The Pros And Cons Of Nuclear Power Plants

When someone thinks of problems plaguing the world, nuclear energy is not the first thing that comes to peoples minds these days.[1]Nuclear power was once deemed the new energy of the future.[2]However, numerous nuclear power plant accidents around the world put a damper on that notion.The United States considers itself one of the most technologically advanced countries in the world, but 103 nuclear reactors currently operating within her borders, one was bound to fail sometime or another.[3]

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).

A continual struggle of humanity is the search for a stable foundation of resources. With

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.

Nuclear power, the type of energy that sits on the edge of humanity’s greatest hopes, and its darkest fears. With a country such as the United States continuing to expand its industry, housing, agriculture and commercial buildings there is a need for more and more energy each year. Nuclear power is one of the many ways the United States gets its energy. Nevertheless, it is one of the most controversial means of energy production. The main concern with nuclear energy is the nuclear waste that is produced along with it. The potential health and environmental risks posed by nuclear waste is what truly scares some of the American public. Therefore, is the amount of energy output by nuclear power plants outweigh the potential risks that nuclear waste can have on human health and the environment? Nuclear power plants should be kept as a means of generating energy for the United States, however, transportation and storage of nuclear waste needs to continuously be checked for safer alternatives.

Nuclear power is the use of sustained nuclear fission, splitting atoms in two, which releases energy in the process to generate heat and electricity. Heat created by fission drives the turbines that generate electricity. When nuclear power was first created it was predicted that it would be very successful. It was also predicted that nuclear power would be “too cheap to meter,” that is electricity would be very cheap so either consumers would not be charged for electricity at all or the prices would be very low (Cohn, 1997). Although nuclear power is still in use today the initial success of nuclear industry eventually declined. Nuclear industry and its supporters claim that nuclear power is environmentally friendly, inexpensive, and safe,

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.

Most countries are starting to build more and more nuclear power plants. Nuclear power plants are factories that produce electricity. It starts of by control rods, usually made uranium, silver and boron, heat up water. Then the water turns into steam and turns the turbines. The turbines then power up the generator than power. The power stored in generators are used to power up a city. So, would building a nuclear powerplant be good for your community? Building a nuclear power plant could be a good decision and could also be a bad decision. The Mayor is thinking of building a nuclear power plant in the border between South Saint Paul and Inver Grove Heights.

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.

Central Idea: Nuclear energy only contributes a small amount to the world’s electricity yet it has hazards and dangers that far out-way its benefits. There are many other alternative power producing sources that can produce energy more efficiently and more safely than nuclear power plants can.

Provided that countries can acquire uranium, they can create clean and safe energy. Generally nuclear power stations are safe. The various barriers and numerous safety measures make it very unlikely for catastrophes to transpire. The most up-to-date plants have a reactor core failure 1 in 1 million years. The proposal of building a plant has to be scrutinized intensely so that the barriers and structure ensure a redundant job in

With any large energy producing facility there are risks. The truth is that accidents do happen at nuclear power plants and at other facilities all the time. An example of this was the accident at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania where there was a partial meltdown in March 1979. More recently was the worst nuclear accident at Chernobyl. Statistical data for 1995, released by the International Atomic Energy Agency early in 1996, indicated that there were a total of 437 operational nuclear power stations in 31 countries with years of experience. Chernobyl was the only plant that injured the public. Thus, judging by the data, that is a good record for a source of energy.

Countries everywhere rely on nuclear energy to power their electricity, but many people are scared these huge reactors. Should they be? Nuclear power plants are safe with the correct safety precautions and designs put into place and they are the most proficient means of producing energy. To put it bluntly, we need nuclear energy from these power plants and as far as technology goes nuclear power plants are the best ways of producing this energy. Despite a few negatives the positives of using nuclear energy greatly outweigh the negatives.

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.