Nuclear Plants and Nuclear Waste Disposal

769 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: 13.3 - What Are the Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Nuclear Power?

The first nuclear power plants started operating in the 1950’s. Now, nearly 12% of the world’s electricity comes from nuclear power facilities. With all this power comes waste, and lots of it. The amount of waste from nuclear power plants annually is over 2,000 tons and there is over 270,000 tons of waste currently in storage. Where is all this dangerous waste stored? You might be surprised.

To give you a background on just what nuclear waste is, I’ll explain just how this hazardous material is formed. By splitting atoms scientists are able to harness large amounts of energy and power entire cities. They split these atoms by shooting neutrons at them in a process known as nuclear fission. After this process has run its course and can no longer be used to generate power a highly radioactive waste is left. There are two classifications of the waste, low-level and high-level wastes. Low-level waste is the garbage accumulated from cleaning and power plant maintenance. It is not that radioactive, but still dangerous to your health. High-level waste is the burnt out fuel cells that can no longer be used. They are the majority of the problem with waste disposal. This highly radioactive waste remains as such for over 50 years on average.

So if this waste remains extremely dangerous for 50+ years how do we handle the storage and disposal of this waste? The answer is so simple that some people might think you were kidding. We bury it. There are no high tech facilities with high security, simply a big hole in the ground. Now you might be wondering where these burial sites are, the answer might scare you. A mere 200 miles away from Reno, NV lies a mountain known as Yucca Mountain. What’s so special about this mountain? It’s planned to soo...

... middle of paper ...

...tle program that has been shut down for several years. The main opposition to this method is people who don’t want their tax money going to something that might not directly affect them. This opposition is narrow-minded and selfish. Limiting scientific exploration is robbing future generations of knowledge and technology.

The current status of our nuclear waste disposal is a global embarrassment. We need to commit to an effective method that provides more reasonable and less hazardous possibilities. Money should not be a concern, rather our safety and health if this storage facility were to have an accident. People say “Don’t put all your eggs in one basket”, but apparently the US has decided to do just the opposite with our waste disposal program. If a realistic solution isn’t found soon, future generations will have to suffer the consequences of our ignorance.

Show More
Related

  • The Lowry Landfill Superfund Site

    2979 Words  | 6 Pages

    The Lowry Landfill Superfund Site is located in Arapahoe County, Colorado, approximately 2 miles east of Aurora. It consists of approximately 507 acres of waste disposal area and is operated by Waste Management of Colorado, Inc. The land surrounding the site consists of native prairie grass and a wetland located along a local creek. Sections around the site are zoned for agricultural use including cattle grazing and non-irrigated wheat farms. 1 The area is home to numerous endangered species including the bald eagle and peregrine falcon. Due to the large amounts of wastes disposed on the site between 1965 and 1980, it became extremely contaminated with a variety of inorganic and organic contaminants. From 1984 to 1993, the EPA oversaw remedial investigation and feasibility studies that were performed by all responsible parties. Since its listing as a superfund site in 1984, multiple remedial actions have been performed in order to rehabilitate the site. These include clay barrier walls around the site, a groundwater collection system, a soil cover for the main landfill, as well as a landfill gas collection system. Groundwater that is collected on the site is treated at an onsite water treatment facility. In 2007, construction began on an onsite gas to energy plant that utilizes the methane produced by the landfill site. The electricity produced by the plant is enough to power 3000 households. 1 Today, use of land and groundwater on and near the site is still restricted by the state of Colorado.1

    Read More

  • Kurdistan Oil Spill

    1369 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...of disposal. Representatives from the Nova Scotia Department of Environment selected sites at Hadleyville, Forchu, and St. Peter's on Cape Breton Island for disposal sites. These sites were chosen on the basis of their accessibility, soil characteristics, ground-water levels, and proximity to cleanup locales.

    Read More

  • Rhetorical Analysis Of Nuclear Waste By Richard Muller

    1997 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Nuclear Waste

    728 Words  | 2 Pages

    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

    Read More

  • Rhetorical Analysis: Dream Big Again

    1656 Words  | 4 Pages

    Things like “accurate Lasik surgery, scratch resistant lenses, cordless power tools, Tempurfoam” and the list goes on and on (paragraph 8.) In the Apollo era the government didn’t need to fund any programs to encourage people to be interested in science. Everyone “embraced what those fields meant to the collective national future.” Not everyone needs to be a scientist or a technologist but it is important that all people acknowledge and embrace the importance of what science and technology can do for the future of humanity.

    Read More

  • Stem Cells: What How and Why?

    1133 Words  | 3 Pages

    However, by allowing the government to limit was scientist can and can?t do; we?re only doing one thing. Making the most brilliant minds our country has to offer leave. It seems as though America is one of the last overly conservative strongholds left in the modern world. If we allow our government to restrict what scientist can research in the United States, the scientist will simply move somewhere where the research isn?t illegal.

    Read More

  • Nuclear Weapons in Iran and North Korea Should Be Ended

    545 Words  | 2 Pages

    waste to be formed. This waste is very dangerous since it remains radioactive for hundreds of

    Read More

  • Argumentative Essay: 11 Facts About Nuclear Energy

    843 Words  | 2 Pages

    This is done to make sure the risk of meltdown is minimized. The nuclear waste is so toxic that every precaution is taken to make sure of is disposed of safely to keep it from poisoning the environment. In an article titled 11 Facts about Nuclear Energy we find out that, “Every 18 to 24 months a power plant must shut down to remove its spent uranium fuel.” Nuclear Power plants can have a meltdown that releases extremely toxic waste into the environment. The reason some people are opposed to nuclear power plants, some estimates say that there is a 50% chance of a meltdown in a U.S. reactor in the next 20 years (“55 Interesting Facts about. Nuclear Energy”). These meltdowns can be small or large, both of them take a lot of money and time. The Three Mile Island disaster alone took 975 million dollars and 14 years to clean up (“55 Interesting Facts about. Nuclear

    Read More

  • Benefits Of Radiation Therapy

    732 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Chernobyl

    451 Words  | 1 Pages

    In addition to the potential dangers of accidents in generating stations, nuclear waste is a continuing problem that is growing exponentially. Nuclear waste can remain radioactive for about 600 years and disposing these wastes or storing them is an immense problem. Everyone wants the energy generated by power plants, but no one wants to take responsibility for the waste. Thus far, it is stored deep in the earth, but these storage areas are potentially dangerous and will eventually run out. Some have suggested sending the waste into space, but no one is sure of the repercussions.

    Read More

  • Christians and the Environment

    1106 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...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.

    Read More

  • Nuclear Power: Dirty, Dangerous and Expensive

    3279 Words  | 7 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Should Money Be Spent on Space Exploration?

    591 Words  | 2 Pages

    Most people think that the costly downside to funding space exploration is a reason to avoid spending money on sciences and instead spend it on problems here on earth, but such funding for space exploration actually promotes economical as well as scientific benefits. Space exploration is an important expenditure for the high cost because of the potential for numerous benefits such as the possibility to find useful resources to cultivate, space exploration and satellites produce many thousands of jobs in our economy, and it creates and discovers newer and better technologies through research and development.

    Read More

  • Advantages and Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy

    1323 Words  | 3 Pages

    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...

    Read More

  • The Effects of Scientific Development on Society

    926 Words  | 2 Pages

    Each of us lives with a modern paradox; how can we continue to enjoy the benefits of science and avoid the threat of its misuse or abuse to endanger life and nature? Responses to this paradox have been many, but seldom anything but emotional and impotent in making any useful changes. Among the strongest feelings brought forth by our increasing awareness of the negative side effects of technology has been the feeling of alienation that we in society have little or no control over the impacts of science and technology on those of us who are supposed to be their beneficiaries. We owe much to science. In fact, modern life would be unthinkable without it.

    Read More

More about Nuclear Plants and Nuclear Waste Disposal

Open Document