Nuclear power is one of the most controversial topics of our time. In a time where people are looking more towards greener energy and towards a more plentiful supply of it, the nuclear breeder reactor comes to shine. A Nuclear Breeder Reactor works on the principal of taking waste from a normal reactor, and using it to make more energy. In such a reactor, what occurs is “Neutrons flying around in these reactors not only induce uranium-235 to split and release energy, but also convert non-fissile uranium-238 into fissile plutonium-239” (Webb). In most reactors, this dangerous, bomb-grade material would be thrown away. This waste is highly radioactive, and can remain so for many millennia. But instead, it can make even greater amounts of energy out of the process. Breeder reactors have a lot of promise, and may even solve the planet’s energy crisis. However, these reactors are relatively unresearched and have not met their full potential as in most normal nuclear plants. Nuclear breeder reactors have many benefits among the many criticisms they have gained over the years. The use of these in the United States could bring many benefits. Breeder reactors may be very efficient, and produce lots of energy, but they are very expensive to build. These reactors cost billions of dollars to build. The cost of building one of these reactors will not be immediately returned through the energy produced. For one such reactor in Japan, “cost of the project has risen from $4 billion to $6 billion,” ("Advanced”). The taxes that would be levied on the taxpayers would put them in much more financial trouble than they already are. Times are hard enough, and paying for more energy that we don’t need right now isn’t worth it. Plus the money to build ... ... middle of paper ... ...id metal fast breeder reactor." Environmental Encyclopedia. Gale, 2011. Gale Science In Context. Web. 14 Dec. 2011. "Nuclear Power in Belgium." World Nuclear Association. World Nuclear Association, Nov. 2011. Web. 17 Dec. 2011. "Nuclear Power in France." world-nuclear.org. World Nuclear Association, 30 Nov.2011. Web. 14 Dec. 2011. Rennhack, Michael. "Nuclear Energy." nukeworker.com. Nukeworker, 9 Aug. 2007. Web. 14 Dec. 2011. "Text of the Politburo Statement About Chernobyl." New York Times 21 July 1986. Gale Science In Context. Web. 17 Dec. 2011. von Hippel, Frank N. "Rethinking Nuclear Fuel Recycling." Scientific American 5.298 (May 2008): 88-93. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 17 Dec 2011. Webb, Jeremy. "Daring to be different: India has bold plans for a nuclear future." New Scientist 185.2487 (2005): 48+. Gale Science In Context. Web. 17 Dec. 2011.
There are many developing countries also looking into nuclear energy because of all the benefits nuclear power has to offer. As of right now between sixteen and thirty nuclear power plants are being made in developing countries like China and India. Both of these countries are moving towards nuclear energy for many reasons like its reliability and amount of energy it producing. It is very beneficial because it only takes up a small amount of space to make one of these nuclear plants and the amount of energy they produce is substantial. Both of these countries are looking into h...
Symonds, Peter. "World Socialist Web Site ." US think tank report weighs up "grim future' of nuclear war (2013).
New York: Simon and Schuster, 1986. Steeves, Lynne; Moreno-Riano, Gerson. Points of View: Nuclear Proliferation, 2009. Aliprandini, Michael; Goodwin, Chuck.
...nce World War II to the present day, the technology of nuclear power has increased significantly in terms of energy output and safety. The energy efficiency of nuclear power is far superior to its counterpart fossil fuel and renewable energy. Compared to fossil fuels, tiny amounts of fuel used by nuclear reactors is equivalent to a large sum of coal. This is a no brainer. Why mine a ton of coal when a little uranium can be used to gain the same amount of energy? Not only is it efficient, it’s safe to use. Used fuel is packed away in storage safely, so there isn’t any chance of radiation leaking out. In the present day, nuclear power incidents haven’t been occurring lately. Advancements in technology and equipment used have made nuclear energy a very reliable and safe source of energy. With today’s energy needs, nuclear power has the ability to keep up in the race.
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...
Stokesbury, James. “World War II and the Nuclear Age.” The History Professor. Jan 2012. 7 Feb
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...
Media coverage of such cases have made the public less comfortable with the idea of moving further towards nuclear power and they only opt for reducing human activities to reduce global warming. It is true that there have been some notable disasters involving nuclear power, but compared to other power systems, nuclear power has an impressive track record. First, it is less harmful and second, it will be able to cater for the growing world population. Nuclear power produces clean energy and it delivers it at a cost that is competitive in the energy market (Patterson). According to the US Energy Information Administration, there are currently 65 such plants in the Unite States (National Research Council). They produce 19 percent of the total US energy generation.
Nuclear power has always been a controversial issue because of its inherent danger and the amount of waste that the plants produce. Once considered a relatively safe form for generating energy, nuclear power has caused more problems than it has solved. While it has reduced the amount of traditional natural resources (fossil fuels), used to generate power like coal, wood, and oil, nuclear generating plants have become anachronisms. Maintaining them and keeping them safe has become a problem of immense proportion. As the plants age and other technology becomes available, what to do with these “eyesores” is a consuming issue for many government agencies and environmental groups. No one knows what to do about the problem and in many areas of the world, another nuclear meltdown is an accident waiting to happen. Despite a vast array of safety measures, a break in reactor pipe or a leak in a containment vessel, could spell another environmental disaster for the world.
Something always curious and provoking happens in science writing. Gwyneth Cravens is an author of five novels and many publications, and one who studies a topic in great detail. She creates an enormous work about nuclear energy for the last decade. Cravens’s research in her last published book titled Power to Save the World: The Truth About Nuclear Energy has led her to do an about-face on the issue. In her article “Better Energy” which was published in May 2008 in Discover magazine, she disputes and claims that nuclear energy is currently best alternative and should be considered as our future energy source. At the beginning “Better Energy” she commences by introducing James Lovelock, who was greatly honored in the green movement for creating the Gaia hypothesis, which combines everything on earth as entirely organic. In the past Lovelock opposed nuclear energy. Unfortunately, to his fans, he changed his views beginning to support nuclear energy. Throughout the article Cravens goes with the explanation how the use of nuclear energy will be able to soft issue about global warming. Current fossil fuel power plants cause serious health problems in thousands of Americans, furthermore, continue to drive the warming. She tries to prove to the audience that currently there is no possibility that U.S. nation can use any of renewable energy sources such as the wind and sun (in which she looks to find common with public views about this case), and that nuclear energy is safe, and this is the best option to get the necessary amount of needed energy.
Note that nuclear energy is another alternate fuel source, which would be like a really expensive Prius that sometimes leaks radiation when it suffers a major breakdown. Which is a scary thought because many Prius owners don’t even know how to change a flat tire.
...ountry's 50 reactors offline since a Fukushima accident, Japan has been almost without nuclear energy that once supplied about a third of its power. As the result of the immediate reaction, Japan posted a trade deficit in 2011 for the first time in 31 years, and another deficit of 8.2 trillion yen ($82.4 billion) in 2012. About half of the increase stemmed from rising fuel costs, according to Trade Minister Motegi. ( Ramtanu Maitra. “Japan Without Nuclear Energy Is a Disaster for the World” Executive Intelligence Review. September 27, 2013 issue) Now, Japan is trying to restart some of 50 currently idled reactors. All those evidences clarify that we cannot be too impatient on the way to say goodbye to nuclear power.
The use of nuclear energy has increased in the United States since 1973. Nuclear energy's share of U.S. electricity generation has grown from 4 percent in 1973 to 19 percent in 1998. This is excellent news for the environment. Nuclear energy and hydropower are the cleanest large-scale means of electricity production. Since nuclear power plants do not burn fuel, they emit no combustion byproducts—like carbon dioxide—into the atmosphere (www.nei.org). Nuclear power can come from the fission of Uranium, plutonium or thorium or the fusion of hydrogen into helium. Today uranium (U-235 and U-238) is most commonly used in the production of nuclear energy. The expa...
The energy industry is beginning to change. In today’s modern world, governments across the globe are shifting their focuses from traditional sources of power, like the burning coal and oil, to the more complex and scientific nuclear power supply. This relatively new system uses powerful fuel sources and produces little to no emissions while outputting enough energy to fulfill the world’s power needs (Community Science, n.d.). But while nuclear power seems to be a perfect energy source, no power production system is without faults, and nuclear reactors are no exception, with their flaws manifesting in the form of safety. Nuclear reactors employ complex systems involving pressure and heat. If any of these systems dysfunctions, the reactor can leak or even explode releasing tons of highly radioactive elements into the environment. Anyone who works at or near a nuclear reactor is constantly in danger of being exposed to a nuclear incident similar to the ones that occurred at the Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi plants. These major accidents along with the unresolved problems with the design and function of nuclear reactors, as well as the economic and health issues that nuclear reactors present serve to show that nuclear energy sources are not worth the service that they provide and are too dangerous to routinely use.
The greatest disadvantages of nuclear energy are the risks posed to mankind and the environment by radioactive materials. ‘On average a nuclear plant annually generates 20 metric tons of used nuclear fuel cla...