy blocks of dense material to shield, which will never be practical to wear as PPE. Thinner lead aprons are useful for lower energy radiation like x-rays, though, so you often see them used in medical environments around x-ray machines.
Designing PPE that specifically shields radiation is quite niche area and there's not a lot that can be done to improve on existing lead aprons, except perhaps more comfortable and flexible designs. I guess that sort of thing would typically be the work of product design engineers working for medical suppliers, and doesn't really need nuclear engineers. Nuclear engineers can find work in shielding and radiation protection though - but this tends to be more about designing the built-in large wall shielding as part of a facility rather than gear that you'd wear.
Personally, I studied a Physics with Astrophysics programme at undergraduate degree level, then shifted focus slightly at postgraduate level to do a Nuclear Physics / Nuclear Engineering Masters. Although I'd previously been taught the basic physics principles of shielding against radiation in physics classes, I learned the most about waste management and radiation protection from that Masters programme, and am now working in a career where I'm using that knowledge to work on very similar problems. My work is more about making accurate measurements of the waste we do have, rather than directly working to directly treat waste, reduce the amount generated, or design shielding, but these are the sorts of challenges some of my colleagues are working on.
In terms of those specific topics, I'll first make a couple of clarifications and distinctions that you should consider.
Firstly, the idea of reducing and eliminating waste: this actually touches two quite different kinds of work - you should be aware of the difference between the ideas of waste treatment, and waste minimisation.
Waste treatment is about taking wastes that we have already got and processing them to reduce hazards, often by separating out the parts with higher or longer-lived radioactivity from the less active parts that form the bulk of the waste. This sort of thing is something some nuclear engineers end up getting involved with, but it can also involve a lot of chemistry, so studying chemistry could be a better starting point if you want to work in waste treatment.
Waste minimisation, on the other hand, is improving processes so less waste is generated to begin with. This can involve a lot of areas - nuclear physicists and nuclear engineers will look at doing things like designing more efficient reactor types that generate more power from the same fuel (what we call "greater burnup") and thus produce less waste. This can also involve mathematicians and computing specialists working to improve simulations and predictions of fuel loading patterns or other optimisations that can lead to less waste. Meanwhile, other fields like chemists might look to improve their processes to minimise waste too. There's also a whole load of project management and planning work that goes into making sure things are efficiently done and that handling of radioactive materials is minimised to prevent the generation of too much low level waste like contaminated protective gear - so you'll also find a lot of admin roles contributing towards solving these challenges too.
Finally, the question about protective gear or PPE (personal protective equipment) - I already gave quite a bit of answer to in the comments on your previous question, but the distinction to be made here is whether you're protecting against radiation, or protecting against contamination. Radiation is what's coming out and doing damage, but once you're away from the source of radioactivity then it can't reach you any more, so radiation protection is often more about making sure you're away from radiation sources and minimising the time you're nearby, rather than wearing protective gear.
Conversely, contamination is where part of a radioactive material gets on you (or worse, in you), meaning you're taking it round with you and are therefore still getting new radiation dose from the contamination even when you're away from the rest of the radioactive stuff. That means it's really important to keep yourself clean from contamination - so most nuclear PPE is actually just regular PPE for keeping dirt and chemicals off and doesn't really require nuclear knowledge to design.
It's also important to remember what it takes to stop the various types of radiation. For a lot of alpha and beta radiation, these are easily stopped by thin layers like regular clothing and don't really need specific PPE. Other types of radiation like neutrons and high energy gammas will go straight through a lot of materials and you need heavy blocks of dense material to shield, which will never be practical to wear as PPE. Thinner lead aprons are useful for lower energy radiation like x-rays, though, so you often see them used in medical environments around x-ray machines.
Designing PPE that specifically shields radiation is quite niche area and there's not a lot that can be done to improve on existing lead aprons, except perhaps more comfortable and flexible designs. I guess that sort of thing would typically be the work of product design engineers working for medical suppliers, and doesn't really need nuclear engineers. Nuclear engineers can find work in shielding and radiation protection though - but this tends to be more about designing the built-in large wall shielding as part of a facility rather than gear that you'd wear.