Nuclear energy has a potential for replacing fossil fuel in Australia which will be limited in the future. According to Graaff (2015), in 2013, 6350 tonnes of uranium were mined from three uranium mines in Australia, making Australia as a third rank after Canada and Kazakhstan. Therefore, Australia should use Uranium to generate nuclear energy as an alternative energy of fossil fuel. It is important to consider the benefits of nuclear energy in order to prevent global warming implications, such a climate change. This essay will examine the positive extent of the nuclear energy use in Australia to reduce global warming in terms of the economy and the environmental aspects and argue that nuclear energy is the most suitable option for …show more content…
(Figure 1) Electricity production costs for 7000 hours of production (1990 Euro cents/kWh) Another benefit from nuclear energy in economic aspect is the employment opportunities. Figure 2 illustrates two types of employment which can work in the nuclear power system; direct and indirect employment. According to Nicholson (2013), indirect employment has a responsibility of Nuclear power station operations and the maintenance. It is estimated that this type of employment will rise jobs opportunities to 11,000 jobs in 2050 (Nicholson, 2013). Another type of employment is the direct jobs. Direct employment works in the construction and the operation of the plants, providing 18,000 direct jobs (Nicholson, 2013). Therefore, in the future, 25 GW nuclear power has the ability to provide 29,000 jobs in total. On the other hand, if the nuclear is extended to 50 GW, the job opportunities might be increase to 37,000 jobs (Nicholson, 2013).
(Figure 2) The Employment Opportunities in Building 25 GW of Nuclear Power Plants Nuclear energy is eco-friendly as it can reduce climate change. One significant benefit is that nuclear energy produces a low amount of carbon dioxide. Figure 3 shows the potential rate of carbon emission from different electricity generation such as, coal, oil, natural gas, renewable sources (wind, hydro, and solar power), and nuclear energy. The lowest potential rate of carbon dioxide emission (CO2) is Nuclear power.
Nuclear has been in use for over fifty years and provides power to thirty two countries, manufacturing no emissions. Australia is one among the few developed countries without nuclear energy and therefore the solely G20 nation while not it. Why is that this the case? 2 reasons: worry and politics. Safety is that the issue cited most frequently by opponents of nuclear energy in Australia., however there has been only one fatal nuclear accident in nearly sixty years of generation worldwide.
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).
An example of the environmental success nuclear energy has provided is France in the 1970s and 1980s. The country switched from using fossil fuels and instead used nuclear energy to supply 78% of its electricity (see figure 3). This in turn lowered the country’s greenhouse emissions by approximately 2% each year since. No accidents have ever occurred at any of France's power plants (Biello, 2013).
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.
Throughout this world, we use various equipment that need certain energy requirements in order for them to run properly. Two of the utmost imperative sources of energy in our world today come from coal and nuclear power. Still, a great deal of citizens of this world are unaware of the impacts of nuclear power whether it be positive or negative due to the fact that nuclear power has not existed as long as coal power has. However, as nuclear power becomes a major resource of energy, we as citizens must determine which is more fitting for not only us, but our environment. As this report continues on, you will come to find the history of each of these resources along with the advantages and disadvantages of each. Concluded from this research was the concept that nuclear power is worthier for America as a whole. Included below are the specific points as to why nuclear power is far superior for American citizens and our environment. However, the main notion to be taken from this report is the view that we need to become further educated on the energy resources present in this world and be able to determine how we can become more efficient and contribute less to climate change in the long run.
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.
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
The advantage of of Nuclear Power is that it doesn’t depend on fossil fuels and is not affected by the erratic oil and gas prices. Coal and natural gas in other power plants emit carbon dioxide, whereas nuclear power plants emit minimal carbon dioxide. Nuclear fission produces a million times more energy per unit weight than fossil fuel alternatives.
Although nuclear energy has many advantages, their disadvantages that cause great concern to the general public. A common opinion amongst the public is the perceived opinion that uranium is dangerous and this has proven to be a major problem when there as has been any consideration of a nuclear alternative in Australia. Another concern is the long lasting radioactive material associated with the use of uranium as a fuel source, for example, the international nuclear waste dump possibility in Adelaide. Even if the South Australian Government could convince the voting public in its state, the plan would require federal approval and changes to the law. South Australia has about 30 per cent of the world's known uranium reserves. However, the strength
Unlike fossil fuels, nuclear energy has the lowest impact on the environment since it does not release any gases like carbon dioxide, methane which are largely responsible for
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.
As each year passes, more and more electricity will be made as a result of increased nuclear power plants around the world. The economic benefits of nuclear energy are equally advantageous as the environmental aspects.
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.
As a whole, reliance on fossil fuels contributes to climate change, which will lead to disastrous consequences in the future. One of the many changes that can be made is to use cleaner sources of energy, of which nuclear is one of them.