Is there a Crisis in Nuclear and Radiochemistry - Ernest Orlando ...

1,121 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,121
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
6
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
9
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Is there a Crisis in Nuclear and Radiochemistry - Ernest Orlando ...

  1. 1. Is there a Crisis in Nuclear and Radiochemistry Education in the U.S.? Heino Nitsche University of California at Berkeley and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory ANS Embedded Topical Meeting- Isotopes for Medicine and Industry- Manpower and Education Anaheim, CA, June 11, 2008 Invited presentation
  2. 2. The AAAS Subcommittee on Energy and Environment Report 1999
  3. 3. The AAAS Subcommittee on Energy and Environment Report 1999 Study Group
  4. 4. The IAEA Report 2002 Assessment of the Teaching and Application in Radiochemistry Report of a Technical Meeting Held in Antalya,Turkey June 10-14, 2002 Review of 24 countries
  5. 5. The DOE/NSF Nuclear Science Advisory Committee Report 2004
  6. 6. The Need for Nuclear and Radiochemists • GNEP: Nuclear power; new fuel cycle and reprocessing developments; nuclear waste isolation and site remediation — Greenhouse effect mitigation • Treatment, processing, and minimization of wastes • Nuclear medicine, isotope production, and radio- pharmaceutical research/industry • Homeland Security and anti-terrorism challenges • Stockpile Stewardship, surveillance of clandestine nuclear activities, nuclear trafficking • Maintaining national programs to ensure adequate education in nuclear and radiochemistry and radiation science to avert detrimental consequences to energy supply, public health and industry
  7. 7. The DOE Nuclear Workforce Figure 3: Cumulative Loss of Nuclear Skills (2002-2011) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Year FTEsLost Retirees Retirees + Attrition PNNL: Loss of Nuclear Workforce (2002-2010) 2010 300 700 Courtesy of Prof. Sue B. Clark
  8. 8. The DOE Nuclear Workforce Courtesy of Prof. Sue B. Clark
  9. 9. Trends in Chemistry Faculty • Nuclear faculty in chemical science disciplines shrinking • Current academic perceptions: – Nuclear physics still considered “important” in the physics curriculum – Nuclear and radiochemistry is perceived as dispensible in the chemistry curriculum • Tendency to replace retired/retiring nuclear science faculty with faculty in other areas • Applications of nuclear/radiochemistry, nuclear physics appearing in engineering curricula, e.g., nuclear engineering
  10. 10. Good News in Nuclear Engineering • Degrees in Nuclear Engineering at the Bachelor and Master level show an upward trend since the past several years (ORISE 2006 Survey) • 31 U.S. Academic NE programs — B.S. degrees: 346 in 2006 compared to 166 in 2003 — M.S. degrees up by 214 for the same time span — Ph.D. constant at 70 per year • This is a result of substantially increased University funding and research fellowship programs • Nuclear and Radiochemistry is still left behindNuclear and Radiochemistry is still left behind — concentrated efforts to increase the number ofconcentrated efforts to increase the number of students are mostly lackingstudents are mostly lacking
  11. 11. 11 Number of Faculty in Nuclear or Radiochemistry by Institution Source: ACS Directory of Graduate Research (DGRweb, 2007) http://dgr.rints.com/index.cfm 0 1 2 3 4 C arnegie M ellon U niversity D alhousie U niversity Eastern M ichigan U niversity Indiana U niversity M ichigan State U niversity O regon State U niversity Pittsburg State U niversity Purdue U niversity R ochesterInstitute ofTechnology State U niversity ofN ew York atStony B rook Tennessee TechnologicalU niversity Texas A& M U niversity U C B erkeley U niversity ofB ritish C olum bia U niversity ofIdaho U niversity ofK entucky U niversity ofM aryland C ollege Park U niversity ofM issouri-C olum bia U niversity ofN evada -Las Vegas U niversity ofR ochester U niversity ofW ashington U niversity ofW estern O ntario W ashington State U niversity W ashington U niversity Female Researchers Male Researchers NumberofFaculty Institution 24 Universities: 41 Faculty 22 U.S. Univ.: 39 Faculty
  12. 12. 12 Age Distribution of Faculty in Nuclear or Radiochemistry by Institution 0 1 2 3 C arnegie M ellon U niversity D alhousie U niversity Eastern M ichigan U niversity Indiana U niversity M ichigan State U niversity O regon S tate U niversity Pittsburg S tate U niversity Purdue U niversity R ochesterInstitute ofTechnology State U niversity ofN ew York atStony B rook Tennessee TechnologicalU niversity Texas A & M U niversityU C B erkeley U niversity ofB ritish C olum bia U niversity ofIdaho U niversity ofK entucky U niversity ofM aryland C ollege Park U niversity ofM issouri-C olum bia U niversity ofN evada -Las Vegas U niversity ofR ochester U niversity ofW ashington U niversity ofW estern O ntario W ashington S tate U niversity W ashington U niversity Researchers Above 70 Researchers Ages 40-70 Researchers Under 40 NumberofFaculty Institution Source: ACS Directory of Graduate Research (DGRweb, 2007) http://dgr.rints.com/index.cfm
  13. 13. 13 Number of Faculty in Nuclear or Radiochemistry Chemistry by Birth Year NumberofFaculty Birth Year 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1925- 1929 1930- 1934 1935- 1939 1940- 1944 1945- 1949 1950- 1954 1955- 1959 1960- 1964 1965- 1969 1970- 1974 1975- 1979 Number of Researchers Source: ACS Directory of Graduate Research (DGRweb, 2007) http://dgr.rints.com/index.cfm
  14. 14. The Public Image of Nuclear Science • NEGATIVE :Public fear of radiation and nuclear powerNEGATIVE :Public fear of radiation and nuclear power — propagated by “environmentalists” and the press — fueled by Harrisburg, Chernobyl, and Tokai Mura accidents — scare of dirty bombs • Some countries abandon nuclear power option — public antinuclear behavior makes anything nuclear prime targets • Most activities are/were related to safety and security — stimulates the impression that anything nuclear is dangerous and very critical • Research was closely related to treatment of wastes and nothing else- GNEP may/will change this!
  15. 15. Nuclear and Radiochemistry is Absent in the Undergraduate Curriculum • No “nuclear science” degrees in Colleges of Science • Some degrees in “nuclear science & engineering” • Rarely a part of general chemistry syllabi • Usually a part of comprehensive general chemistry texts (chapter 25) -- often not taught at all • Only an elective in a comprehensive, ACS-approved undergraduate chemistry degree program —increased ACS requirements in other areas of chemistry • Students are not informed about nuclear and radiochemistry and never come in contact with it —believe that discipline is not at frontier of science and there is no job market
  16. 16. National Research Council Report 2007
  17. 17. PhDs in Nuclear & Radiochemistry Awarded at US Universities 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 Year Number 23.4 12.6 12.5 6.8 Ph.D.s in Nuclear and Radiochemistry Awarded in the U.S.
  18. 18. Nuclear Physics vs. Nuclear/Radiochemistry Ph.D. Graduates • Number of chemistry & physics PhD’s decreasing since early 1990’s • ~ 82 PhD’s in nuclear physics per year (2000, 2001), out of ~1,400 PhD’s in physics • < 10 PhD’s in radiochemistry per year (2000, 2001), out of ~ 1,800 PhD’s in chemistry
  19. 19. General Decline in Science and Engineering “In preparing Indicators 2004, we have observed a troubling decline in the number of U.S. citizens who are training to become scientists and engineers, whereas the number of jobs requiring science and engineering (S&E) training continues to grow. Our recently published report entitled The Science and Engineering Workforce/Realizing America's Potential (NSB 03-69, 2003) comes to a similar conclusion. These trends threaten the economic welfare and security of our country. … Now, preparation of the S&E workforce is a vital arena for national competitiveness.” National Science Board, Science and EngineeringNational Science Board, Science and Engineering Indicators—2004Indicators—2004
  20. 20. Nuclear Science Expertise is Viewed as Vital: Demand May Exceed The Supply “We further recommend that training grants be established in areas required to advance DOE’s mission in the future, but for which the U.S. is not producing scientists and engineers. Some of these should be in traditional areas essentially unique to DOE such as nuclear engineering and nuclear science. Others will be especially useful in emerging areas like nanotechnology and biological engineering that must grow at the intersections of traditional disciplines” Secretary of Energy Advisory Board (2003)Secretary of Energy Advisory Board (2003)
  21. 21. Nuclear Science Expertise is Viewed as Vital “…The future vigor and prosperity of American medicine, science, technology, and national defense clearly depend on continued development of nuclear techniques [and applications]…” National Research Council 1988National Research Council 1988 “… Too few isotope experts are being prepared for functions in government, medicine, industry, technology, and science…” Report to the US House of Representatives, 1998Report to the US House of Representatives, 1998
  22. 22. Repairing The Nuclear Education Pipeline Kindergarden to Grade 12 Undergraduate Students Graduate Students Postdoctoral Scholars
  23. 23. Repairing The Nuclear Education Pipeline (K-12) • NSAC Subcommittee on Education: We recommend that the highest priority for new investment in education be the creation of a Center for Nuclear Science OutreachCenter for Nuclear Science Outreach by the DOE and the NSF • Effective outreach can engage the public from K-12 to adults, e.g., space sciences, the genome project • Stimulate an increasing national understanding of the nuclear world that Mankind lives in, as well as an improved appreciation of the goals and achievements of nuclear science • Create a dedicated resource, to be consistently focused on developing communication and outreach on nuclear issues
  24. 24. Repairing The Nuclear Education Pipeline (K-12) • Many efforts by organizations, national labs, interested groups, etc. —the message is normally focused locally, rather than nationally • The Center would profit from these other efforts, but achieve its outreach goals while strengthening and supporting these existing efforts, not duplicating them
  25. 25. Repairing The Nuclear Education Pipeline (K-12) • Creation of Center for Nuclear Science OutreachCenter for Nuclear Science Outreach by DOE and NSF with sufficient resources, either at a university or a national laboratory • Acquire a professional and dedicated staff knowledgeable about nuclear science; K-12 and public education; and public relations • Achieve nuclear science community input and feedback by the establishment of ties with the DNP, its Committee on Education, the Division of Nuclear Chemistry and Technology of the ACS, and the ANS
  26. 26. Repairing The Nuclear Education Pipeline (Undergraduate Education) • Undergraduate years - crucial window of time • Re-introduce Nuclear and Radiochemistry into the basic chemistry syllabus —at least one week per two semesters • Undergraduate research is of major importance for nuclear science in maintaining/growing the graduate student population • Provide specific nuclear undergraduate research experiences — with faculty and/or DOE scientists — some fellowships exist dedicated to all of science in DOE labs : Summer Undergraduate Laboratory Internship (SULI) progam
  27. 27. Nuclear Chemistry Summer Schools (ACS-Sanctioned) •NSAC Subcommittee on Education: Establishment of a thirdEstablishment of a third summer school for nuclear chemistry, modeled after the twosummer school for nuclear chemistry, modeled after the two existing schoolsexisting schools •San Jose State University and Brookhaven National Laboratory– limited to 12 students each - sponsored by DOE’s Office of Basic Energy Sciences and Office of Biological and Environmental Research •Steady increase of applicants •From about 40 (1999) to more than 140 (2007) •Approximately 70% of participants go on to physics or chemistry graduate school, most of whom concentrate on nuclear chemistry or radiochemistry •Recruitment into and training of young scientists in the field of nuclear and radiochemistry remains a very high priority for the nuclear science community
  28. 28. Repairing The Nuclear Education Pipeline (Graduate Education) • Research is the primary mode of training for graduate degrees in physics and chemistry • Requires sufficient and longer-term funding commitment • NSAC Subcommittee on Education: We strongly endorse theWe strongly endorse the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board’s 2003Secretary of Energy Advisory Board’s 2003 recommendation that new, prestigious graduate studentrecommendation that new, prestigious graduate student fellowships be developed by the Office of Science in thefellowships be developed by the Office of Science in the areas of physical sciences, including nuclear science, thatareas of physical sciences, including nuclear science, that are critical to the missions of the DOEare critical to the missions of the DOE • Prestigious fellowships and training grants would serve to attract the brightest graduate students for study in the physical sciences, including nuclear science, in areas critical to the missions of the DOE, providing them with the flexibility to prepare for research in their subfield of choice
  29. 29. Repairing The Nuclear Education Pipeline (Postdocoral Fellows) • NSAC Subcommittee on Education: We recommend thatWe recommend that prestigious postdoctoral fellowships in nuclear science beprestigious postdoctoral fellowships in nuclear science be established, with funding from the NSF and the DOEestablished, with funding from the NSF and the DOE • To recognize nuclear scientists early in their careers for their accomplishments and potential, and to help increase the visibility of nuclear science • There are relatively few ways in which nuclear scientists early in their careers are recognized for their accomplishments and potential, and even fewer ways in which this recognition extends beyond the nuclear science community. Prestigious postdoctoral awards in other physical sciences have served to meet both of these challenges
  30. 30. It is Not Too Late To Avert a Catastrophe…. • A foundation upon which to build still exists (for the moment)… — existing university programs — ACS Summer Schools in Nuclear and Radiochemistry • Replace retiring faculty before they retire — often only possible if specific sponsors (DOE, NSF) guarantee funding of such positions to the universities — Nuclear Industry sponsored Chairs — create new faculty positions in non-nuclear chemistry departments
  31. 31. The European Approach
  32. 32. A High-level Solution is Required • Until our political leaders and decision makers firmly commit to nuclear science and technology, all lower level efforts are bandages to this urgent national problem • The decision to truly improve nuclear and radiochemistry science and education has to come from Congress with a commitment to (long-range) funding • Educate your Senators, Congress delegates, and the Press
  33. 33. Thank you for your attention Thank You for Your Attention

×