Should Society Make Nuclear Fission Obsoletes

Should nuclear energy be used? Throughout the article “Nowhere to go”, the author objectively reviews the use of nuclear energy, using the text and graphics to provide details that demonstrate the advantages and disadvantages of its use. Nevertheless, the consequences of using nuclear energy outweigh the benefits. One of these consequences is that working with nuclear energy can cause many health problems. The text states, “Dangers include radiation sickness, cancers, and other health problems. High level radioactive waste can present hazards ‘for a million years or more,’ Kamps says.” This means that using nuclear energy can cause health problems for future generations.

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.

When a uranium nucleus splits, energy is released (as steam). This steam turns generators and creates electric energy. One pro is that nuclear fission does not release as many pollutants as fossil fuels. Two cons are that it nuclear waste is hard to dispose of and also can be harmful for humans.

There are many different opinions on whether we should continue to create nuclear energy or we should stop it. Some of the positive aspects are there has been no fatalities at nuclear power plants. Another one is nuclear power plants generate 20% of today power. Also nuclear energy is a clean power source with no pollution. Some negative aspects are creating these plants cost a lot of money. Another problem is we are running out of places to store waste. The waste puts off nuclear radiation

The origins of nuclear power, in fact, should be enough to give one pause; fission reactions (albeit uncontrolled ones) were originally intended to be used as weapons: the weapon, of course, being the atomic bomb. The nuclear program began in earnest when Einstein himself, afraid that Hitler had a team working on such a weapon, wrote to President Roosevelt to inform him that such a weapon might be possible to build (Shrader-Frechette 7). The development of the A-bomb by the Manhattan Project, its use in Japan and the effect on World War II are all well-documented. (After the initial test at Alamagordo, New Mexico, one of the bomb’s major developers, J. Robert Oppenheimer, was rumored to whisper: “I am become death, the destroyer of worlds,” when he saw the level of destruction his new creation had achieved.) Less well known are the recommendations made by a panel of Manhattan Project scientists about the post-war uses of nuclear energy. The panel’s report concluded, “The development of fission piles solely for the production of power for ordinary commercial use does not appear economically sound nor advisable from the point of view of preserving natural resources”; in other words, the first panel of experts on commercial nuclear energy and its resources felt uranium was too expensive to waste on

The use of fossil fuels as a primary source of power is poisoning our world, and nuclear power is just the way to stop this. Nuclear power is using the process of nuclear fission to create electricity. Nuclear fission is the splitting of a uranium atom to release massive amounts of energy. When this process takes place in a nuclear reactor, the energy is used to superheat water which is pumped through pipes also submerged in water which then boils. The pressurized water vapor is used to turn turbines that produce electricity. Nuclear power is one of the cleanest, safest, most reliable and economically beneficial sources of power, and it needs to be considered as a substitute for fossil fuels. Nuclear power unfortunately has been given a bad name, but is actually an important resource that should be utilized by the U.S. and the rest of the world.

There are also many negatives that can be seen. The mining and purifying of uranium isn’t a clean process also including the transport of nuclear fuel to and from plants. The used fuel is radioactive and potentially deadly. A nuclear power plant generates 20 metric tons of used nuclear fuel and is classified as high-level radioactive nuclear waste. It will evetually corrode any container that holds it and can be lethal to nearby life forms. The wastes have to be monitored. The results when nuclear power plants malfunction may be catastrophic. One example is the Chernobyl disaster and the recent Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. The Chernobyl disaster caused thousands to die from cancer and other

Since the nineteen-forties nuclear weapons have been used to help end, or have caused problems between countries. The dangers of using nuclear weapons have increased over the many years since they were first used. Either way, the fight over nuclear weapons have become more and more common because of the new developments in science and technology. The use of nuclear weapons have been used to threaten many different countries around the world which include the United States and many more. Nuclear weapons have become an overall issue in the world today, yet the issue has been ignored. Just recently this issue has been noticed, yet we still ignore the problems that have happened. As the world of technology has become more educated new nuclear weapons have been created, but they have not been tested or used. The United States should aggressively promote nuclear disarmament because of reprocessing, exaggerations, and waste management.

William Tucker, author of “Why I Still Support Nuclear Power, Even after Fukushima”, gives perquisite explanation of interesting points supporting his cause. Tucker believes that after all the harm from nuclear power in Fukushima, Japan, nuclear power is better than any other natural resources used for the same cause, such as, coal, natural gas, and even a hydroelectric dam. In William Tucker’s words, he claims, “The answer is that there are no better alternatives available. If we are going to maintain our standard of living—or anything approximating it—without overwhelming the earth with pollution, we are going to have a master nuclear technology.” William Tucker addresses the emotions and sense of worry of his audience. I believe William

Evidence: The addition of new nuclear weapons to the already large stockpile could be detrimental in the case of a third World War. This could also cause tension among the countries that already have, or are currently creating, nuclear weapon programs. The quote from Barrack Obama in Weeks’ article states, “First, we must stop the spread of nuclear weapons, and seek the goal of a world without them . . . If we fail to act, we will invite nuclear arms races in every region, and the prospect of wars and acts of terror on a scale that we can hardly imagine” (Weeks, 3).

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.

One of the first themes that arises in the book is the issue of having a double standard when it comes to the rules in which the world is supposed to operate under the current Treaty of Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Schell argues that the treaty has created a two tier system between the countries that possess nuclear weapons and those who do not. He states that “a highly volatile and violent contest is no longer bi-polar but global between some of the existing possessors of the bomb and new entrants or petitioners to the club who hope to deter the great ones” (Schell, p.6, 2007). His argument here is clear. Why should the smaller countries trust the current nuclear powers for protection, and if they can use nuclear weapons for deterrence to ensure their safety why cannot they? Schell argues that the five powerful countries that are allowed

Nuclear Fission has a greater affect on our planet than greenhouse gases. Greenhouse gases are chemicals that go towards the atmosphere and cause global warming. This may sound severe, but wait until you learn what nuclear fission leaves for our future generations. Nuclear fission seems like a good source to produce a massive amount of energy, but a small neglection of its waste can wipe out an entire town.

The historian Spencer Weart notes "You say 'nuclear bomb ' and everybody immediately thinks of the end of the world" The escalation of nuclear proliferation in and around the world, especially in the Middle East has led to the fear of nuclear war in the near future. Many countries built nuclear weapons because it felt insecure from the major nuclear states or from their neighbors conventional military or nuclear capabilities. This is the situation with China, India and Pakistan. Many other reasons encourage countries to seek nuclear weapons, but the main reason for acquiring nuclear weapons is the deterrence against any external threat and prevention external offensive that might lead to war. Nuclear weapons make such countries feel more secure, nuclear weapons can prevent war because countries will have the ability to deter any external aggression. At the same time, there is no guarantee that acquiring nuclear weapons may lead to nuclear war.

Nuclear weapons are the most dangerous weapons on earth. One can demolish a whole city, potentially killing millions, and exposed the natural environment and lives of future generations through its long-term catastrophic effects. According to the UNODA- United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (2011), “Although nuclear weapons have only been used twice in warfare- in the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945-about 22,000 reportedly remains in our world today and there have been over 2,000 nuclear tests conducted to date.” Nuclear weapons have been viewed as a threat to peace by world leaders. There have been debates of whether to let Iran and North Korea acquire nuclear weapons, leaders all around the world along with Liberals believe that it is a threat to peace and should limit the spread whereas neo realist have another belief that nuclear weapon can make the world a peaceful place. Because states would fear to attack each other. For example the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 and cold war- there were only threats and war did not happen because of nuclear deterrence. The Cuban missile crisis has frequently been portrayed as the only time where the world stood in the point of nuclear war between the superpowers. This is an example of how nuclear weapons were used to threaten the rival. Another examples would be that of India and Pakistan before they acquire nuclear weapon , they fought three bloody wars after having their independence but since 1998, after acquiring