The Future of Nuclear Power

Firstly, the atomic incidents of Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania and Chernobyl in Russia are often mentioned as examples for nuclear plants being unsafe. In both cases failures of workers led to a meltdown in the reactors and increased radiation in the surrounding area (Henderson 12-17). And as the recent disaster in Japan shows, a nuclear crisis cannot only be caused by human mishaps, but also by unpredictable and untamable natural hazards. Consequently, nuclear crises cannot be predicted or prevented completely. Nuclear plants are, furthermore, considered uneconomical because in the eighties the construction costs of nuclear plants were underestimated and exceeded the estimation by $100 billion (Henderson 103). Therefore, the nuclear power opponents are arguing that nuclear power is burdening the American economy unnecessarily. According to the nuclear physicist Jeff Eerkens, antinuclear groups are also claiming that nuclear power is not necessary for the future since renewable energy sources, such as solar, wind, hydro, and geothermal power will be providing sufficient energy for the United States, and are at the same time much cheaper than the costly nuclear power plants (Eerkens 20). Over all, opponents consider nuclear power to risky and inefficient to “deserve further support from U.S. taxpayers” (Henderson 104).

As we know, greenhouse gases have been one of the major causes for climate change. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency, the primary source of greenhouse gas emission is from electricity production which is mostly generated by burning fossil fuels. Over several decades, mankind has spent countless amount of resources, trying to find a suitable energy substitute for fossil fuels in order to stabilize climate change. Unsurprisingly, due to its powerful nature, nuclear energy has been one of the most popular and developed technology around the world. In this paper, I am going to discuss the fundamental flaws in nuclear energy, and the potential danger it could bring to not only the mankind today, but also tomorrow. In addition,

The responsibility to ensure the safety of nuclear energy production throughout the world is in the hands of people. But, the layperson concept may be a bit askance because many consumers may view the issue of nuclear energy only in terms of price considerations. This is a discomforting notion considering the myriad of risks involved, especially in light of the consequences that have occurred at the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant in Japan, and the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in the Ukraine. While no comparison exists in the United States (U.S.) that would enable U.S. citizens to understand the human and environmental toll that results when something tragically wrong occurs; it remains well past the time for us to consider real solutions to our energy needs that do not have the potential for such wide-spread devastation. Regardless of the various technologies and engineering acumen used to operate nuclear power plants, they are only as effective safety-wise as those who are charged with maintaining security.

Throughout the time of nuclear power, scientist have been debating whether or not it was worth the risk for nuclear power. Most people agree that “[it has] the capacity to turn the earth into a desert or make the desert bloom” (4). Nuclear power is ideal in terms that it is efficient and cost effective, but it also has some downfalls. The process creates a lot of nuclear waste that is highly radioactive without a good place of disposing it, not to mention the inherently dangerous risks involved with nuclear power plants, such as explosions.

The steam spun the wheel of the turbine with a Whoosh. The ecstasy of finding a new energy source is ineffable, and when found, the discovery always immediately prompts a race to use this newfound source. In accordance with this behavior, many sought to integrate nuclear power into society upon its development. The difference being nuclear energy is far more complicated and powerful than anything the field of energy has dealt with thus far. There are two types of nuclear reactions, fission and fusion; working reactors only using fission currently. In fission a neutron reacts with Uranium-235 to produce energy, two fragment nuclei, and multiple neutrons to continue the reaction. Meanwhile, in fusion two hydrogen isotopes react to produce energy, protons, neutrons, and Helium. As a consequence of these processes ' complex and formidable natures, there is a hesitance to their utilization as it is difficult to discuss the complexities of the procedures with the public without some misinterpretation. Despite the benefits found in nuclear power, it still undergoes harsh debate as governments oppose giving money to such an unexplored area of science. Yet, an increase in funding for U.S. nuclear programs would prompt advancements that replace less effective energy sources, creating opportunities for specialization in the field.

Nuclear power has been one of the largest contributors of energy for the past fifty years. With the end of World War II, research into nuclear energies shifted away from war applications to simply using it to power the world. Nuclear power was regarded as the never ending energy source that would bring an end to energy problems and power the whole world. For many years it seemed to work with no problems; however, that was a short lived reality. As problems with nuclear energy came to light, many believed it was a better investment for the future to research and develop new energy sources or just continue using fossil fuels. Many believe the risks and downsides of nuclear power outweigh the benefits. However, there are still many advocates of nuclear power that believe it is the best energy source for the world for reasons such as its large production of energy, their belief that it is not a major harm to the environment, and their belief that it is better than the other energy alternatives. However, in spite of these beliefs and facts, research into nuclear power opposes the belief that nuclear power should be the main contributor of power because they are expensive to build and can result in a catastrophic situations.

Atomic energy production is a dangerous technology that must be replaced by eco-friendly energy production methods. Atomic energy production relies upon radioactive materials used as fuel to generate electricity; these fuels are highly toxic and volatile substances that are lethal to all forms of life. In the event of a technical malfunction, or natural disaster, these dangerous substances can escape into the environment where they will remain disruptive for centuries. The nuclear power plant at Fukushima Daiichi in Japan is one such example of this, but alarmingly, many nuclear power plants are built along geological fault lines, in tsunami regions, and other dangerous weather zones all across the globe. The potential for widespread devastation to the environment is real. For this reason alone nuclear energy should be phased out entirely and replaced by a safe alternative.

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 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.

Dwight Eisenhower launched the Atoms for Peace initiative in 1953 with a bold declaration: “the atom stands ready to become man’s obedient, tireless servant, if man will only allow it” (Joppke 709). After a frenzied ride on the coattails of the development of the atomic bomb, nuclear power was poised as the technology of the future, human ingenuity powering growth in a new era. Half a century and a few oil wars later, the United States stands proud as a first-world bastion of antinuclear sentiment. This swing in public opinion, effected by the accident at Three Mile Island, debates over nuclear-arms proliferation, and concerns over nuclear waste storage, has left nuclear power at an uncertain

With the ever increasing population, [energy demand, and the need for alternative resources continues to increase.] Nuclear energy comes up as a strong contender by being clean, sustainable, and more consistent moreover than others in the renewables category. Even though those in the energy industry argue that the use of nuclear plants provides a stable source of power in a clean and renewable matter, in areas where other resources are available, the potential threat of nuclear meltdowns outweigh the positive benefits of nuclear energy as cleanups cost billions because of decontamination and unusable land so the number of nuclear power plants should be restricted so the risk of national and worldwide economic damage is minimized.

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.

The world's natural resources are being consumed at an alarming rate. As these resources diminish, people will be seeking alternative sources by which to generate electricity for heat and light. The only practical short-term solution for the energy/pollution crisis should be nuclear power because it is available, cleaner and safer.

On this assignment we are going to research all energy sources and their drawbacks, we are also going to explore on some the negative ramifications that even the clean hydropower have, additionally we are going to weigh those against the possible consequences of developing nuclear power, a controversial alternative to fossil fuels. We will discuss the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster as well as the 20th century Chernobyl nuclear meltdown in drawing conclusions about risk versus reward of nuclear energy use.

Global demand and consumption of energy is at an all time high; the world needs a safe, efficient, clean, and high producing source of energy production. The solution is something we already use for energy production, Nuclear power. From the beginning of nuclear energy there has been concerns over the safety of the power plants and its impact on the environment. With climate change and more accurate information on nuclear power the tide is shifting in its favor. This paper will explore the positives of nuclear power, political change on nuclear power, safety of the energy source and new technologies associated with the nuclear power process. Most importantly are the risks associated with nuclear power worth it? Research suggests that nuclear power is safer now more than ever and has less of an impact on the environment than coal or oil. Public support and misconceptions over the years have been up and down due to political agendas and those who are misinformed about nuclear power. Individuals who are involved in the energy field are in favor of nuclear power and building more plants with newer technology.