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
Exxon/Mobil, one of the nation’s leading oil producers, has its main refinery located in Beaumont, Texas. Each year, the residents of Beaumont/Port Arthur have to contend with the 39,000 pounds of pollution spewed each year by the Exxon refinery. Exxon’s emissions are 385% above the state refinery average. In 1999, the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Committee (TNRCC) allowed the plant to increase their emissions, without allowing the public to have a say in the matter. Interestingly, 95% of the people living near the plant are of African American descent and are in the poverty range. Some believe that this, along with the lack of education in the area, allows Exxon to get away with such high emissions. Residents in nearby neighborhoods have been complaining of headaches, nausea, eye, and throat irritation for years. Since 1997, Mobil has repeatedly violated health standards in its emissions of two key air pollutants: sulfur dioxide and hydrogen sulfide, These “rotten egg” smells are so strong, one can smell it through a car driving past the refinery. After numerous complaints and one record of a refinery worker becoming unconscious because of the fumes, the EPA awarded Exxon with a $100,000 environmental justice grant in October of 1998. Hopefully, Exxon has put the money to good use and cleaned up their emissions.
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
In order to find the benefits and hazards of mountaintop removal mining in West Virginia, I used the various resources and gathered information from both sides of the questions posed, including economical benefits such as earnings, and environmental hazards such as ongoing experiments to clean up acid mine drainage. And some opinions written and expressed in newspaper articles and magazines.
Environmental philosophers, policy-makers, and community activists who discuss environmental justice do so almost exclusively in terms of mainstream Western distributive models of social justice: Environmental justice is about the fair or equitable distribution of environmental goods, services, and "resources."
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.
1. What other information would you like to have before you make a decision about whether nuclear waste should be stored in Yucca Mountain?
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...
The article mentions how we never really thought through how we would get rid of nuclear waste which is still deadly from a thousand years from now. So we place spent fuel rods near the nuclear sites in cooling pools. This is something I do not agree with the chapter says that in 2003 we had 108 million pounds of nuclear waste concentrated at these sites and that in thirty years it will be doubled. This is an absolute disaster waiting to happen I think that we need to find a better way of disposing of nuclear waste than just concentrating millions of pounds at sites near urban populations otherwise we are going to have another 3-mile island disaster on our hands. Especially if they keep putting the waste near presumed dead volcanoes, what if an earthquake happens and reawakens the volcano that was not dead but just dormant and all that molten lava goes rushing towards all that
Environmental justice was primarily emerged in USA, which was raised from a campaign against the imposition of toxic and pollutants in a minority community. At the early stage, environmental justice was simply referred to the distributive justice, specifically, inequity distribution of environmental risk (Schlosberg, 2013). Particularly, the environmental impacts and risks are always disproportionately distributed into the poor and minority communities, which also indicate an early focus: racism in the environmental justice (Cole& Foster, 2001; Mohai, Pellow, &Timmins, 2009). At the time, it is still anthropocentric which with not much attention on the natural environment and the relationship between human and
When one discusses acts of racism, slander or the stereotyping of a group of people may come to mind. However, the concept of environmental racism is rarely considered. This form of racism positions dominant environmental framing as racially driven, in which people of color (i.e. minorities) are affected disproportionately by poor environmental practices. Communities of color throughout the United States have become the dumping grounds for our nation’s waste disposal, as well as home to agricultural and/or manufacturing industries that pollute the land. Government regulations and cultural practices have all contributed to environmental racism. The government’s policies have also negatively impacted low income groups as well as people of color. Environmental justice is dependent on rethinking our environmental policies, and ethical environmental practices.
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.
There exists a pattern of historically disenfranchised groups in the United States, such as minorities and low-income communities, being exposed to a disproportionate level of environmental hazards such as toxic waste, pollution and urban decay. This relationship between social and environmental aspects has been termed environmental racism, and beginning in the mid to late 20th century the Environmental Justice Movement grew to combat the politically normalized existence of environmental racism (Cole). The Environmental Justice Movement began as a grassroots environmental movement that faced many obstacles stemming from deeply rooted social constructs regarding race, and social class. The social standing of the communities that caused corporations
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
At the beginning of the semester, I thought that environmental justice was justice for the environment, which is true to a point, but I now know that it is justice for the people. Only when there is a people that have been wronged, usually using the environment as the the method of delivery, does it become an environmental justice case. Environmental justice ensures that all people, regardless of income level or race, have a say in the development and enforcement of environmental laws. It acts on the philosophy that anyone living on and in the land should have a say on how it is treated and used. Sometimes when developing legislature, the populations in mind are not all affected equally, and if said population
...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.