The Debate Over Nuclear Waste

Nuclear waste is a radioactive waste that is dangerous, and a fair percentage of people would agree on this topic. However, is it really dangerous or is it just harmful to an extent? In society, many debates are held over trying to prove to the world that this substance is harmful. In the essay, “Nuclear Waste,” Muller states clearly that he sides with the anti-nuke of the debate and how he pinpoints the facts of nuclear waste with great persuasion. Yet, it is uncertain whether Muller clearly has a good argument and/or answers the questions that many people linger to know.

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]

Highly radioactive waste disposal has become one of the most controversial aspects of nuclear technology. As the amount of spent nuclear fuel from commercial nuclear reactors and high-level radioactive waste from defense-related processing plants has continued to mount, the issue has become increasingly contentious and politicized.2 The politicization of this issue is especially evident in the site selection process of a permanent national repository for the disposal of highly radioactive waste.

Summary: In this paper I will discuss the overall of nuclear energy to rectify some misconception. I will give the advantages and disadvantages for using nuclear energy and let the readers understand the basic idea of it.

In both of the supporting articles over the use of nuclear energy, there is a proficient amount of strengthens and weakness in both arguments. Though the use of the background and prior information given in the preclude, it allows the reader to understand the basics of nuclear energy and the way both authors are approaching to present their ideas. Using this analytical preface most of the information presented, allows the reader to have an idea on which side is more appealing to their choosing. Allowing the reader to get a perspective on both sides of the argument will insight them on the information presented and will ultimately give a substantial amount of evidence to back their claims.

The 9/11 attacks were among the deadliest attacks ever committed against the United States, whereby nearly 3,000 people where killed instantly. Yet what’s more shocking is that these atrocities were committed without the use of nuclear material. Fear of biochemical nuclear waste attack and its potential to cause unimaginable harm are among the biggest concerns in the nation. As a professor of physics at the University of California, Berkeley Richard Muller, in his article entitled “Nuclear Waste” addresses the topic of nuclear waste and its storage at Yucca Mountain. Muller argues that society should question the validity of information being presented as it pertains to the safety of nuclear waste. He supports this notion by highlighting the rigorous process involved in safely transporting nuclear waste, while noting that demanding100% safety in life is impossible. Muller presents his arguments in a cohesively well construct tone, supported with statistics and a touch of sarcasm thus lending to credibly to the information. Ultimately, Muller’s purpose is to inform the average reader of the true dangers associated with nuclear waste, while highlighting human’s exposure to natural occurring nuclear waste as well as exploring logical ways of safely securing these byproducts. Consequently, Muller challenges his readers to not let the fears of the unknown get in the way of being able to make sound judgment as it would lead to

The primary concern when disposing of nuclear waste and cleaning the facilities that produce it is the duration of half-lives of the elements that make up nuclear waste. One example is Uranium-235, which is used widely by nations that have a nuclear weapons program. U-235 has a half-life of 703,800,000 years. This means that U-235 will take over 700 million years for it to decompose by half. It is estimated that these elements will still be hazardous for ten times their half-lives. At this rate, U-235 will take around 7 billion years for it to become non-threatening to humans. It should be noted that seasons, temperature, or any known solvents will not affect the rate of decay. During the Cold War, very little attention was paid to the high volume of radioactive waste generated and even less to its effects on the environment. U-235 is an extreme example, we still have to contend with low level radioactive waste produced daily by Industry and Medical facilities. Some of the effects on the environment are; groundwater contamination, soil contamination, buried soil and water containing waste, and underground disposal facilities storing large volumes of hazardous, radioactive waste. One such facility was the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository, which was designated in 1987 by the NWPA Amendments, and located on federal land adjacent to the Nevada Test Site (NTS) in Nye County, Nevada some 80 miles Northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. Congress approved the site in 2002,

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.

It is estimated that at today’s rate of consumption, the earth has about fifty years left of fossil fuels. In contrast, due to the very small amount of uranium needed to create a huge amount of energy, the supply of nuclear energy is almost infinite [Jiskha].

The disastrous meltdowns that cause whole cities to become uninhabitable, as well as leaving families homeless and laborers without jobs, have defined the negative perspective of what people see in nuclear power. However, even after such catastrophes, the pure raw energy output makes nuclear power essential for the future of the human race. As time passes, the world’s energy usage has grown an increasingly massive size every year due to the consumption swell of energy. Despite nuclear plants being a heavily controversial topic internationally, its advantages are very well recognized and it’s causing nuclear plants to slowly become the basis of our growing society.

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.

Nuclear power is generated from the energy that is released from a heavy nucleus into a lighter, more stable nuclei. The heat produced is used to boil water which drives a steam turbine to generate electricity. This chain reaction process is also called fission. A key element to fuel nuclear plant is uranium. Uranium is considered to be a nonrenewable energy source, even though it is a common metal found in rocks worldwide. U-235 is most commonly used in plants because its atoms are easily split apart. To extract U-235 uranium ore is mined; for the United States, this element is found in the

The surprising realization of potentially irreversible effects on the planet and the living beings due to the continued growth and development of human race has welcomed in a new period of environmental ethical debate. As we get more acquainted with the after effects of continuously burning fossil fuels, the more we start looking for alternatives. As indicated by the 2012 World Energy Outlook, the International Energy Association (IEA) suspects near to a 35% increment in worldwide energy utilization by, therefore this demand will be ultimately met by increased dependency on fossil fuels. Thus this gives another prominent reason to look for more clean alternatives of fossil fuels. Nuclear Power is one of those clean alternatives. Nuclear Energy is one of the energy options being used worldwide that could be made more extensive because of its ability to not produce significant CO2 as compared to other fossil fuels, thus resulting in less global warming. However, when taking into account the aftermath of utilizing nuclear energy, it is really important to understand the ethical considerations that lie under nuclear energy programs. Till date, there have been many nuclear incidents in the world that has forced everyone to reconsider about nuclear power, some of them have affected everyone more than the others like The Nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, The Three Mile

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.

The use of nuclear energy is a big topic for debate. Many countries have fully embraced it while others, such as the U. S., haven’t. Nuclear energy is feared for its danger and scorned because of its wastes. On the other hand, nuclear energy does have some pros like cheaper cost of energy and environmentally safe. Reactor breeders show great promise in nuclear waste, but are it enough to convince the nation?