Nuclear waste is a huge problem in our world today but it also makes the world that we know possible. The problem with it is that we have reached the point where we produce it faster than we can store it. Everyone will agree that the waste obviously needs to be stored somewhere, but we can also agree that we do not want it stored or transported through our back yards. The goal of the government is to store the waste in one location, Yucca Mountain, instead of scattered across the country. To do this all of the existing waste must be removed from their locations, put into some type of safe transportation and shipped across cities, states and even the country. With the massive amounts of waste that need to be transported to the site, the people that live near the rail roads and routes that would be used for the waste would be in serious danger if exposed to these chemicals. There is a large risk of exposing communities, towns and large cities to chemicals that could cause a Chernobyl sized accident and this not worth the possible positives of the project. Placing all of the nation’s waste in Yucca Mountain is an environmental injustice in itself by storing it near, and transporting it through the hometowns and big cities of our country.
The Environmental Protection Agency defines environmental justice as "the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, sex, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies." In simpler terms this means that something is an environmental injustice if the environment or any of the people living in it are being knowingly mistreated. Nuclear waste cases have been some of the m...
... middle of paper ...
...r Waste Management in the United States: Starting Over
Rodney C. Ewing and Frank N. von Hippel
Science, New Series, Vol. 325, No. 5937 (Jul. 10, 2009), pp. 151-152
Published by: American Association for the Advancement of Science
Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20536586
The Road to Yucca Mountain: The Development of Radioactive Waste Policy in the United States by J. Samuel Walker
Review by: BRIAN BALOGH
Technology and Culture, Vol. 52, No. 2 (April 2011), pp. 417-418
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press and the Society for the History of Technology
Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23020592
Risk Perception, Ambiguity, and Nuclear-Waste Transport
Mary Riddel
Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 75, No. 3 (Jan., 2009), pp. 781-797
Published by: Southern Economic Association
Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27751415
The article “Nuclear Waste” is an interesting perspective from Richard Muller. Muller is a very credited author and he speaks his mind about the situation where people are trying to figure out how to deal with nuclear waste around the U.S. There are many proposed ideas but Muller has a very simple and straight forward idea that he believes is the ideal decision. The essay he wrote can be interpreted in different ways but his motive for writing is very clear. Muller’s background is quite impressive because he is highly credited. When reading Muller’s essay, you notice points that supports his argument and truth about the situation around nuclear power. He brings his outlook on the situation to the audience and conveys that viewpoint convincingly.
Environmental justice has to happen all around the world, because Environmental justice is the justice of the environment that you live in, and these environments aren't in good conditions. This justice is so that everyone can live in an environment that isn't bad for one's health. This justice has to do with environmental racism because it isn't fair just too blame certain people.
The Web. The Web. 04 Feb. 2010. http://www.shmoop.com/wwi/science-technology.html>. "
The Nevada Test Site is an area designated by the United States Government for Nuclear Weapons testing. It is located in rural southern Nevada and is about the size of the State of Rhode Island. This location was founded in 1952 as one of 5 on land sites designated for this task. Above ground nuclear or atmospheric testing was conducted at the Nevada Test Site until 1958. There was a break in testing until the United States decided to begin underground testing in 1962. There were a total of 828 nuclear tests performed underground during these years. In 1963 a limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty was signed by the United States that limited above ground tests world wide. These underground tests were performed until 1992, and nuclear testing in the United States seized all together in 1994 when the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty was signed. The majority of the testing was conducted to further the efforts of the Cold War, as well as, to further general understanding of the effects and results of nuclear testing. This paper will discuss the history, geological aspects, and impacts of the Nevada Test Site on this and surrounding areas of Nevada.
Derry, T. K., and Trevor Williams. A Short History of Technology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961.
Environmental justice is usually refers to the belief everyone, regardless of their ethnicity or socioeconomic class, should equally share the benefits of environmental luxuries as well as the burdens of environmental health hazards. Environmental Justice is demonstrated using examples of environmental injustice, such as unfair land use practices, environmental regulation being enforced in some areas only, unfair location of harmful industrial facilities and the disposal of toxic waste on communities where most of its population are minorities. Many environmentalist have addressed the issue, for instance the essay “From Carrying Capacity to Footprint, & Back Again,” by Michael Cain reveals that ecological footprint show that people appear to be using resources more rapidly than they can be regenerated and its affecting mainly developing countries.
Nuclear Energy has many proponents and much opposition. Many of the groups that oppose nuclear power have legitimate concerns, mainly with the dangers of nuclear material in relation with human health concerns and environmental troubles that are risked by allowing nuclear power plants to increase in number. Yet, many of these opposition groups have made outspoken and radical claims about the “hidden” motives of why nuclear power is promoted and subsidized by our federal government. For example, The Nuclear Information and Resource Service claim that the federal government has the intention of committing genocide against Native Americans because uranium mining is predominantly done on reservations. Another cry out by nuclear power opponents is the constant reliving of the few nuclear mishaps that occurred decades ago, at Chernobyl or Three Mile Island. No doubt, past accidents have happened worldwide and are important reminders to not play around with nuclear material, but technology has improved as well, a fact opponents fail to consider. Many of these organizations feel that other sources should be used to supply America’s energy needs. These types of statements tag many opponents to nuclear energy as misinformed, out of touch with scientific facts, or just closed minded to the whole concept of nuclear power. On the other hand, the proponents of nuclear energy like President Bush see it as cheap, and environmentally friendly. As a result, President Bush passed the Comprehensive Energy Bill in 2005 that would increase production of all types of energy, including nuclear, by giving subsidies and tax breaks to nuclear power producers. Keeping safe America’s capabilities for generating electric power by way of nuclear e...
As you can see, the road of managing radioactive wastes is more complicated to what it first lets on to be. There are many different classifications of the wastes and many different ways that the waste can be disposed of and stored depending on the classification of it. The NRC picks up a big responsibility in seeing to that all the radioactive wastes are dealt with properly. Without these rules it is very likely that these potentially hazardous materials become a major problem to the health of the population and the environment.
Since the dawn of civilization, all living (and some non-living) things have needed energy. When humans discovered fire, the first form of harnessed energy, it made it easier to stay warm, prepare food, make weapons, etc. Since then, humankind has been inventing new ways to harness energy and use it to our advantage. Now-a-days, people in most nations depend extremely heavily on fossil fuels – to work, travel, regulate temperature of homes, produce food, clothing, and furniture, as well as other power industries. Not only are these fossil fuels dominating our society and creating economic vulnerability, but they also produce waste that causes a number of social and environmental concerns. The waste from these fuels leads to acid rain, smog, and climate change. It also releases sulfur dioxide as well as other air pollutants that are very harmful to the human respiratory system (Morris, 1999, p. ix). There are other alternative sustainable energy sources including solar, hydroelectric, wind, and biomass. However, the main source aside from fossil fuel is nuclear energy from controlled nuclear reactions (where nuclei of radioisotopes become stable or nonradioactive by undergoing changes) in a nuclear power plant. Nuclear power produces enormous amounts of energy to serve a community. Unfortunately, nuclear energy has its own set of problems – a big one being its waste. The spent fuel from nuclear plants is radioactive. This means that it emits radiation, or penetrating rays and particles emitted by a radioactive source. Ionizing radiation is known to cause cancer, and therefore makes anyone who lives near spent nuclear waste facilities vulnerable to this incurable disease. The disposal of nuclear waste is a global issue...
The public perception of nuclear energy and nuclear waste disposal controls a region’s acceptance of a nuclear waste site. As environmentalism becomes the center of the debate about nuclear waste unit siting, multiple suspected costs are brought the forefront. The first, and often the most influential, is the suspected cost of waste sites to the people that surround it.
Whipple, Chris G. (1996). Can Nuclear Waste Be Stored Safely at Yucca Mountain?. Scientific American. 274(6). 72-79.
It wasn’t until a study called Toxic Waste and Race done by the Church of Christ in 1987 showed that the most significant factor is deciding a location of a hazardous waste facility was racial did the movement gain momentum. While there are many debate on what environmental justice is, most would say the first significant documentation of it was when the Principles of Environmental Justice was written, signed, and sent to DC to be reviewed in the 1990’s. Various community leaders from churches to council members to school teachers came together at the National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit and made a point in showing that the citizens are not happy with how their environment has been handled and the ideals that legislation has come to fruition under. Ideals such as fairness when making policy, responsible use of renewable resources, balanced relations with native americans, use of military force on peoples, and mitigation for victims domestically and abroad are only a few controversial topics they
When we think of environmental justice, we often focus on the ecosystem in which we as humans live, and the natural resources and non-human animals that live there. We tend to think about ethical uses of natural resources, and the effects it has on the non-human animals, such as animal rights, endangerment and extinction, loss of habitat, deforestation, erosion, and pollution. Environmental justice is another factor that is concerned with environmental protection and social justice, including humans into the mix of the complex ecosystem. Environmental justice considers the fair and equal distribution of cost and benefits between humans and the natural world. (1) Environmental justice is also defined as the fair treatment of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income and no particular group should have to bear more than their fair share of the burden of negative environmental consequences from industrial pollution or
The Nevada state government is against putting the depository in the Mountain. Many people disagree with the project a say the the site can safely hold the waste for only 100 years (www.
...far into the future as possible until it becomes a burden to the current generation and that any perceived benefits gained by those future generations cannot be measure. With that in mind, burying the nuclear waste in Yucca mountain is simply too risky given natural condition, which is why the aboveground storage and passing on to future generations method is best suited for the overall benefit of mankind and the enviroment. This can only hold true if each generation commits to not only contributing towards the safe containment of the radioactive waste, but also encourages the next generation to do the same. Actions taken today with good intentions for the future can still yield negative results in that future. But, with this method, small incremental improvements can be taken over time and not burden one generation with the welfare of all generations after it.