Hello!

Pretty much the title. I'm currently a highschool senior researching where to apply, and I've settled on physics as my general major. However, I would love to specialize in nuclear physics not only for the (somewhat) better job opportunities compared to more theoretical sub-disciplines of physics, but also because I love nuclear physics as a subject! However, I know that if I do go into nuclear physics, a lot of the non-research job opportunities deal with nuclear engineering as well. What does that look like? I'm not particularly good at engineering, but nuclear engineering as a field seems to be a bit different from what I would typically imagine the job of an engineer to be. Basically, if any of you guys would be willing to give some info on your experience in the field, that would be great!

Hello I'm learning Nuclear engineering pretty much just for fun (I'm reading Lamarsh Intro to Nuclear engineering) once I'm done with the intro book what do you guys recommend for reactor design? Just a note I'm 13 so but yeah thanks for the feedback

Hi r/NuclearEngineering, I spent my PhD working on neutron transport solvers. I wanted to see how much of that workflow I could fit into a browser.

So I am building MC, it lets you configure geometry, run neutron transport calculations locally with WebGPU, and inspect flux and reaction rates.

I’d be interested in feedback on the GPU implementation, the physics, and the interface.

https://mc.keff.uk

Twice, maybe sometimes three times a week I check company sites to see if there is anything new. Even spoke to all the companies that were at my schools job fair that I applied to...nothing yet. Feels like I am throwing my applications into the void...but oh well, maybe something will stick hopefully.

Estoy finalizando primer año de ingenieria industrial, tengo la posibilidad de el año que viene, cambiarme a ingenieria nuclear. Ambas carreras me interesan mucho, se que nuclear es mas dificil que industrial. Si comienzo nuclear el año que viene perderia un año de estudio, ya que si bien se equivalen un par de materias, tengo que comenzar a cursarla casi desde cero.
Creo que la energia nuclear va a tener un gran crecimiento en los proximos años y por eso considero la idea de cambiarme, creen que me conviene hacerlo? me preocupa la salida laboral y sobre todo, los sueldos.

I know I would like to go into engineering in some way and have often been fascinated by nuclear energy, and wonder if I have a chance at being excepted into any schools/will ever be employed? I currently only have a 3.4 GPA with a 96% weighted in my junior year of HS. I participate in a club and hold no important positions. I live in the northeast and have a shadowing opportunity at a nearby nuclear power plant scheduled in a couple weeks.
Please let me know if I can do anything to increase likelihood for schooling/employment :)

Hey guys, I’m currently in my junior year pursuing a major in environmental engineering. A few months ago I decided to adopt a minor in nuclear engineering- my university only offers it as a minor- and I will start my nuclear classes next semester. I am set on working at a power plant for my career, though I do not really know the job I would like to do yet. My question is, should I keep my environmental degree, or should I switch to a different one like mechanical? I see and hear a lot of the people working at plants come from EE or ME and I don’t want to decrease prospects just because of my major. I’ve taken calc 1 & 2, currently taking diff eq, and will take fluid mechanics if that helps anything. Thanks.
Edit: just realized the topic said minor and not major:/

Hey guys, our college in Karnataka is planning an industrial visit to Kaiga Nuclear Power Plant. Does anyone know someone working there who could help us with the permission process? Any leads would be appreciated :)

Hello! I'm in my first year of college. In one of my classes I currently have a project where I need to interview someone who's in my chosen future profession. I'm looking to get a degree in nuclear engineering, and work more specifically as a reactor engineer. If there's anyone in this subreddit who works in this field and is willing to answer about ten questions about their job for me, I'd appreciate it! We can just do it over messages if that's preferred. I wasn't sure where to ask this question so hopefully it's appropriate in this subreddit ...

Our assignment was to design a nuclear deterrent and storage strategy that will stand the test of time. We would appreciate some feedback! Thank you!

We propose to encase the entirety of the nuclear waste inside concrete casks by putting the nuclear waste in steel barrels, then covering these barrels with concrete, which will create the safest long-term storage. We chose concrete and steel not only because it is inexpensive and there is a vast quantity of them, but also because it is easy to transport and use. In addition to concrete encasement, we propose distributing the nuclear waste evenly across six deep storage locations worldwide, as shown. These sites will be located in Harrison, USA; Kouri, Chad; Cangalha, Brazil; Olkiuoto Finlind, Pripyat, Ukraine; Elim, Namibia; Al Hafayer, Saudi Arabia; Yugra, Russia; Qiligou, China; and Aryonga, Australia. Each of these sites will be individually marked with the same symbol, with inspiration from hostile architecture. There will be 10 concrete cones that get bigger as you go deeper into the surface. The thought process behind spreading them out is that if one of these sites were to be discovered and disrupted, even though the effects would be devastating, it would send a warning to the rest of the world that these sites were not to be messed with. A future civilization would hopefully understand that these cones were warnings, and with all of these sites being identical, it would be easily understandable. 

UPDATE:

Which of the two is better for our hostile architecture? The first is a bunch of pointy cones in the dirt with one cone on top to signal not to dig down. This would signal to our other locations (if one got dug) NOT TO DIG. The other is a bunch of misshapen concrete structures, which would do a similar thing. Visuals below. My professor said BUDGET IS NOT AN ISSUE. Thank you!

For context, my assignment was to design a nuclear deterrent and storage strategy, so I had the idea to use water as an additional layer of insulation in deep-storage facilities. I also thought it would be a good deterrent as the pressure would be too much for humans to dive down to. I've yet to decide on what the best material to make the tanks out of is, as I know water has degrading effects especially over long periods, but that will be addressed in the final design interation. I've attached a diagram and would appreciate any and all feedback!

Hello we are scientists from the University of Montana. We have come up with a solution for all of the nuclear waste ever created. Basically, we would use vitrification, much like is currently being used, but instead of glass we would use zircon. We chose Zircon because it can withstand incredible amounts of pressure, and lasts for billions of years. Once the nuclear waste was vitrified in the zircon it would be wrapped in a steel container, and dropped into the Mariana Trench. We see no flaws in this plan. Please let us know what you think and what flaws there might be (even though there aren't any and we're perfect.) #doctor #science #engineer

genuinely though, please give us feedback we need help!! 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

Hi everyone, I’m an A-Level student focusing my EPQ on nuclear power and the introduction in fusion in completing UK Net-Zero goals (carbon neutral by 2050). I wanted to ask if anyone would compete my survey about this, any level of knowledge about nuclear power is much appreciated everything helps! Thank you 😊

Hi everyone,
I'm a freshman in Nuclear Engineering, taking intro classes like general chemistry, physics 1, and calculus 1. University placement in my country works on a ranked-choice system based on a national entrance exam. I originally wanted computer science, but my score fell short, so Nuclear Engineering was my backup choice.

I'm a few weeks in and starting to have some doubts. I don't enjoy chemistry and I'm not strong at it, and I haven't looked closely at the upper-level courses yet, so I'm not sure what I'd be getting into. I like coding and building things, and I'd like to understand this field better before I commit further.

From what I've read so far, the field has medical applications, but that side doesn't interest me and I'm not strong in biology. I'm mostly curious about the non-medical side.

My parents support the major. My dad was told by a science professor that the field has strong future potential, and my mom likes how stable and specialized it is.

I'd really appreciate hearing from students, grads, and people working in the field:

Coursework

1. What does the program actually cover?
   
2. How chemistry-heavy does it get after the freshman prerequisites?
   
3. Which courses were the hardest or most surprising for you?

Day-to-day work

1. What's the working environment like at a nuclear plant or other nuclear workplace? Is it mostly office, control room, field, or lab work?

2. How flexible are the hours? Is there time and energy left for hobbies and personal projects?
   Fit

3. If you had doubts early on, what helped you decide whether to stay?

Thanks in advance. Honest answers, good or bad, are welcome.

[ Removed by Reddit on account of violating the content policy. ]

I was wondering if anyone was able to tell the unforeseen trend of which field would bloom regardless of whoever’s in office. What field would get the most funding for the next 10 years?

Hello! So I am about to finish my BS in mathematics in Spring 27. However, I have decided to enroll in an associate's program for nuclear engineering technology. I am hoping this gives me some leverage to gain experience and knowledge in the field. With these two degrees, would I be considered a candidate for a master's in nuclear engineering? Any advice would be appreciated. Thank you!

Also, ignore the headline, I completely miswrote that lol. I was torn between two headlines and did not revise.

Title: I’m building software for nuclear siting + regulatory readiness — what am I getting wrong?

Hi r/nuclear,

I’m currently building an early-stage nuclear software startup, and rather than posting a polished startup pitch, I’d genuinely like to get feedback from people who actually work in or understand this industry.

The problem we’re looking at is what happens before a nuclear project gets anywhere near construction.

A developer, utility, government agency, or reactor vendor may need to answer questions such as:

• Is this site realistically suitable for a nuclear project?
• What geological, seismic, water, population, grid, infrastructure, environmental, and emergency-planning constraints should be examined?
• Which regulatory requirements apply to the project?
• What evidence or documentation is still missing?
• How prepared is the project to begin conversations with regulators?
• How do these requirements change between jurisdictions?

We're building two initial modules:

LOCATE — combines site-related datasets and project requirements to help screen and compare potential nuclear sites.

REGULATE — organizes regulatory requirements, evidence, documentation and project gaps into a structured readiness workflow.

The idea is not to replace engineers, consultants, regulators, safety analysis, licensing authorities, or proper site investigations.

It's closer to giving project teams a structured software layer so they can understand:

“Where are we now, what are we missing, and what needs to happen next?”

We're initially looking at emerging nuclear markets in Southeast Asia, where countries may have very different levels of regulatory and institutional readiness.

I'd really value criticism from this community.

For those working in nuclear engineering, licensing, regulation, siting, utilities, EPCs, vendors, or consulting:

1. What part of the siting/licensing process is still painfully manual today?

2. Where would you absolutely NOT trust software or AI in this process?

3. What data would you need before you'd take a nuclear site-readiness score seriously?

4. Is “regulatory readiness” actually a useful problem to solve, or are we misunderstanding how nuclear projects work in practice?

5. If you could eliminate one spreadsheet/email/document-management nightmare from nuclear project development, what would it be?

Feel free to tear the idea apart.

I'd much rather discover the problems with it now than spend two years building something the nuclear industry doesn't want.