Nuclear waste has a reputation for making law makers and the public uneasy, thus it is difficult to find a site for nuclear waste disposal units. However, creating such sites is necessary to allow nuclear energy to the electricity production forefront in America. In the search for a waste disposal location, companies have been turning toward Native American reservations as the final resting places of the radioactive waste. Multiple tribes have quickly denied companies access to their land, but others have taken advantage of the potentially prosperous opportunity. One of the first tribes to decline a waste site was the Navajos, for the nuclear industry’s destruction of their land was still fresh in their minds. It is true that nuclear waste disposal is a theoretically dangerous venture, yet it also contains many potential benefits. Siting a nuclear waste unit on the Navajo reservation would benefit the country and the Navajos, but the idea is meet with reluctance because of the suspected costs to the Navajo people, the environment as a whole, and the Navajo’s land.
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.
The health effects from uranium and radioactive run off is well known on the Navajo Reservation. The uranium boom in the 1950s left much of the reservation in shambles; piles of mill tailings seeped into the ground and released radon into the air. The mill tailings, then, leached into the Navajo’s groun...
... middle of paper ...
...exico Communities: The Struggle for Environmental Justice." Human Rights 30.4 (2003): 23-25. Academic Search Premier. Web. 22 Apr. 2014.
“Radioactive Waste Management.” World Nuclear Association. World Nuclear Association. Nov. 2013. Web. 22 Apr. 2014. << http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Nuclear-Fuel-Cycle/Nuclear-Wastes/Radioactive-Waste-Management/>>.
“Waste Management Overview.” World Nuclear Association. World Nuclear Association. Nov. 2013. Web. 22 Apr. 2014. >.
Taylor, Kathryn S. "Fewer Nuclear Waste Sites Poses Problems for Hospitals." H&HN: Hospitals & Health Networks 67.12 (1993): 58. Academic Search Premier. Web. 22 Apr. 2014.
Thorpe, Grace. “Our Homes are not Dumps: Creating Nuclear-Free Zones.” Natural Resources Journal. 36 (1996) 956-963. Web. 22 Apr. 2014.
One of the most talked about opposition toward nuclear fission is the radioactive waste it produces. A radioactive waste is what is left behind after using a reactor to make electricity. There are two levels of waste, low and high, but both are regulated by the Department of Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. High level waste is made up of fuel that’s been used directly in the reactor that is highly radioactive but can still be disposed. Low level waste is the contaminated items that have been exposed to radiation. The nuclear wastes are then stored in a safe and secure location with different types of methods such as wet storage, dry storage, and away from reactor storage. Wet storage is the main method of disposing the waste because it is the
Wing, Steve et al. "A reevaluation of cancer incidence near the Three Mile Island nuclear plant: The collision of evidence and assumptions." Environmental Health Perspectives, v.105, n.1, January 1997, pp.52-57.
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.
About 31 or more people had died from the tragic event in 1986 in Chernobyl, Russia from the accident itself or from thyroid cancer that developed after the incident later on down the road chernobyl was a horrific event and lead to more deaths even after the fact.Another nuclear related accident was when the TMI power planted almost melted down,it showed us that a lot can happen from one small problem such as a faulty pressure valve can over heat the reactor and this could cause a plant to meltdown.A problem we face everyday still is nuclear waste, we wonder where we can put it that allows the population to still be safe.The U.S. is doing a latter approach for nuclear waste and the location chosen for this is Yucca Mountain in Nevada. They feel waste is to dangerous to just leave it.A good thing about power plants is that they are safer than other methods in the working field.Nuclear power is useful but with the radiation given off or if the power plant exploded or something along those lines the radiation is stronger and more powerful and can spread across a location and kill many. Nuclear power is also safer having less deaths on the job compared to other generating sources known as oil refiners or other fossil fuel jobs.
The use and management of radioactive materials is not a topic that is generally discussed in abundance to everyday citizens. Many people do not know what radioactive waste is or even the effect that it can have on the human body. Radioactive waste is a type of waste that has some type of radioactive material inside of it. The managing of this radioactive waste is extremely important because it can cause damage to living tissue. Without a place to properly dispose of or contain, the radioactive waste can contaminate our water, food, air, or even our land. If this happened it would be detrimental to all human’s health, causing many different problems throughout the world not only with the health of the population, but problems with the environment as well. Therefore it is vital that we have somewhere to put these radioactive wastes.
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 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.
This act must be abolished or altered to proceed with any construction of a waste facility. Furthermore, the federal government must be informed and approve the construction of such a structure. However, these setbacks can be remedied and do not stop the possibility of hosting such a nuclear waste disposal facility. A benefit that may not be evident can have the possibility of saving money by generating electricity from other countries waste by the construction of a nuclear power
Since the end of the World War II, nuclear energy has been one of the most potent forces on the planet. Nuclear powered submarines and aircraft carriers dominate the oceans and nuclear power plants provide nearly 20% of the nation’s power supply (Bayh & Gregg, 2014). All of this nuclear production produces tremendous amounts of nuclear waste. This waste must be disposed of safely, creating a problem for scientists and politicians for decades to come.
...ing nuclear waste is a new and unsound technology, but still a solution to the problems of excessive waste. Where in the future, new technologies may allow for the waste to be completely recycled and reused in the reactors to create more energy. With both positives and negatives of nuclear energy, the real question that remains is “if not nuclear, then what else?” (Rutgers’s Felder)
Nuclear power is a relatively new method of supplying the ever growing population with the electricity that is required. Although the majority of people are unsure of how generation occurs, nuclear power provides roughly 17% of the world’s power. (Rich, Alex K...) This makes nuclear power a deciding factor in how the race progresses in technology and energy fabrication as it is able to produce mass amounts of electricity in short periods of time. The limit potential for nuclear power is unclear in not only energy but also weaponry and some medical uses. The fact that uranium and the radioactivity that comes with it are used in facilities and other inventions often lead people to distrust the inventions which, while not entirely un-called for, hinders progress and leads to fables and tales around nuclear energy, its creation, and the nuclear power plants that are springing up around the world. This causes nuclear facilities to slow in their development which only makes things worse because as things progress the facilities will only get increasingly safe as long as they are handled professionally. (Rich, Alex K…) Some of the slanderous fables around nuclear power include things like claiming that nuclear facilities cannot operate during droughts and water shortages. (Kharecha, Pushker…) While nuclear power is accompanied by several risks, it can also be the solution for various global strains and difficulties.
Kai Erikson argues that radiation and other forms of radioactive waste are a new species of trouble (Erikson, 1994). Nuclear waste disposal is a pressing issue of extreme importance. Nuclear waste is material that either contains a radioactive substance or has been contaminated by radioactive elements and is no longer useful. With all of the dangers surrounding nuclear waste and a half-life of one hundred thousand years this issue must be solved with complete certainty. Any mistakes or miscalculations can destroy the environment.
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.
More action to create more storage is being done. Nuclear waste is stored at surface level in the UK, but there are plans to create deep underground locations to lock up the waste, but they are still planning on the location (Wong, Sam). The main fear driven by the existence of nuclear waste is that the waste may get into their homes or contaminate the drinking water. Those assumptions are false, and the waste will always have somewhere to be stored as long as it is being made, so you will not have to worry about it getting into contact with you.Also, the Yucca Mountain in Nevada is a decided location to become a repository for nuclear waste and is currently in use ('Stop Dithering on Nuclear Waste' [Science Agenda]). For the nuclear power generators in the US, there is a large safe place for waste which is well funded.Nuclear waste should never come in contact with somebody who does not choose to work near it. Of course, if you do choose to work with nuclear waste so that the waste, opportunities to make the waste atomically stable are being researched with some
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...