Debates about the use of nuclear power plants in New York City have received much attention in the last few years. Many scientists believe that the use of Nuclear Power would be beneficial for New York City, since an abundant amount of electricity is necessary to fuel the Big Apple; however, one primary argument espoused by opponents is that the use of nuclear power will bring about negative effects like radiation exposure, debt and may allow the power plant to become a potential target for terrorist attacks. This paper describes selected constitutional issues related to the use of nuclear power plants with a focus on the risks it poses and concludes with implications for alternative sources of energy.
II Safety risk is an issue
…show more content…
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.
III Nuclear power plants should not be built due to the biological effects it poses during a meltdown. Radiation is exposed to inhabitants during a meltdown but many people are not aware of the horrific effects. An example of this is explained in the article “Biological Effects on Radiation”. “The higher the radiation dose, the sooner the effects of radiation will appear…this syndrome was observed in many atomic bomb survivors in…1986 Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident…of these, 28 died within the first three months from their radiation injuries. Two more patients died during the first days…” (2012).
Fossil fuels are a primary source for providing energy throughout the United States. These sources of energy are causing many problems involving environment, health, and pollution. The solution? Nuclear power. Nuclear power is seen as a green energy that can improve global warming. However, there a more issues that can result from using nuclear power. Even though there are a lot of people who support it, nuclear power can result in world threatening problems. Nuclear waste, expense and time, and the threat regarding to war and terrorism are constant issues related to nuclear power.
Nuclear power plants are a safe, clean and reliable source of energy production. They are uniquely qualified to meet the growing demand for energy in the USA.
The United States of America’s population constitutes just 5% of the world’s population, yet it consumes nearly 24% of the world’s energy. Because of our huge consumption of energy, we harm our environment in different ways, like producing massive amounts CO2 emissions which have catastrophic effects, such as climate change, that directly impact us and the different forms of life around us. To cut down on these negative effects, researchers have developed more environmentally friendly methods of energy production. The debate now centers around which energy method is better than the rest. Although there are many energy-generating methods, we will focus on renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power, as well as nuclear power. Shrader-Frechette opposes nuclear energy because it 's seen as unclean, expensive, and dangerous. Senator Lamar Alexander opposes wind and solar energies because the sheer amount of space required by these energy producing methods does more harm to our environment than good. Even if Shrader is right about the disadvantages of nuclear power, which she is not, its worldwide use as our main source of energy would pose an insignificant threat compared to the dangers of the impact solar and wind power would have on the environment. We have no time to experiment with visionary energy sources; civilization is in imminent danger and has to use nuclear power -- the one relatively safe, available, energy source -- now or suffer the pain soon to be
It is also can cause fatal consequences. One of the main disadvantages of nuclear power plants is the severe consequences of accidents.
There is an energy company that wishes to build a nuclear power plant in the East Pennsboro Township. I am sure many would disagree with this after what happened at Three Mile Island and I understand how they feel but I think a new nuclear power plant should be built. For one thing, nuclear power plants are not as dangerous as you think. The “white smoke” coming out of cooling tower (the large column) is actually steam which has no negative effect on the environment. Nuclear power plants do not create or release any harmful gases into the environment and they have no effect on global warming. TMI was in a critical state to the point where people were evacuating but in the
Nuclear power refers to the generation of electrical energy by controlled nuclear reactions. These reactions produce heat, which in turn creates steam that runs the generators to produce electricity. Approx. 1/8 of the electricity worldwide generated comes from nuclear energy. In this task, you will analyze the use of nuclear energy as a resource energy.
Nuclear power plants increase cancer risk by .002%, shortening life expectancies by less than an hour while fossil fuels shorten by 3-40 days. The cancer risk is similar to delaying parenthood by 2.5 days, or by a man wearing pants for 8 hours more per year. There has only been one incident that has seriously affected the cancer risk in the area. Most radiological injuries/deaths each year are due to large, uncontrolled radiation sources.
From the electricity that kept my home warm and powered the lights at school to providing employment to both my parents for the past 30 years, nuclear power has been at the center of my life growing up. In Wadsworth, Texas, the South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Company has been a way a life thousands of people by providing nearly 1200 jobs and providing carbon-free electricity for over 2 million people. However, this is just one example in just one state in the United States. According to the Nuclear Energy Institute, 11 percent of the world’s energy comes from nuclear power plants and for 13 countries it provides more than 25 percent of their country’s energy. However, even though nuclear power has made its mark as a global competitor in the realm of green energy, incidents such as 3 Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima have created a global sense of uneasiness. On top of this underlying fear, the huge building costs of new nuclear plants has lead to a stunt in the growth of nuclear energy even though operation costs for nuclear energy at $0.0219/kW is less than that of coal ($0.023/KW) and almost half that of gas ($0.0451/kW) (IER). Even though nuclear energy has had some setbacks, it is still safer (short-term and long-term) than the carbon-producing alternatives. The question at hand is whether we should take an utilitarian perspective by giving more serious consideration to the long-term effects of the carbon-emitting energy sources and whether we can overcome our
Uranium being radioactive substance, general risk perception is that people living around the nuclear power generation are prone to cancers. However, research has shown that Coal-fired industry has a higher leukaemia incidence risk when compared to the nuclear industry. However, there is no credible documentation regarding the health effects of nuclear power plant operation facilities.
“No one in the United States has become seriously ill or has died because of any kind of accident at a civilian nuclear power plant.” says Joe Barton. This is a highly controversial topic where there are many conflicting opinions. Some people believe that these plants are too dangerous to exist while other think that they are the edge of tomorrow. When analyzing it from a purely statistical and analytical standpoint, nuclear energy is clearly worth the possible risks they pose.
Moreover, though some may argue that radiation exposure in the US is mostly from natural sources and not man-made, why add to this exposure by building more nuclear plants. For example, a graph named, “Sources of Radiation Exposure in the United States” notes that about 82% of radiation exposure is not from man-made sources like nuclear plants, but from natural sources like Radon. Nevertheless, even with this being the case, we can not forget that just one incident with nuclear reactors killed off thousands, so it would be senseless to use this data to build more nuclear bombs (or nuclear power
There have been lots of nuclear accident around the world. One of the accident that had a major impact on the world was the Chernobyl disaster. The disaster took place on 26 April 1986 at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine. The disaster was caused by a reaction explosion induced by design faults and staff application errors. The accident took place in the course of scheduled tests to check the power supply mode in the event of external sources loss. Even after 10 days, explosions and ejections of radioactive substances continued. The release of radiation and radioactive substance polluted the places within 30 km of Chernobyl, and those areas have been closed for a long period of
Nuclear power was the world’s fastest growing form of energy in the 1990’s. However, presently it is the second slowest growing worldwide. Considering that nuclear power accounts for eleven percent of the world’s energy supply, one must ask what happened [Nuclear Power]. Why is it that the growth of nuclear power has almost completely stalled? The simple answer is that after meltdowns such as Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, many people are afraid of nuclear power plants, which causes great opposition to the expansion of the industry. Unfortunately, most people are not well informed about nuclear energy; many do not take the time to view its positives and negatives.
The world as we know today is dependent on energy. The options we have currently enable us to produce energy economically but at a cost to the environment. As fossil fuel source will be diminishing over time, other alternatives will be needed. An alternative that is presently utilized is nuclear energy. Nuclear energy is currently the most efficacious energy source. Every time the word ‘nuclear’ is mentioned, the first thought that people have is the devastating effects of nuclear energy. Granting it does come with its drawbacks; this form of energy emits far less pollution than conventional power plants. Even though certain disadvantages of nuclear energy are devastating, the advantages contain even greater rewards.
Many critics argue that due to the Three Mile Island nuclear incident that occurred March 28, 1979, in Pennsylvania resulted in a reactor meltdown, with no casualties due to a combination of equipment failure and a lack of operators understanding what to do to a faulty reactor. This incident has put the majority public to have safety concerns over not only the operators working in the plants but also the civilians in the surrounding area. Yet since the accident, the United States formed the National Academy for Nuclear Training to improve training the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations which reviews and accredits nuclear utilities’ training programs for all key positions at each plant. In addition, nuclear energy plants have proven the ability to produce clean electricity without greenhouse gas emissions and the reliability due to its increased efficiency and increased power output.