Persuasive Essay On How To Stop Nuclear Waste

Citizens of countries where fossil fuels are being utilized are concerned at the possible chance of global warming. So many greenhouse gases emitted, ice burgs and caps are shifting or melting, that population is beginning to worry about what is going to happen to the environment in the future if this source is kept being used. With nuclear energy we don’t have to worry about the environmental changes. Nuclear energy has

Disposal of the high level nuclear waste that comes from nuclear power plants continues to be a big problem. It has been challenging and costly to find safe ways to store this waste. According to a report from the U.S National Academy of Sciences, it will take 3 million years for radioactive waste stored in the U.S. as of 1983 to decay to background levels (thinkquest.org). Who wants this amount of waste stored in the environment where they live? Currently in the U.S. nuclear power plants produce 3,000 tons of this high level waste each year (thinkquest.org). If nuclear power continues to be produced, this amount of waste will only continue to increase, causing a bigger dilemma as to what to do with the waste. As the waste is removed from the plant it still contains a high level of radiation. Exposure to radiation whether it occurs in the moving process or leakage from storage not only has a negative impact on the environment but also can pose a major health threat to humans. Based on the level of exposure, symptoms to humans can range from nausea and headaches to damage of nerve cells, loss of white blood cells and even death (think .org). The potential risk of exposure is not worth human life.

Today, a considerable amount of energy is provided by nuclear energy. The technology is well organized and developing every passing day and as a result the cost of operation is falling. Using radioactive resources to produce energy generates waste. Waste that contains radioactive materials is called nuclear waste. The secure and environmentally-friendly disposal of nuclear waste is a crucial aspect of nuclear power programs. [1]

So what is nuclear waste, I hear you ask. It is what's left over after nuclear fuel has been through the reactor, once used in the reactor it'll make nuclear energy what's left behind is dangerously radioactive. Uranium is the main component of what goes in a reactor and it is split into almost every other atoms there are during the reaction so it's no longer stable and safe. Nuclear waste is very dangerous and for those of you who have seen to many movies or read to many comic books where people who come

The most egregious facet of the ongoing fiasco that is the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear incident is widely accepted to be the intentional release of hundreds of tons of radioactive water into the oceans surrounding the reactors. In terms of total radioactivity released into the environment, Fukushima has already surpassed the Chernobyl incident of the 1980s, that Soviet-sized lead balloon (plutonium balloon?), which is the only other Level 7 event on the International Nuclear Event Scale. But another seemingly forgotten relic of the Cold War could pose an even greater nuclear threat to our oceans, although it has yet to receive the same level of scientific and political scrutiny as these two accidental events.

Firstly, nuclear waste is hard to dispose of. Unlike other power sources, nuclear waste is still not known about how to dispose of. This is a problem because the waste emits radiation, which can leak into the environment. Chernobyl is

Storing nuclear waste is a political problem as no one wants it stored near them, so there is a dispute about where radioactive waste should be stored. But after all the advantages of using nuclear energy outweigh its disadvantages as nuclear plants emit less than one-hundredth of carbon dioxide gas compared to coal or gas-fired energy plants so there is a very little effect on the environment. Humans living next to coal-fired power plants are exposed to higher radiation doses than those living near nuclear plants, where the former is harmful to human health and may be responsible for acid rain. On the other hand dependence on nuclear energy is now increasing in most countries as nuclear reactors use uranium as a fuel which is found everywhere on earth. It is inexpensive and easier to transport than other fuels which makes them less dependent on oil and foreign fuel from other countries.

The use of nuclear power and nuclear weapons is forcing humankind, and indeed the whole ecosystem, to participate in a particularly cruel and totally uncontrolled experiment. The United States can not afford continuing to raid the environment with long-lived radioactive materials that are scattered to the wind and embedded in our soil, exposing large populations, and foisting health impacts - such as: “high instances of infant mortality and more than six thousand cases of thyroid cancer in children and adolescents according to a 2008 UN report” - (6) on unsuspecting future generations who have no choice in this matter. With this in mind, nuclear energy also puts out more carbon dioxide, puts out more air pollutants, enhances mortality more and takes longer to put up than real renewable energy systems, namely wind, solar, geothermal power, hydro-tidal wave power and, the radiation exposure will force animals and insects out of their homes, or possibly kill them as to what happened in Chernobyl. Moreover, nuclear power enhances nuclear weapons proliferation. (Ted Talk) Due to the fact, that the people haven’t yet came up a solution to where to store spent energy. Moreover, short- and long-term storage of spent nuclear fuel has been a challenge for the industry and policymakers. Spent fuel, if not disposed of properly, could contaminate water supplies or be used by terrorists to create a dirty bomb. This

Nuclear energy is the process of creating useful heat and electricity. The nuclear power debate is a controversy about the deployment and use of nuclear fission reactors to generate electricity from nuclear fuel for civilian purposes. The debate over the expansion of the nuclear energy program has been prominent over the last 4 decades. The debate really escalated during the 1970s and 1980s, when it "reached an intensity unprecedented in the history of technology controversies", in some countries. It is important for the expansion of human life and improving life as we know it. I firmly believe that we need to keep using and expand the use of nuclear energy due to the fact that it eliminates fossil fuel pollutants, it is sustainable and cost effective, and it improves overall human quality of life.

Nuclear power plants produce a lot of energy but the power plant is also potentially, extremely dangerous. There is 100 nuclear power plants that are in use in the United States of America as of now. Although when there is an accident, the power plants release a lot of radiation. The radiation hurts the environment, including living things. Since nuclear power plants are not entirely safe and still have flaws, they can lead to disastrous events like the Chernobyl accident. The accident led to about 270,000 cancers and 93,000 fatal cancers according to the Greenpeace Organization. The Union of Concerned Scientists has created solutions in making nuclear reactors safer. They have sent recommendations to the owners of the power plants to tell them what they should do to make sure there will not be anymore nuclear accidents. So far, with these regulations, there have not been any accidents in the U.S. However, the Environmental Protection Agency has made a more promising solution by regulating the radionuclide emissions and the removal of high level radioactive waste that the power plants are producing. However with these regulations, there is still are still possibilities of nuclear accidents and the release of radiation caused by the power plants. Nuclear power plants need to be safer to help the environment and to prevent numerous deaths.

Its price is extremely high and unaffordable for many. We’d be forced to find another way to get rid of the waste which would be again burying and dumping. It brings us back to the danger of keeping the nuclear waste and having it supervised for many tens of thousands of years, according to United States Environmental Protection Agency standards ("Time for Change." Pros and Cons of Nuclear Power). This could go wrong in two ways. As humans, we have to recognize that many times people are clumsy and/or careless. One day something could go wrong while stacking up the nuclear waste or there could be a leaking in the containers that could put everyone working there at risk. These places where nuclear waste is kept, can be terrorist’s main attacking targets ("Nuclear Energy: Pros and

“A tiny speck of plutonium-239, as little as three millionths of a gram, can cause lung cancer. One pound of plutonium-239 contains enough specks to kill nine billion people instantly” (Pringle 26). Plutonium-239 is a human-made element, also known as the most dangerous substance on earth. As a by-product of uranium fission, plutonium-239 is created by generating electricity from nuclear sources. Contrary to popular belief, nuclear energy is hazardous and threatening to health. The use of nuclear energy should be banned as evidenced by the number of accidents, health effects, and global impact.

Nuclear energy is the energy released by a nuclear reaction, it uses fuel made from mined and processed uranium to generate heat and electricity. It is the world’s largest emission free energy source. Nuclear energy also has the lowest impact on the environment than other energy sources. But it can still be very harmful because of the radiation is causes and the radioactive waste it produces. Radioactive wastes are the ruins of nuclear materials that are used in providing nuclear energy. These wastes contain high levels of radiation that can be very hazardous to humans and the environment. Some people accept and support the idea of using nuclear energy and others don’t. In the following paragraphs, some major nuclear accidents and the public acceptance of nuclear energy will be discussed.

Individually, they're no larger than your pinkie, but the energy-packed pellets that are the radioactive remains of nuclear power generation pose an enormous problem for nuclear energy plants that weren't originally designed to store them. So far the 103 operating nuclear reactors in the United States have generated an estimated 45,000 tons of waste that is expected to remain radioactive for more than 200,000 years (Onion, 2016). And right now, the waste, which emits radioactive particles that can eat away at human tissue and organs, is being stored in tanks or concrete and steel bunkers at sites that were only meant to contain the waste for perhaps decades, not centuries. "Spent fuel is now stored in pools and dry casks," says Rodney Ewing, a professor in nuclear engineering at the University of Michigan. "Today it's safe. But it's certainly not a long-term solution (Ewing, 2015)."

The problem with nuclear waste is getting worse everyday while we try and find a solution to dispose of the waste properly, however there are some people who think that the nuclear waste project for waste disposal is not that serious and it does not have an affect on the environment, but they are wrong because our lack of care for proper disposal of nuclear waste is having a tole on the environment where the waste is buried and the life forms around these waste sites.