Climate Change, Coal, And Nuclear Power

When someone thinks of problems plaguing the world, nuclear energy is not the first thing that comes to peoples minds these days.[1]Nuclear power was once deemed the new energy of the future.[2]However, numerous nuclear power plant accidents around the world put a damper on that notion.The United States considers itself one of the most technologically advanced countries in the world, but 103 nuclear reactors currently operating within her borders, one was bound to fail sometime or another.[3]

Firstly, the atomic incidents of Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania and Chernobyl in Russia are often mentioned as examples for nuclear plants being unsafe. In both cases failures of workers led to a meltdown in the reactors and increased radiation in the surrounding area (Henderson 12-17). And as the recent disaster in Japan shows, a nuclear crisis cannot only be caused by human mishaps, but also by unpredictable and untamable natural hazards. Consequently, nuclear crises cannot be predicted or prevented completely. Nuclear plants are, furthermore, considered uneconomical because in the eighties the construction costs of nuclear plants were underestimated and exceeded the estimation by $100 billion (Henderson 103). Therefore, the nuclear power opponents are arguing that nuclear power is burdening the American economy unnecessarily. According to the nuclear physicist Jeff Eerkens, antinuclear groups are also claiming that nuclear power is not necessary for the future since renewable energy sources, such as solar, wind, hydro, and geothermal power will be providing sufficient energy for the United States, and are at the same time much cheaper than the costly nuclear power plants (Eerkens 20). Over all, opponents consider nuclear power to risky and inefficient to “deserve further support from U.S. taxpayers” (Henderson 104).

For years, many scientists, environmentalists, and energy experts have been studying how human’s creation and use of energy has impacted our environment. These experts have discovered some troubling facts. Most of our country’s energy is created from burning fossil fuels that pollute our atmosphere, contribute to global warming, and thus threaten the future of our planet. But there’s a safe and effective solution to this problem: nuclear power. Nuclear power should be used more in the United States to create clean power that doesn’t pollute our environment, in order to help combat climate change.

Dwight D. Eisenhower’s Atoms for Peace program would proceed to bring upon one of the most controversial ideas for renewable energy: nuclear energy. The first commercial generation of nuclear energy in the United States was in 1957 at the Shippingport Atomic Power Station. This station was able to provide power for Pittsburgh until 1982. With increased atomic research, our country now has over 100 nuclear reactors to provide much energy for the United States. With our country trying to take the lead in the global warming initiative, we must look at all the available renewable options and weigh them against each other. I believe that our government must continue its funding for nuclear energy because of its potential benefits for the

While Nuclear energy may have been beneficial to the American government and its citizens in some ways, it reshaped the way Americans and the United States Government thought of the role of citizens in Nuclear America. Americans could not rely on their government to keep them safe anymore and the government, through misguided attempts at preserving and improving the citizens’ lives, were putting those very lives at risk.

The United States must re-examine many policies previously accepted as reasonable, especially its own national energy policy. As the largest overall and per capita energy consumer in the world, the U.S. needs to decide upon a reasonable source of energy for the foreseeable future, especially since its energy needs will increase dramatically during that time. With political instability likely to remain the norm in the Middle East, oil continues to be an energy source of questionable reliability; in addition, current estimates of worldwide reserves suggest we may in fact run out of oil entirely in the next fifty years. Natural gas reserves are in fairly short supply too, and costs limit its

This report is formed to examine the effects that nuclear energy has brought upon the United States of America. As over the years, local state government as well as the public citizens of America are having sceptical doubts on the long term effects that nuclear energy would bring to the states.

When you hear the word “nuclear”, what do you think of? Does the thought scare you, intrigue you, or have no effect at all? Nuclear energy has been a part of our lives for many years. Some events that included nuclear power included the Cold War and the Chernobyl disaster. These events have changed how people view nuclear energy. Nuclear power is used all around the world to create efficient energy, but it can also be used to create weapons and destructive material. Nuclear power has proven to be clean, efficient and cost effect; the Chernobyl disaster revealed to the world why we needed to change training, safety procedure, and the structure of the plant itself.

“No one in the United States has become seriously ill or has died because of any kind of accident at a civilian nuclear power plant.” says Joe Barton. This is a highly controversial topic where there are many conflicting opinions. Some people believe that these plants are too dangerous to exist while other think that they are the edge of tomorrow. When analyzing it from a purely statistical and analytical standpoint, nuclear energy is clearly worth the possible risks they pose.

After 30 years ever since Chernobyl, the U.S has been using nuclear energy has a type of fuel. To start, Chernobyl was one of the world’s worst nuclear disaster. A fire caused an explosion to occur at the Chernobyl plant in Ukraine and forced more than 300,000 people to flee and caused radiation levels that are still harmful today. After this incident, the U.S continues to use nuclear energy as a type of fuel for buildings and more, but a meltdown or an explosion in the U.S is unlikely to happen because of how safe facilities are in the U.S. A meltdown will rarely happen, but what is worse is the accumulation of radioactive waste and the U.S have been ignoring the fact that this is a problem. The discovery of radioactive waste is important

Nuclear power was the world’s fastest growing form of energy in the 1990’s. However, presently it is the second slowest growing worldwide. Considering that nuclear power accounts for eleven percent of the world’s energy supply, one must ask what happened [Nuclear Power]. Why is it that the growth of nuclear power has almost completely stalled? The simple answer is that after meltdowns such as Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, many people are afraid of nuclear power plants, which causes great opposition to the expansion of the industry. Unfortunately, most people are not well informed about nuclear energy; many do not take the time to view its positives and negatives.

Nuclear energy was first introduced into the world when Admiral Rickover decided that there should be a new way to power submarines. They were successful in launching a nuclear-powered submarine in 1954. This new idea of using nuclear power was starting to arise in the 60s and 70s when they made their first nuclear reactor. Even France decided that it was time to propel their society into nuclear powered energy which is now powering 75% of their electricity (Touran, 2013). Nuclear energy has acquired a large amount of attraction, the beginning of a new future awaits the people of the United States; One filled with eco-friendly energy and the construction of a world filled with nuclear energy. People across the United States are starting

The world's natural resources are being consumed at an alarming rate. As these resources diminish, people will be seeking alternative sources by which to generate electricity for heat and light. The only practical short-term solution for the energy/pollution crisis should be nuclear power because it is available, cleaner and safer.

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.

Nuclear power has been around for decades and can be easily utilized to help meet America’s energy needs. With energy