Silver Lining

The great promise of the atomic age--cheap and unlimited power from uranium --has not materialized. Some critics blame the Atomic Energy Commission for yielding to the military and devoting too much of its attention to developing atomic weapons. Speaking last week before the Detroit Section of the Society of Automotive Engineers, Dr. Lawrence R. Hafstad, director of the AEC's Division of Reactor Development, answered the critics. If practical atomic power ever comes, said Dr. Hafstad, it will probably be because of, not in spite of, military needs.

It is well established, Dr. Hafstad admitted, that the earth contains a lot of uranium and that uranium contains a lot of energy. Theoretically, one pound of fissionable uranium could do the work of 360,000 gallons of gasoline. But no one should be led astray by such figures, Dr. Hafstad warned. Getting practical and tractable energy out of uranium is an extremely difficult, dangerous and expensive business.

Elusive Materials. In designing nuclear reactors, Hafstad said, the scientist cannot depend on familiar, well-behaved materials. Most of them are useless. They absorb too many neutrons (and so slow down the reaction) or they are quickly damaged by corrosion, heat or radiation. The AEC is building a special reactor to test the performance of various materials for piping, shielding, etc. Until it has been in operation for some time, reactor designers will not know for certain what materials they dare to use.

Hafstad regretted that he could not give his audience the latest figures on the cost and efficiency of reactors. Keeping on the safe side of security, he estimated that four large research reactors cost $2,688 for every kilowatt of power they produce, while a coal-burning power plant, he pointed out, costs $133 a kilowatt. Nuclear reactors will have to improve enormously before they can compete economically with conventional power producers. At present they are so far behind that a private company would be crazy to put any money into them.

Dividends of War. The saving factor, said Hafstad, is the much decried "military research." War and the fear of war, which transcend economics, may yet make nuclear energy available for peaceful purposes. "In fact," said Hafstad, "the history of technological development is replete with examples of civilian devices the development costs of which were borne by the military. Take such a lowly item as an aluminum saucepan. How long would it have taken to collect from housewives in dimes and quarters, the millions of dollars that have gone into the [wartime] study of the metallurgy and fabrication problems of aluminum? Or take airplanes themselves. Would the Post Office Department, for example, have been able to find the hundreds of millions of dollars for the development costs of a device as visionary as the airplane?" Hafstad pointed out that the submarine has proved wholly useless for all but war like purposes. But the lightweight diesel engine now dominating U.S. railroads was developed for use in submarines. The present furious research on reactors for propelling naval vessels or even the work on the wholly "useless" atomic bomb may yield similar peaceful dividends.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.