Separation Of Uranium From Sea Water Essay

Using conventional fission, nuclear power plants generate electricity without creating air pollution from stack emissions as the energy is released from the breaking of the nucleus rather than the combustion of the organic compounds in the fossil fuels that create carbon dioxide . In contrast, combusting coal, oil, or natural gas emits sulfur dioxide(fossil fuels contain both organic and non organic compounds that contain sulphur) that contributes to acidic deposition, particulate matter that threatens human health, and carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that contribute to global climate change.One might consider the indirect greenhouse emission of actually building a nuclear fission reactor and also the resources that are required to obtain and purify the uranium essential for the plant to run. Even after considering all the steps involved in building plants and generating power, researchers from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have calculated that nuclear power lowers emissions 4–150 times below the emissions from fossil fuel combustion . IAEA scientists estimate that at current global rates of usage, nuclear

An example is that nuclear power emits more energy than fossil fuels. In an article called “The Pro and Cons of Nuclear Power”, Jeremy Smith states that Uranium, which is used to make nuclear energy, can produce 20,000 times as much energy than fossil fuels (2011). This means that a small amount of Uranium would be used to make an abundant amount of energy. On the other hand, the process of acquiring the Uranium may be more dangerous that predicted. According to Jeremy Smith, uranium mining exposes workers to radium, a highly radioactive element, which then turns into radon gas. “Radon gas… can expose workers and nearby communities to an array of health risks like lung cancer, bone cancer and lymphoma” (Smith 2011). In conclusion, although uranium gives an immense amount of energy, it would not be worth it if thousands of workers become ill and possibly die.

Water is probably the most important resource we as people have. Humans can survive without food for several weeks, but without water we would die in less than a week. On a slightly less dramatic note, millions of liters of water are needed every day worldwide for washing, irrigating crops, and cooling industrial processes, not to mention leisure industries such as swimming pools and water-sports centers. Despite our dependence on water, we use it as a dumping ground for all sorts of waste, and do very little to protect the water supplies we have.

Two wastes that resulted from this production were coal tar and purified waste. Coal tar was a formation of less volatile chemical compounds. Coal tar’s sole purpose was for roofing and road building material. Scientists taking coal tar as a starting point developed other uses. Manufactured gas plants were creating more coal than they could find buyers for and eventually formed an emulsion with water. The tar produced spills and leaks over decades of operation. Chemicals found in coal tar were anthracene, fluorene, napthalene, pyrene and many others (dec.ny.gov). Sulfur and cyanide compounds that were being removed through purifier beds consisting of lime or wood chips formed purifier waste. Reactions took place between the gas and purifier material corroding gas pipes, stoves and lighting fixtures. Purifier beds would eventually fill up with tar and become unusable. Having to dispose of the material, the waste had a strong odor and the wood chips would ignite if left uncovered. The purifier waste would either be shipped to landfills or fill low-lying areas on premises. The cyanide compound found in purifier waste contaminated groundwater away from the burial location. The water that became affected was highly acidic and caused harm to fish and

Energy- Everyone needs it. The major challenge for the 21st century however, is generating this energy with the lowest impact on human and ecological health. A number of differing production methods have been derived in response to this, one of the most controversial of which is Nuclear energy supplied through Uranium mining. This is a uniquely topical issue in Australia, on account of the sheer amount of Uranium held in Australia’s borders (30% of the world’s reserves) and its potential impact on Australia’s economy (4), the politicised and partisan nature of nuclear debate, along with longstanding opposition associated with such striking international disasters as the Chernobyl and, more recently, Fukushima events (1). With such significant

Uranium can be used to produce nuclear energy, it's renewable, and it means less pollution which in turn helps the environment.

One of Uranium’s largest environmental impacts is the quality and quantity of surface water near Uranium mines. Once Uranium is extracted from mills, a significant amount of Uranium products are released into rivers and lakes. This significantly increases the concentration of Uranium in surface water. Radon, a product produced from the decaying of Uranium, if consumed by the animals, can create serious lung and stomach issues. Inhaling radon has a similar effect. Uranium, once the material dissolves into the soil, can also significantly influence the soil quality in a given area. Soil, after this process, can’t provide moisture for plant growth and many underground living organisms die. Considering the Olympic Dam Mine is next to a large river, these issues are occurring more and more near the

Even though the mining of uranium can cause environmental pollution, the power plant itself does not actually produce pollution. Yes, there is also nuclear waste we have to take care of, but it is stored in Yucca Mountain.On the contrary, people may be afraid of the nuclear waste having an accident while transporting it to the mountain, but it hasn’t happened yet. This is why we should help keep TMI open.

The world’s need for energy is growing exponentially, our current lifestyle relies almost entirely on non-renewable energy sources in order to provide electricity for our homes. Australia has an abundance of these non-renewable materials which provide Australia with a stable form of export as well as providing employment. Australia is abundant in natural resources like iron and coal, as well as other materials, the most notable being Uranium. Uranium, which is in plentiful supply in Australia (containing 31% of the entire world’s supply), has very controversial uses.

Nuclear power has been highly controversial in the world, specifically uranium mining. Uranium mining is an option that was presented to the world for a source of nuclear weapons, nuclear medicine, as well as nuclear power. Uranium is a natural element, it has an average concentration of 2.8 per million in the Earth’s crust. Uranium is very abundant and is more plentiful than gold, silver, and mercury. The half-life of uranium-238 is 4.46 billion years, the half-life of uranium-234 is 245,000 years, and uranium-235 has a half-life of 704 million years (Uranium: Its Uses and Hazards, n.d.). There are four common kinds of extracting uranium from the ground; open pit and underground mining, in situ leach mining (ISL), heap leaching, and milling. While there are several forms of mining that have proven to be affective at extracting uranium from the ground, none of the mining types have been guaranteed to stop nuclear radiation in the area that the mining took place. Nuclear power has gotten a bad name ever since the atomic bomb, so many people have become skeptical on how safe the rising expansion of uranium mining is. The environmental implications that uranium mining has caused in the past has brought up the question on if the expansion of nuclear technology is worth the risk.

Whether or not uranium exposure can cause cancer is a popular question in the media. Many studies show that there is carcinogenic potential, but others have also shown that it is possible that it doesn’t cause cancer. There are two doses of uranium. One of them is chronic low dose. This dose means that it is below being able to detect adverse health effects. This dose can enter your body through drinking water [5]. Low level exposure to uranium for extended time can cause a “subclinical’ illness. This can increase the rates of carcinogenesis. Not very many diseases have been discovered from low dose exposure. The second dose of uranium, high dose exposure, is when uranium can cause a big effect on your body. This is not very common, and may

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.

Uranium is a common naturally occurring radioactive element in the earth's crust. It was initially used to coloring glass or ceramic glaze (M. Eisenbud & T. Gesell 1963: 319), whereas it became the nuclear fuel used in nuclear reactors and atomic bomb until 1939 when O. Hahn and F. Strassmann discovered the nuclear fission of uranium, and its released tremendous energy can be used for generate electricity or as a weapon. Even there occurred such a speech, 'who owns the uranium could be the world' (T. Zoellner 2009). Therefore, the world has entered a uranium mining boom. Meantime, it also has given rise to people's discussions whether the uranium mining should be on a large scale without restrictions. Some people believe that uranium

a healthier, cheaper, and safer alternative to uranium, and is essential to the future and success

Thus, wreaking havoc on environmental safely on a global scale, intoxication, poisoning, and destroying ecosystems. Secondly, nuclear energy is considered non-renewable energy, rather an alternative energy source, since Uranium is non-renewable. Even though nuclear power plants produce the least amount of Co2. Consequently, Uranium is the biggest concern on pollution. The mining and refining process of Uranium hasn’t been a clean process to a certain degree because transporting it represents a pollution hazard during its transport to and from nuclear power plants. Besides, being radioactive and dangerous. On the contrary, Nuclear power plants only pose a minute threat to the safety of the environment by its transportation of spent fuel not during the actual operation of the power plants as opposed to the more outdated fossil fuel power plants. For instance, fossil fuel power plants contribute tremendously to pollution during their operation. Not only-but also, the methods of transportation from mining and waste. The ecological hazard is even greater. Fossil fuel power plants produce pollution just by operating them. On the other hand, Nuclear energy does not create pollution during electricity production. Therefore, reinforcing one of the major advantage nuclear energy retains over traditional fossil fuel methods is that, “nuclear power production releases no pollutants into the air. By contrast, a typical coal-burning power plant