# data[].attributes.body
Radiating a passion for efficiency and serving the people with reliable energy.

# data[].attributes.body
FissionChips is committed to providing America with clean and reliable nuclear energy through the use of cutting-edge reactor technologies, smarter regulations, and the preservation of existing reactors across the country. Our Clean Energy Plan will not only mitigate the effects of climate change, but will provide for enhanced national security, a more robust infrastructure, job growth, and worldwide safe sustainable development.

# data[].attributes.body
Nuclear energy is derived from a complex process beginning with the energy is stored in the nucleus of an atom, in Nuclear Power plants they rely on radioactive elements like uranium to utilize for fuel. Uranium is formed into ceramic pellets and is placed in a 12-foot metal fuel rod. Hundreds of rods are bundled to create a fuel assembly. These uranium atoms are split apart, this process is known as fission. Fission releases massive amounts of energy, which is used to heat water to steam. The steam turns a turbine and enables a generator to produce electricity (Schiffman 2011).

# data[].attributes.headline
Nuclear Energy Compared to Other Energy Sources

# data[].attributes.subject
Nuclear Energy Compared to Other Energy Sources

# data[].attributes.body
Currently, within the U.S. there are 98 operating nuclear power reactors. These reactors represent about 10% of the U.S. electrical generation. They are also the source of 63.3% of our clean-air electricity (Nuscale Power)
Nuclear power plants do not burn fuel and they do not produce direct greenhouse gas emissions. Nuclear energy accounts for 56% of our nation's carbon-free electricity and nearly 20% of America's electricity comes from nuclear energy, making it an important clean energy resource for years to come (Duke, 2019).

Nuclear power is one of the most efficient types of energy available; as seen In the image below, it has the highest capacity factor, meaning it produces maximum power more than 93% of the time during a single year. A typical nuclear reactor produces 1 gigawatt of electricity; two to three coal plants would be necessary to generate the same amount of electricity (Office of Nuclear Energy, 2020).  Additionally it has the smallest footprint for the most energy produced. In the video below it shows how much space would be required to produce 1000MWe (Nuscale Power).

Nuclear Fission is able to provided the most power for the smallest quantity of fuel. One pound of uranium can supply the same energy as 3 million pounds of coal. This drastic difference is one of the many reasons it reduces carbon dioxide (CO₂) in the atmosphere. According to the World Nuclear Association, if all the worlds nuclear energy facilities were replaced with coal-fired power plants, 2.6 billion tons of CO₂ would be added to the atmosphere annually. (Schiffman 2011)

# data[].attributes.body
The NuScale Power Module has developed competitive design, fabrication and on-site installation by creating a far less complex design. As a result the two power plants could be installed and fully operational after a 3 year construction schedule. The power plants are designed with modular construction techniques, which make installing and removing the facility quick and at reduced construction costs. Additionally, the modular style allows the facility to easily be expanded to further reach energy needs. In the video below it explains the NuScale construction sequence. Construction for a NuScale net 684 MWe plant is $3 billion, as opposed to the normal cost of a regular Nuclear power plant at around $30 billion.

Due to the smarter energy designed by NuScale, they also have found ways to reduce operating costs for running the plant. They have modified refueling by making it a routine task, instead of costly two year evolutions. Additionally they have implemented smaller electric turbines which require little maintenance, and multiple modules in a centralized site also lead to reduce maintenance costs. (Nuscale Power)

# data[].attributes.body
Nuclear waste, or "used fuel", is the uranium removed from the reactor. Currently, most nuclear facilities utilize dry cast storage. Dry Cask Storage systems are bolted-closed containers that keep cooled fuel pools surrounded by an inert gas for at least one year. By bolting the casks closed, it reinforces a leak-proof system to keep the spent fuel inside. The cask is then covered in more steel and concrete to decrease radiation for on-site workers and the surrounding community. This creates safety in storage, but also makes protection in transporting these casks if necessary to a different site. All the used nuclear fuel produced by the nuclear energy industry in 60 years would cover an area the size of a football field with a depth of 10 yard (Nuscale Power).
Additionally, the used fuel removed from the reactor still contains nearly 96% of its original fuel. This fuel could be recovered to produce new fuel. We will be utilizing this new recycling technology. Not only would it reduce the burden of disposing of waste, but could also reduce the need for more mining of uranium. The uranium is recycled by combing it with a plutonium. This blend creates a new fuel known as MOX fuel. Following the use of Mox fuel, it will then be stored using dry cast storage. This new recycling technology allows us to utilize as much uranium while producing less waste and requiring less mining.

# data[].attributes.body
We are requesting a fund of $6 billion to place, develop, and begin operation of two new NuScale SMR power plants. Each single reactor power plant has a start up cost of $3 billion. We are allotting an additional $1.5 billion for each plant to purchase and prepare the property for the development of the plant and to pay initial costs and salaries to begin, maintain operations of the plant, and begin development of the dry cask storage.

# data[].attributes.headline
Considering the Advantages of Nuclear Energy 

# data[].attributes.subject
Considering the Advantages of Nuclear Energy 

# data[].attributes.headline
Considering the Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy 

# data[].attributes.subject
Considering the Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy 

# data[].attributes.body
Nuclear power is a viable economic source of electricity generation due to its enhancement of national security, its reliability, as well as its zero emissions operation and cost competitiveness (Deinart, 2017).

The International Energy Agency (IEA) sees the global demand for electricity growing at 1.9% per year in the period to 2040. This demand, coupled with a strong desire to reduce greenhouse gases and climate changing effects makes nuclear energy a perfect solution (Fauske, 2020). However, many have concerns over initial costs, economic impacts, and financing.

Are Nuclear Power Plants Worth the Capital Cost?

The economics of new nuclear plants are heavily influenced by their capital cost, which accounts for at least 60% of their levelised cost of electricity (Fauske, 2020). Interest charges and the construction period are important variables for determining the overall cost of capital. However, once a nuclear plant has been constructed, the production cost of electricity is low and predictably stable. Operating costs of plants are manageable, and have a “low risk of significant operating cost inflation.” Further, plants have long lives; some being predicted to last “ 60 years or more (World Nuclear Association, 2017).  Long service life and high capacity factor allow a sufficient amount of funds for plant decommissioning, waste storage, and other costs associated with plant operation.

How do Nuclear Power Plants Benefit the Economy?

With the current climate crisis, it is of economic benefit to invest in clean energy that doesn’t add to the problem. Increased global temperatures as a result of Greenhouse Gases are causing economic strife throughout the world; increased natural disasters such as fire, hurricanes, flooding, heatwaves, polar vortex’s etc., are causing millions of dollars in losses from damaged infrastructure, lost businesses, human health, and more. By utilizing clean power, GHGs can be reduced significantly and can result in less of these abnormalities and thus, a decreased loss of life, limb, property, and money in the long run.

Further, Nuclear power plants “create some of the largest economic benefits compared to other electric generating technologies due to their size and the number of workers needed to operate the plants (Nuclear Energy’s Economic Benefits — Current and Future, 2012).”

Simply speaking, Nuclear Power Plants require manpower- and a lot of it; the nuclear energy sector creates thousands of jobs.

Moreover, an increased reliance on nuclear energy will produce a demand for more skilled laborers such as welders, pipefitters, masons, carpenters, millwrights, sheet metal workers, electricians, ironworkers, heavy equipment operators and insulators, as well as engineers, project managers and construction supervisors needed to make a plant operate correctly (Nuclear Energy’s Economic Benefits — Current and Future, 2012). This demand will result in a more college-educated population, and thus bolster the United States economy.

Nuclear energy expansion in the U.S. and around the world, could also provide a unique opportunity to rejuvenate the nuclear manufacturing sector through an investment in factories, processes, and research to supply the components necessary for nuclear technologies. The demand for these commodities, components and services provides an export opportunity for U.S. manufacturers.

In order for these advantages of nuclear power to be fully realised, policymakers need to address fundamental market design problems. One such idea is to place monetary value on nuclear advantages such as reliability, security, and climate change mitigation.

Finally, In the interest of the general public, the average nuclear plant pays about $16 million in state and local taxes annually (Fauske, 2020). These tax dollars benefit schools, roads, and other state and local infrastructure.

If Nuclear Energy is so great, why aren’t there more Nuclear Power Plants?

Financing Nuclear Power Plants is challenging, and for a number of reasons. First, the high capital cost and technical complexity of NPPs present relatively high risks during construction (delays and cost overruns) and operation (equipment failures and unplanned outages) (The Financing of Nuclear Power Plants, 2009). Second, the often controversial nature of nuclear projects, could give rise to additional political and regulatory risks. Last, given the long time frame involved in nuclear projects from the start of construction to the end of operating life, a broad-based political consensus is likely to be needed, otherwise investors will be open to the risks of sudden policy shifts as governments change, potentially jeopardizing their investment (The Financing of Nuclear Power Plants, 2009).

Since our proposed plant is less complex than other designs, installation on-site is simplified. Off-site fabrication and assembly reduces cost, and components are delivered to the site ready to install. As a result, construction occurs in a shorter, more predictable period of time and requires less manpower. Our short construction schedule provides greater assurance that the plant will achieve operation before unforeseen external events impact the schedule.

Why Our Proposal Is Cost Effective

Our plants have no reactor coolant pumps, no external steam generator vessels, and no large-bore reactor coolant piping. This translates into lower cost to fabricate, install, operate, maintain and decommission, thereby reducing the life-cycle cost to produce energy while lowering operational risk.

By giving FissionChips Inc. the money to adequately research, design, build, staff, and finance a sustainable and efficient Nuclear Energy program, the government would be taking an active role in the advancement of clean energy, thus signifying leadership in the world energy economy and telling its citizens that it cares about clean, reliable energy. In providing the resources needed to propel this nation towards the front of the global clean energy race, we can create more jobs, more energy, a better earth, and thus, a stronger society.

# data[].attributes.body
By EPA regulations, there are federally defined limits for what is permitted in terms of radioactive emissions from nuclear power plants. These limits ensure safety of surrounding communities and ecosystems, and must be reported annually to the US NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission). These reports are available to the public, and the public can hold nuclear power plants accountable to make certain that it is properly serving the community. Our power plants are secured by high-end security systems and employees to verify the protection of the public and the power plant.

What is radiation?
Radiation is defined in physics as the emission of energy in the form of waves and particles through space or a medium. This comes from everywhere: the sun, the Earth, and air. Nuclear radiation, which is a byproduct of nuclear energy, is the radiation that comes from unstable atoms, produced when Uranium goes through the process of "fission."
Many critics commonly associate living near plants with a higher rate of cancer. However, several studies conducted over the past few decades have proven that there is no correlation between living near a nuclear power plant and higher cancer rates. The NRC published the statement: "The 1990 [National Cancer Institute] NCI report concluded that cancer mortality rates were the same whether a reactor was nearby or not."

In what ways do we ensure that our radiation levels are within these federally determined limits?
First, the NuScale reactor buildings are designed to utilize a material that can withstand and contain radiation upon emergencies. The containment of radiation is a major component of the nuclear power plant. The reactor is designed to be surrounded by a concrete and steel shield. Concrete is generally used because it is able to absorb radiation and stop it from passing through into the atmosphere and surrounding areas. Nuclear waste is disposed of safely to protect the community and surrounding ecosystems. Because of the smaller size of NuScale reactors, there is less radiation to worry about at each plant and is therefore easily within federal limits. Although we only need to report our emissions annually, we perform radioactive level tests regularly, and demonstrate that they are so low they could practically be zero. This is a result of the precautions that we take in our infrastructure to heighten safety and prioritize the health of our area.

What happens to the nuclear waste?
A common topic in regards to nuclear energy is what will become of the nuclear waste that is generated through the process of using nuclear energy. There is already less waste produced at our power plant than usual because of the NuScale process of recycling fuel. Not only this, but the smaller sized plants mean there is less nuclear waste contained in a concentrated area. Our power plant will implement a Dry Cask Storage system to keep nuclear energy completely safe from the public and surrounding ecosystems. Dry Cask Storage systems are bolted-closed containers that keep cooled fuel pools surrounded by an inert gas for at least one year. By bolting the casks closed, it reinforces a leak-proof system to keep the spent fuel inside. The cask is then covered in more steel and concrete to decrease radiation for on-site workers and the surrounding community. This creates safety in storage, but also makes protection in transporting these casks if necessary to a different site.

Public Outreach
Part of the process of constructing our power plant involves a priority in public safety and communication. We intend to have seminars open to the public throughout the construction process where our community can attend to be educated on the process and details of our power plant, ask questions, and be familiar with what we do. We believe this is a critical element of our power plant to corroborate public support and approval, as well as general public safety. Transparency is a critical element when it comes to security and accountability of our company.

Nuclear Energy will positively impact the community!
Not only will it provide a great number of new jobs for people living in the area, it is also significantly more efficient than fossil fuels and other forms of energy and is therefore much better for the environment and addresses the issue of over-consumption.

# data[].attributes.body
Beyond just the public safety, many express concerns on how nuclear power plants affect local wildlife and ecosystems. Our precautions put into place are not just for the safety of humans, but also to maintain our important and loved local wildlife.

Generally, the critiques are on how nuclear waste affects wildlife. When looking at nuclear waste, it is categorized as either low-level or high-level waste to determine the period of time necessary for storage before it can be disposed of safely. The majority of waste created in our power plant falls under the category of low-level waste. As stated before, the waste at our power plant is stored in a Dry Cask Storage System that is bolted shut and sealed with concrete for at least one year. Over time, nuclear radiation looses its danger through a process known as radioactive decay. Radioactive decay is the spontaneous decay of an unstable atomic nucleus and the unstable atom loses its energy by radiation over time. Radioactive decay of a material is defined by the half-life of the material, which is the period of time for the radiation to drop to half of the initial value. This means we store our waste for the period of time necessary for it to become non-hazardous material. Once this occurs, it can safely be disposed of in a manner that does not negatively impact local wildlife and ecosystems.

NuScale systems mitigate the affects of warming coastal waters that occur from using water in our systems. Because of the smaller design, there is less water needed to cool the fuel rods and therefore less warm water periodically reentering the coastal wildlife, minimizing the issue of the coast warming from our power plant to practically nonexistent.

# data[].attributes.body
FissionChips Inc. is proposing the development of two new NuScale Nuclear Energy facilites along the coast. NuScale claims that its small modular reactors, or SMRs, will be safer and use less water than conventional reactors. But the big selling point is their relatively low buy-in cost. A utility could, theoretically, build a micro-nuke plant for less than $2 billion upfront, a bargain next to the $27 billion or so currently being spent to construct new reactors at the Vogtle plant in Georgia” (Thompson 2018). Not only are the NuScale nuclear power plants less expensive, they utilize new technology and design innovations to make them scalable to fit more locations and still meet their energy needs. Building a 720 MWe, 12 module NuScale plant could power 540,000 U.S. homes with carbon free electricity and reduce over 6 million tons of CO₂ emissions per year (Nuscale Power). This is why we believe that building two SMRs would be effective in providing carbon free power.

# data[].attributes.body
While we work hard to ensure complete safety, it is also imperative that we plan for an emergency and be prepared for every possible scenario. Although the existence of a plan such as this makes it seem as though the nuclear power plant poses risks, designing a plan such as this is done to verify thorough security of our community.
Our publicly accessible emergency plan is available below. It touches upon a few important concepts for the surrounding community to be aware of if necessary. Our plan is modeled based on similar power plants that are already in existence.

There are several kinds of emergency alerts that can occur, all with different meanings and plans. Here are the classifications:
1. Unusual event: this is in the instance of a minor, unplanned event. There is no threat to public safety when this occurs.
2. Alert: A plant safety system has been damaged and requires attention, however there is no threat to public safety when this occurs.
3. Site area emergency: A radioactive release that was unplanned has occurred, however it is not expected to surpass the federal safety limits or reach past 1,000 yards from the power plant.
4. General emergency: A radioactive release that was unplanned has occurred, expected to surpass the federal safety limits. Protective measures must begin.

The surrounding community of the power plant is separated into Protective Action Zones (PAZ) and Public Education Zones (PEZ). In the instance of a general emergency, there may be a required shelter in place in the PAZ zones, or even actions taken as small as educating the public on the situation to keep the community updated. (likely in both the PAZ and the PEZ). Those living in these areas will be encouraged to be familiar with the plant and potential plans. Regardless of whether or not the public is familiar with our plans, we make it a priority to keep the public updated and safe in the case of an unplanned extremity.
In the instance of a General Emergency, on top of enacting a shelter in place, people in the PAZ and possibly PEZ are encouraged to tune into the radio or television to stay informed on what to do. If necessary, our power plant will instruct if it is time to evacuate, although this in unlikely.

# data[].attributes.body
Backgrounder on Analysis of Cancer Risks in Populations Near Nuclear Facilities. (2019, May). Retrieved from: https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/bg-analys-cancer-risk-study.html

Deinert, M. R. (2017). Nuclear Power nuclear power , Economics nuclear power economics of. Encyclopedia of Sustainability Science and Technology,7180-7193. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-0851-3_33

Desai, H. (2020, July 28). Resources. Retrieved from https://www.nei.org/resources

Dry Cask Storage. Retrieved from: https://www.nrc.gov/waste/spent-fuel-storage/dry-cask-storage.html

Emergency Planning: Diablo Canyon Power Plant. Retrieved from: https://www.pge.com/includes/docs/pdfs/shared/edusafety/systemworks/dcpp/PGE_0000_Flyer%20May%2011OL.pdf

Fauske, A. (2020, May 13). Cost Benefit Analysis of Nuclear Power Plants. Retrieved from https://www.fauske.com/blog/cost-benefit-analysis-of-nuclear-power-plants

IEA (2019), World Energy Outlook 2019, IEA, Paris https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2019

Mueller, M. (2020, April 22). Nuclear Power is the Most Reliable Energy Source and It's Not Even Close. Retrieved from https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/nuclear-power-most-reliable-energy-source-and-its-not-even-close

Nuclear Energy - How Energy Works. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.duke-energy.com/Energy-Education/How-Energy-Works/Nuclear-Power#tab-1973b216-dd36-401f-9959-96cac246cc61

Nuclear Energy’s Economic Benefits — Current and Future. (2012). Stanford University. Retrieved from http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2018/ph241/may2/docs/nei-apr12.pdf

Nuclear Explained: Nuclear power and the environment. (Last updated January 2020). Retrieved from: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/nuclear/nuclear-power-and-the-environment.php#:~:text=A%20major%20environmental%20concern%20related,fuel%2C%20and%20other%20radioactive%20wastes.&text=The%20radioactivity%20of%20nuclear%20waste,a%20process%20called%20radioactive%20decay.

Nuclear Power Plants. Retrieved from: https://www.epa.gov/radtown/nuclear-power-plants#:~:text=Public%20safety%20is%20a%20high,limits%20for%20radioactive%20air%20emissions.

Nuscale Power. Retrieved from https://www.nuscalepower.com/.

Schiffman, H. (2011). Green Issues and Debates: An A-to-Z Guide. Sage Publications, 361-366.

The Financing of Nuclear Power Plants. (2009). Nuclear Development. doi:10.1787/9789264079229-en

The Pros & Cons of Nuclear Energy: Is it safe? (2019, April 30). Retrieved from https://springpowerandgas.us/the-pros-cons-of-nuclear-energy-is-it-safe/

Thompson, J. (2018). Is Nuclear Energy the Key to Saving the Planet? High Country News. Retrieved from www.hcn.org/issues/50.21/nuclear-energy-a-new-generation-of-environmentalists-is-learning-to-stop-worrying-and-love-nuclear-power.