Advantages And Disadvantages Of Nuclear Power In South Africa

The use of nuclear power can have several negative impacts on the economy. The use of nuclear power can be costly. The building of the plants can cost between $12 - $18

The first advantage of nuclear energy is that it is one of the cleanest sources of energy available to us now. The process of fission doesn’t emit any greenhouse gases or emissions that are linked to global warming. Nuclear energy is currently the largest clean air energy source. It currently occupies 63.3 percent of the emission free electricity in the United States, and this must continue to get expanded upon. With increased use of nuclear energy comes a decreased use in fossil fuels, which would result in a lower carbon footprint for the U.S. This would help slow down the impact of global warming and climate change.

In both of the supporting articles over the use of nuclear energy, there is a proficient amount of strengthens and weakness in both arguments. Though the use of the background and prior information given in the preclude, it allows the reader to understand the basics of nuclear energy and the way both authors are approaching to present their ideas. Using this analytical preface most of the information presented, allows the reader to have an idea on which side is more appealing to their choosing. Allowing the reader to get a perspective on both sides of the argument will insight them on the information presented and will ultimately give a substantial amount of evidence to back their claims.

Firstly, the usage of nuclear power is consistent and plentiful. As we know, the reaction of nuclear can emit a great power of energy, it can support vast of families’ and enormous plants’ working. In addition, unlike solar energy and wind power, which depend on external factors, nuclear power is consistent generate at anytime and anywhere. Secondly, since the nuclear power is easy to produce and it also can generate a huge amount of power, it is much cheaper to use it. What’s more, like Hill’s saying, “with the cost of natural gas and oil soaring”, the nuclear plants have return back to work and produce massive energy. Lastly, nuclear power benefits to environment: not only because it does not produce the carbon emissions, which can alleviates the global warming; but also it reduces the noxious byproducts, like sulfur dioxide, which is main reason of air pollution. Therefore, using the nuclear power is an ideal energy resource for human

Nuclear power is a much greener option than others, and can help prevent the devastating effects of fossil fuels on the environment. Burning fossil fuels releases thousands of tons of GHGs (greenhouse gasses) into the air that cause a variety of serious environmental problems. The emissions cause global warming which leads to the melting of polar ice caps and the raising of oceans. This also causes acid rain and air pollution which pollutes water sources, accelerates erosion and damages ecosystems (Pacific

There are also many negatives that can be seen. The mining and purifying of uranium isn’t a clean process also including the transport of nuclear fuel to and from plants. The used fuel is radioactive and potentially deadly. A nuclear power plant generates 20 metric tons of used nuclear fuel and is classified as high-level radioactive nuclear waste. It will evetually corrode any container that holds it and can be lethal to nearby life forms. The wastes have to be monitored. The results when nuclear power plants malfunction may be catastrophic. One example is the Chernobyl disaster and the recent Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. The Chernobyl disaster caused thousands to die from cancer and other

Nuclear reactors only emit carbon dioxide and sometimes displace animals. The “cons” from nuclear reactors compared to others vary but it’s very clear that the nuclear power is the better choice.

According to the World Nuclear Association, there are many different type of cost when building a nuclear power plant. The bare plant cost is identified by the engineering and construction cost. The owner’s cost includes land, cooling infrastructure, and associated buildings to name a few. I will explain the bare plant cost and compare to other energy sources. The US Energy Information Agency (EIA) has come up with a formula to determine the cost of construction based on the amount of power the plant will produce. Construction cost mainly includes special materials, sophisticated safety features and back-up control equipment. According to the EIA, construction of nuclear power plants may be expensive short term is cost efficient long term. The NEA formula predicts that the cost of construction is about $3,530/kW ($US/kilowatts) in 2013 (Comparisons between different building costs can be seen in table 1). $US/kilowatts means that for every kilowatt produced at the nuclear facility, $3,530 is spent on building cost. In fact, a nuclear power plant in Waynesboro, Georgia has received a

As the demands for energy increases, the United States needs to determine how it is going to meet the need. A range of options is needed for future generations and nuclear power is one suitable option. As with any option, it comes with its strengths and weaknesses. Presently, sixty-six percent of the United States energy comes from fossil fuel, while only nineteen percent comes from nuclear power; however, fickle oil prices are a sign that the era of abundant and cheap transportation fuel is ending. As the global necessity for electricity rises, the United States needs to turn to nuclear power as their solution.

Nuclear power produces huge amount of energy through nuclear fission. 1 ton of uranium fuel, which is used as a fuel in generating electricity, equals to 50,000 tons of fossil fuels for generating the same amount of electricity. Since a small amount of nuclear fuel can produce a large amount of energy, it is powerful and efficient.

Pollution is another topic with both pros and cons. Fossil fuels release harmful pollutants into the air such as carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide. Nuclear power does not release any of those toxins into the atmosphere. However, a pollution problem with nuclear energy is thermal pollution, where a plant’s “hot effluents” are put into a nearby body of water, and raise the temperature by a small amount but enough to cause a disturbance in the ecosystem of the lake or reservoir. Nevertheless, this could easily be solved by cooling the effluents before releasing them into the water. The other problem facing nuclear energy is waste disposal. Nuclear waste is radioactive and very dangerous. Therefore, it must be kept buried and sealed up for a long period of time until the radioactivity dies [Plasma-Material]. One positive fact about nuclear energy that is not disputed is its abundance.

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.

The world as we know today is dependent on energy. The options we have currently enable us to produce energy economically but at a cost to the environment. As fossil fuel source will be diminishing over time, other alternatives will be needed. An alternative that is presently utilized is nuclear energy. Nuclear energy is currently the most efficacious energy source. Every time the word ‘nuclear’ is mentioned, the first thought that people have is the devastating effects of nuclear energy. Granting it does come with its drawbacks; this form of energy emits far less pollution than conventional power plants. Even though certain disadvantages of nuclear energy are devastating, the advantages contain even greater rewards.

With any large energy producing facility there are risks. The truth is that accidents do happen at nuclear power plants and at other facilities all the time. An example of this was the accident at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania where there was a partial meltdown in March 1979. More recently was the worst nuclear accident at Chernobyl. Statistical data for 1995, released by the International Atomic Energy Agency early in 1996, indicated that there were a total of 437 operational nuclear power stations in 31 countries with years of experience. Chernobyl was the only plant that injured the public. Thus, judging by the data, that is a good record for a source of energy.

Global demand and consumption of energy is at an all time high; the world needs a safe, efficient, clean, and high producing source of energy production. The solution is something we already use for energy production, Nuclear power. From the beginning of nuclear energy there has been concerns over the safety of the power plants and its impact on the environment. With climate change and more accurate information on nuclear power the tide is shifting in its favor. This paper will explore the positives of nuclear power, political change on nuclear power, safety of the energy source and new technologies associated with the nuclear power process. Most importantly are the risks associated with nuclear power worth it? Research suggests that nuclear power is safer now more than ever and has less of an impact on the environment than coal or oil. Public support and misconceptions over the years have been up and down due to political agendas and those who are misinformed about nuclear power. Individuals who are involved in the energy field are in favor of nuclear power and building more plants with newer technology.