Nuclear Energy Pros And Cons

Credibility: The world's first exposure to nuclear energy came with the detonation of two atomic bombs in Japan in 1945. Scientists perceived a positive aspect of

Earlier this year the Havasupai Tribe and a coalition of conservation groups sued the United States Forest Service for allowing Energy Fuel Resources Inc. to operate a mine under a 1986 federal environmental review without tribal consultation. The Canyon mine was previously in non-operational status due to low uranium stock prices in 1992. Opponents of the uranium mining operation want the federal environmental review updated and

The Institute for Energy and Environment offered and alternative in 1999 for the management of nuclear waste. For short term storage the Institute for Energy and Research (IEER) recommended nuclear waste should be stored as near and safely as possible from where it was produced. IEER suggests that the sites need to be dry and as close as possible to the place where the waste was generated to avoid a potential terrorist disaster. The funding for the extra storage on the site should come from the Federal Governments Nuclear Waste Fund. For short term storage the Institute for Energy and Environment Research (IEER) recommended nuclear waste should be stored as near and safely as possible from where it was produced. IEER suggests that the sites need to be dry and as close as possible to the place where the waste was generated to avoid a potential terrorist disaster. The funding for the extra storage on the site should come from the Federal Governments Nuclear Waste Fund. Many repositories should be looked and studied for more than a decade and none prioritized. Finding a permanent and safe solution is very difficult and would require a lot of time because of the want for good science (Ledwidge,

Studies have been performed on activities like disposing in the oceans, as well as on more exotic proposals such as deep geological disposal and launching into space. Some of these methods have been found wanting in terms of feasibility, costs and legal restrictions [1]. The management community in charge of nuclear waste disposal had come to the agreement that the only practical route for ensuring sufficient long-term isolation of HLW from the environment is deep geologic disposal[3].For example, Canada has focused on the concept of Deep Geological Disposal for long term management of nuclear wastes generated from nuclear activities. The Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) is in charge of disposing radioactive wastes in the country. Canada’s long term management plan for used nuclear fuel is called “Adaptive Phased Management” [3] ,The plan is to confine and isolate the used fuel in a suitable host-rock with the help of a multiple barrier system. Selection of the site is based on screening of potential sites followed by a preliminary assessment of

spectrum of their sample in hopes of discovering something new; this decision to proceed is what

The radioactive elements and huge concentration of salt that is injected into the shale rocks concerns the nation because they’ve seen cases to when those chemicals have found their way into our water and even our air. In results of this problem- biology professor Robert Jackson, discusses in Source D- how he, along with some researchers, analyze two hundred private wells of residents in

The disposal of of nuclear waste is another environmental concern that must be dealt with in a smart manner. This is a highly debated topic for several reasons. Having a half-life of 10,000+ years, some radioactive substances will stay highly dangerous for thousands of years. One possible solution to the storage of nuclear waste is the Yucca mountain project (McCombie). This would provide a universal storage site for all of the nuclear waste of the United States. However; there still are many things to be worked out for this solution such as - how will the nuclear waste be safely transported to Yucca Mountain?

The U.S. Department of Energy has proposed plans to deposit 70,000 tons of highly radioactive waste underground Yucca Mountain in Nevada. While many environmental questions and concerns have been raised about the safety of the waste disposal plan for the next 10,000 years, there appears to be no alternative. Waste from nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants are a serious environmental problem that will be present for generations to come. It should be society's responsibility to come up with more efficient sources of energy, despite the costs, to prevent the production of more hazardous waste in the future.

Nuclear Waste The essay “Nuclear Waste” by Ricard A. Muller talks about the controversial matter of the disposure of radioactive waste. Despite the overwhelming concerns of citizens, Richard Muller believes the dangers associated with the transportation and deposit of nuclear waste is not as paramount as the issue may seem. The concepts that seems most alarming to the public are the number of year it takes for the radioactivity of the waste to subside and where it will be stored in the mean time that will not affect their safety. As Muller explains, ”Even after 100,000 years the radiation will still be above 10% of the level it had when it left the reactor.

Public safety is one of the main concerns for the community. The concern is that the United States Department of Energy (DOE) has not done enough to clean up the site.

While reading Richard A. Muller Nuclear Waste a professor of physics from the University of California. I really enjoyed the reading and learning how nuclear waste “is one of the biggest technical issues that any president is likely to face”. In this chapter he also spoke of Plutonium which is a transuranic radioactive chemical element with symbol Pu and atomic number 94. Richard also went on to say that there is a “safe” nuclear waste disposal located in Yucca Mountain, Nevada. In order to keep the waste disposal safe, it is buried in a storage room in which is 1000 feet below the surface.

There have been a decent amount of regulations on this matter but evidence shows that the DOE regularly doesn’t listen to their own rules or changes them so that the Yucca Mountain site can still be considered safe. I believe that the decision to move forward with the Yucca Mountain project was a political move, scientific evidence showed that the site was not what was originally perceived and at the time the Nevada political strength was low so they did not have the opportunity to fight against using Yucca Mountain as a repository. Similarly, there is a significant amount of money that can be made, or that needs to be invested into this project which can change the finale decision. In addition, there is clear evidence that water has been able to drain into the mountain bringing hazardous material with it, which shows that the site is not a barrier to its environment and if toxins can get it then there is a potential for radiation to leak out. This in turn can cause major health concerns to humans and the

Nearly 40 years of nuclear weapons production at Rocky Flats had left facilities, groundwater, soil, and surface waters contaminated with chemical and radioactive substances that posed potential health and safety risks to the public and workers” (Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)). Accidents at those sites further contribute to environmental contamination. “Manufacturing activities, accidental industrial fires and spills, and support activities including waste management resulted in the release of hazardous and radioactive substances, hazardous wastes, and hazardous waste constituents to air, soil, sediment, groundwater, and surface water at Rocky Flats.” (Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)). Similar to the contamination that is spread by the detonation of the atomic bomb, the contaminations caused by the manufacturing plants also have a very long half-life which means the contamination recovery from these sites will take a significant amount of time as well.

Nuclear energy has been around longer than people think. In 1934 Physicist Enrico Fermi experiments in Rome showing that Neutrons can split many kind s of atoms. In 1946 the Atomic Energy Commission was created to explore peaceful uses of energy and nuclear energy development. In 1951 an experimental Breeder reactor produced the first electric power from nuclear energy in

Nuclear knowledge has existed for a long time. Nuclear Engineering U.S. Department of Energy relates, ―By 1900, the physicists knew the atom contains large quantities of energy‖ (par 11). Many others formed good theories, such as Ernest Rutherford and Einstein’s contribution with his equation E=mc^2. In 1934