Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
What are the positive effects of nuclear power
Harmful effects of nuclear energy
Con and pros of nuclear energy essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: What are the positive effects of nuclear power
Today’s world faces many problems. Hunger, war and pollution are some common problems that come to mind. Nuclear energy however, should not have to be one of these problems. Nuclear energy has been around since the early 1950s. Over the years, many have debated whether nuclear-produced energy is any better than other energies such as coal-produced energy. While both sides have their pros and cons, nuclear energy, is the overall worst out of the all the energies being produced.
Nuclear energy is not as beneficial to the environment as one may think. Nuclear energy does not burn anything in order to create energy. However, the problem is not in that aspect, but rather the fact that we do not have a way to get rid of the nuclear waste. According to Amanda Beckrich, there is currently no full proof solution to the long-term storage of the radioactive products used in the development of nuclear energy. Materials used in the nuclear process include isotopes of uranium, plutonium, iodine and strontium (Beckrich 10). All of these materials are radioactive and dangerous if exposed to society. When radioactive products are spilled or exposed into society, the consequences can be detrimental. People who are exposed to high doses of radiation will most likely face serious consequences. The United States Environmental Protection Agency states that people will likely face a number of different health problems varying on the amount they have been exposed to. Some possible major health effects include cancer, internal bleeding, damage to the central nervous system and death (“Radiation Protection: Health Effects”). With these outcomes being possible, there is not a justifiable answer to this problem.
However the opposition may offer the counte...
... middle of paper ...
...re. The objective should be to slowly phase out coal, natural gas and nuclear energy for energy that does not use up all the earth’s resources. Whether that’s wind energy, solar energy or hydro energy is not something I can answer.
Works Cited
Beckrich, Amanda. "The pros and cons of nuclear energy." The Science Teacher 80.3 (2013): 10.
Academic OneFile. Web. 25 Mar. 2014.
Hammond, Allen. "Fission: The Pros and Cons of Nuclear Power." Science. Vol. 178. N.p.:
American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1972. 147-49. Print.
“Nuclear Weapons: Who Has What?" CNN. Cable News Network, 18 Dec. 2012. Web. 25
Mar. 2014.
"Radiation Protection: Health Effects." EPA. Environmental Protection Agency, 07 Aug. 2012.
Web. 25 Mar. 2014.
“The Economics of Nuclear Power." Nuclear Power Economics. N.p., 01 Feb. 2014. Web. 25
Mar. 2014.
Nuclear power has grown to be a big percentage of the world’s energy. As of January 18, 2013 in 31 countries 437 nuclear power plant units with an installed electric net capacity of about 372 GW are in operation and 68 plants with an installed capacity of 65 GW are in 15 countries under construction. As of end 2011 the total electricity production since 1951 amounts to 69,760 billion kWh. The cumulative operating experience amounted to 15, 15,080 years by end of 2012. (European Nuclear Society) The change that nuclear power has brought to the world has led to benefits in today’s energy’s usage.
Carbon, Max W. Nuclear Power: Villain or Victim?: Our Most Misunderstood Source of Electricity. Second ed. Madison, WI: Pebble Beach, 1997.
Folke, L., & Burnette, H.S. (2005, March 28). Burning bright:nuclear energy's futute. Retrieved from http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba511/
Central Idea: Nuclear energy only contributes a small amount to the world’s electricity yet it has hazards and dangers that far out-way its benefits. There are many other alternative power producing sources that can produce energy more efficiently and more safely than nuclear power plants can.
After the United States developed the atomic at the end of World War II, interest in nuclear technology increased exponentially. People soon realized that nuclear technology could be used for electricity, as another alternative to fossil fuels. Today, nuclear power has its place in the world, but there is still a lot of controversy over the use of nuclear energy. Things such as the containment of radiation and few nuclear power plant accidents have given nuclear power a bad image. However, nuclear power is a reliable source of energy because it has no carbon emissions, energy is available at any time, little fuel is needed for a lot of energy, and as time goes on, it is becoming safer and safer.
Our new leaders in Congress have vowed to do everything in their power to stop him” (Environment America, n.d.). It is statements like this that makes us think that political involvement could be paramount in the step to solving our global warming issues, at least a strong start. We are aware the renewable energy is the wave for a more sustainable future and to make this happen politics must be involved, we need our government to take a stand in producing energy that does not pollute the earth causing such catastrophic events as “tsunamis” that kill thousands of unsuspecting people. This article talks about what types of things our government can get in pace with such as, “renewable energy via solar, wind and energy efficiency” (Environment America, n.d.). In June 2014, the President has moved forward starting with the “clean power plan” per the article “Global Warming Solutions” (Environment America, n.d.) we need and must demand future political involvement for this
Thirty thousand metric tons of spent fuel rods from power reactors and another 380,000 cubic meters of high level radioactive waste, have been produced in the United States since the beginning of the nuclear age. Presently, these fuel rods are stored at the nuclear reactors in water filled basins and accumulate at the rate of six tons per day (Whipple, 1996). As the populataion increases, so does the demand for electricity. If we continue relying on nuclear power to provide our electricity, we will continue producing more and more nuclear waste. Greater use of nuclear power and volumes of waste mean a greater chance of accidental release of radiation into the environment.
You are watching the control panels and gages for rector two. Sitting comely you think about how easy your job is. It is a joke! All day you sit around and watch the gages for reactor number two just to make sure they maintain their settings. You don't even need to look at the gages either because a computer automatically regulates them without you.
“On April 26, 1986, a sudden surge of power during a reactor systems test destroyed Unit 4 of the nuclear power plant station at Chernobyl, Ukraine, in the former Soviet Union. The accident and the fire that followed released massive amounts of radioactive material into the environment.” (U.S.NRC) Around the world nuclear power plants are used to substitute natural fossil fuels due to the increase in expense. Although power plants are better in cost they release SO2 and NOx into the air that form various acidic compounds and particles which remain in the air and ozone for days and even years. They come down in the form of acid rain which can lead to various health problems and deaths. Power generation is a significant source of pollutants that can impair the environment, economy, and human health.
Renewable Resources Coalition, 9 Dec. 2016, www.renewableresourcescoalition.org/nuclear-energy-pros-cons/. (Pros and Cons) “World Book Online Reference Center | Online Reference Book| Online Encyclopedia.” World Book,
Nuclear fission is going to become more and more useful in worldwide power production for the foreseeable future. The reasons are numerous, but can be summarized by the relative ease of reliable power production that is provided. This does not go without having many disadvantages. But it is the fact that nuclear fission provides a massive amount of reliable electrical energy at a relatively low cost that has many countries investigating the possibilities of nuclear power generation. To understand why nuclear power would be the only option (at this time) for an alternative to fossil fuel burning for energy production is to understand its history, the world’s current power production from nuclear power, and where it is going in the foreseeable future.
Nuclear power, the use of exothermic nuclear processes to produce an enormous amount of electricity and heat for domestic, medical, military and industrial purposes i.e. “By the end of 2012 2346.3 kilowatt hours (KWh) of electricity was generated by nuclear reactors around the world” (International atomic energy agency Vienna, 2013, p.13). However, with that been said it is evident that the process of generating electricity from a nuclear reactor has numerous health and environmental safety issues.
Prevent dangerous climate change by phasing out fossil fuels (oil, coal, gas) and replacing them with clean renewable energy such as solar.
To save words we not go into the basic details of these radiations but these radiations make the radioisotopes our friend or foe. These radiations revolve round the issue of their use and disposal. Interestingly, both use and disposal are issues of concern. Disposal is an issue because the waste is non-biodegradable and the harmful radiations from them could cause cancer and alter genes in the DNA etc. The use of radioactivity is by itself an issue. Is it safe to use? Where shall the nuclear power plant be located? Where will the waste go?
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...