The Unpredictability And Dangerous Nature Of Nuclear Power

Good Essays
1. USSR vs. US
a. After the fall of Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany, the world entered into a competition for supremacy between the last two remaining world powers; the Soviets of the U.S.S.R. and the Americans of America. In their race for supremacy, the two powers created, tested, and improved the most destructive weapon of all time, the nuclear bomb. Between 1946 and 2010, the two nations tested over 1,850 bombs. The competition drove each to continue testing across the world from the depths of the oceans to the open skys. These test were banned in 1963 and all test were banned in 1996.
b. Article
After budget cuts from the 2000s and the dropping of the water levels in the aquifer, scientist are having trouble monitoring the radioactive
…show more content…
Like all energy production methods, nuclear energy has its advantages and disadvantages. The current most persuasive pro would be that nuclear energy is a well developed, ready to go energy production. Unlike other green energy, it is what economist called “market ready”. Another pro would be that is emits virtually no carbon emissions. The cons would be the unpredictability and dangerous nature of nuclear power. Many of the elements used have half-lives that last millions if not billions of years. These radioactive waste products must be stored somewhere potentially infiltrating ecosystems. In contrast, fossil fuels provide a relatively cheap, easily available, and are very stable sources, that is they are much safer then nuclear. However, they emit massive amounts of greenhouse gasses when they are burned, drilled, and transported, pollution is harder to contain, and much more. The processes that are involved in bringing the minerals and fossil fuels to market are similar. They both are devastating to the environment, both are having to dig deeper to find their product making it more expensive, dangerous, and impactful on the environment, and much more. If I had to choose between the two evils, I would chose nuclear only because its byproducts are easier to contain and maintain. Although it would be very expensive and would require constant diligence and oversight, I believe that well regulated nuclear energy would be much less destructive then fossil fuels. Not only that, the possibility for technological advancements within the field of producing nuclear energy, such as the prospect for fusion, provide promising sources of cleaner

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    It also is not affected by the oil and gas prices. Although this is an alternative, it still has some cons. Nuclear power plants consist of radioactivity, which if released can be deadly. A nuclear power plant on average generates 20 metric tons of nuclear fuel, which is considered high radioactive waste (Brian & Lamb, 2000). This waste can emit radiation and heat that can eventually corrode the container and be deadly to life near by.…

    • 1462 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Game Changer

    • 1205 Words
    • 5 Pages

    “Just one uranium fuel pellet [...] contains the same amount of energy as 17,000 cubic feet of natural gas, 1,780 pounds of coal or 149 gallons of oil.”15 Not only is uranium more efficient, but there is much larger supply of it than there is of natural gases and oil, which are estimated to run out within decades. Although there is still an abundant supply of coal, its supply is likely to decrease at a faster rate than it does presently with the dwindling of other fossil fuels. Many may argue that the nuclear disasters that can occur as a result of nuclear power generation are far more destructive than global warming is. While these events are undeniably devastating, they can be prevented with the proper precautions and research. The power plant in Chernobyl had a faulty design and an unstable reactor.…

    • 1205 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    According to Climate Nasa’s article on nuclear power, coal and gas are far more harmful to humans and the environment (http://climate.nasa.gov/news/903/) than nuclear power. Coal and fossil fuel burning emit harmful air-pollutants that have caused climate change and risked human life. In addition, replacing cheap energy resources with nuclear power plants can avoid tons of greenhouse…

    • 881 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    To begin with, nuclear energy has several major advantages. Not only a large amount of energy can be produced with only a tiny amount of energy input to the power generator, but the maintenance cost is low also. Moreover, unlike fossil fuel, it will not cause serious air pollution. However, after the two serious nuclear…

    • 1029 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Persuasive Essay Nuclear

    • 1156 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Nuclear power seems to be a perfectly viable sustainable energy option to satiate our present and future energy needs. There are fewer greenhouse gas emissions and far less waste production when compared to conventional energy sources. So, what seems to be the problem? As good as it is, Nuclear power does have it’s drawbacks and comes with it’s own set of challenges. Even though the amount of waste produced, is far less, it is highly toxic and nuclear waste disposal is a big challenge.…

    • 1156 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Thorium is also an ideal host for disposition of weapons grade plutonium. It is also possible to derive these advantages using thorium in existing reactor designs. Heavy water moderated lattices offer best characteristics for utilization of thorium. In particular, the used of Pu(RG) and thorium in 220MWe PHWRs offers an attractive option for near-term deployment in several regions of the world. However, presently thorium is not economically viable as global uranium prices are much lower, but for a country like India with vast resources of thorium compared to negligible uranium resources, this seems as an effective option.…

    • 942 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The Atomic bomb is the most controversial weapon ever made by man; first used by the United States of America during World War Two, it evaporated tens of thousands of people In seconds and destroyed whole cities. The Atomic bomb was devastating but not devastating enough for the U.S. Government who started another bomb project only this time experimenting with Hydrogen. Thus the Hydrogen bomb was created; a bomb that was feared by all people who knew about it. This paper will give one a good understanding of how the first atomic bomb rattled many and how nuclear weaponry has evolved over the decades through the Cold War onto the present. In 1945 the second world War was ending and there was no doubt that the allies were going to win.…

    • 1220 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    A fissile material was one that could sustain the nuclear chain reaction of fission. Plutonium was easier and cheaper to produce than enriched uranium. Groves had the Hanford Site built in Washington State to produce plutonium. Plutonium could be used to build bombs faster, fast enough to test them, giving them an edge over the uranium type bomb. However a plutonium variant of the uranium bomb would not work.…

    • 1094 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The environmental effects of nuclear power are relatively light compared to those” (Maehlum, 2013, para5). Which means nuclear energy is less energy may be harmful the climate although the world is faced global warming by energy pollution. However, worst aspects that impedes production of nuclear energy to spread everywhere is several harmful effects that may destroy the life. Indeed, nuclear accidents and leaking radiations are worst issues that are involved in countries. The world has seen nuclear accidents and spread of nuclear radiation that have killed a lot of people who work on nuclear plants or live around plants.…

    • 1765 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    There is also biomass energy which is energy from trees and is readily available and produces high energy content, but on the other hand you have burn the trees that destroys the environment and even if you plant more which will help with reforestation it will not take out all the carbon you are putting the atmosphere, and biomass is expensive to. This is unlike nuclear which is getting cheaper and cheaper and is producing more emissions. That is why nuclear should be the next big energy source for the future it is very reliable. The only bad thing about nuclear is that it can turn into a disaster when not maintained right, nuclear meltdowns have occurred a few times in the history but one really sticks out on peoples mind Chernobyl. This nuclear meltdown caused the single worst eco destruction in history.…

    • 1611 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays