If you're interested in atomic history and the Manhattan Project, a great book is Richard Rhodes' The making of the atomic bomb (ISBN: 1451677618). It's ~900 pages of history, from the personalities of the scientists involved, to the sites of Oak Ridge, Los Alamos, and Hanford, and the first uses. I enjoyed reading it while interning at ORNL and Sandia in the summers during undergrad.
The weapons are horrifying in their destructive power, but the Project is a testament to what we can accomplish in science and engineering if we apply virtually unlimited resources toward R&D to solve a problem. Beyond the obvious product of the Project, it led to the creation of the DOE national laboratory system, which has since served as a means of maintaining an able technical workforce in the US, with physicists, mathematicians, chemists, biologists, and computer scientists, among others, all working in the public interest (and on things beyond weapons). Investing in science can pay dividends well into the future.
For some perspective, the cost of the Manhattan Project was on the same order of magnitude as the Apollo Program in terms of inflation-adjusted cost, about $22-26 billion in 2016 dollars. Of course that amount does not include the environmental cost still being felt in Hanford and elsewhere, or the human cost.
Knowing the cost of those two programs really makes you question some other efforts, like the program to develop the F-35 aircraft, estimated to cost $380 billion before even considering the additional $1.1 trillion in operational cost. For comparison there, the Interstate Highway system cost about $500 billion to construct.
I read somewhere that the Manhattan Project was at one point consuming 1/7 of ALL electricity generated in USA. And this is when all factories (and many newly built ones) were running at full capacity. Truly mind boggling.
The other mind-boggling info about the project is that they needed copper for the Y-12 electromagnetic separation magnets. But because there was a war on, they couldn't get it. So they went to the US Treasury and borrowed 14,700 tons of silver.
Daniel Bell, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, supposedly said:
"Young man, you may think of silver in tons, but the Treasury will always think of silver in Troy Ounces"
I highly recommend this talk by Richard Feynman on Los Alamos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uY-u1qyRM5w. His personal anecdote on some interesting details while he was working there.
Two other good books about early nuclear weapon manufacturing: “Plutopia” and “Making a real killing: Rocky flats and the nuclear west”. Plutopia focuses on Hanford and is quite eye opening. It also compares and contrasts the early American and Soviet programs
The weapons are horrifying in their destructive power, but the Project is a testament to what we can accomplish in science and engineering if we apply virtually unlimited resources toward R&D to solve a problem. Beyond the obvious product of the Project, it led to the creation of the DOE national laboratory system, which has since served as a means of maintaining an able technical workforce in the US, with physicists, mathematicians, chemists, biologists, and computer scientists, among others, all working in the public interest (and on things beyond weapons). Investing in science can pay dividends well into the future.
For some perspective, the cost of the Manhattan Project was on the same order of magnitude as the Apollo Program in terms of inflation-adjusted cost, about $22-26 billion in 2016 dollars. Of course that amount does not include the environmental cost still being felt in Hanford and elsewhere, or the human cost.
Knowing the cost of those two programs really makes you question some other efforts, like the program to develop the F-35 aircraft, estimated to cost $380 billion before even considering the additional $1.1 trillion in operational cost. For comparison there, the Interstate Highway system cost about $500 billion to construct.