Home > Environmental studies essays > Is Nuclear Power beneficial to Scottish society?

Essay: Is Nuclear Power beneficial to Scottish society?

Essay details and download:

  • Subject area(s): Environmental studies essays
  • Reading time: 5 minutes
  • Price: Free download
  • Published: 15 October 2019*
  • Last Modified: 22 July 2024
  • File format: Text
  • Words: 1,424 (approx)
  • Number of pages: 6 (approx)
  • Tags: Nuclear energy

Text preview of this essay:

This page of the essay has 1,424 words.

When the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, the world was ushered into the so-called ‘Atomic Age’ – Nuclear power was indeed a reality. Nuclear Power promised to provide clean &  efficient energy for many years to come. However, these promises were not entirely true and it must be said that nuclear power has only been put to minimal use. Many people are still skeptical about nuclear energy. This begs the question: is Nuclear Power beneficial to Scottish society?
Nuclear power is an extremely expensive source of energy. The uranium used for fuel is not found in its elemental form. It is always bonded to other substances. Once the uranium compound is mined, it must then be separated.  The uranium compound is sent to an enrichment plant where it can be purified. The purification process is very complicated and involves many complex machines and procedures. Uranium must be sent to several different enrichment plants before it is pure enough to be made into fuel rods. Millions of dollars are spent in order to produce one set of fuel rods. This cost is passed on to the consumer through an increase in energy prices. Most consumers do not want to pay higher energy bills.
Some people, however, feel that the higher cost is acceptable because nuclear power is a very efficient source of energy. When a set of uranium fuel rods is installed in a reactor, they will not need to be replaced for several years. Coal-fired power plants are not nearly this efficient. A coal-fired plant burns thousands of tons of coal each day. This difference in efficiency is very important because the world’s coal supply is being rapidly depleted. Uranium fuel, on the other hand, is very plentiful. Consumers do not want to worry about the electricity being shut off because the power plant ran out of fuel. They like the piece of mind they get from knowing that the supply of uranium on this planet could provide efficient energy for centuries to come.
Another major concern with nuclear power is the waste. Unlike a coal-fired power plant, a nuclear plant does not make pollution while it is on-line. The burning of coal releases many toxic gases, such as carbon dioxide and chloroflourocarbons. These gases collect in the atmosphere and trap heat energy from the sun as it reflects off the earth’s surface. This trapped heat energy causes the increase in temperature of the earth’s surface and lower atmosphere known as global warming(Schneider 21). A nuclear reactor does not pollute the air or water like a coal plant. It does, however, produce radioactive waste that is very dangerous. When the uranium fuel rods are spent of their energy and need to be replaced, they cannot simply be thrown away. The used rods are still very radioactive and will remain so for hundreds of years. The radiation that is released from the rods is very dangerous to humans. Exposure to radiation in large amounts can cause death or extreme tissue damage. Exposure in smaller amounts can cause cancer, sterility, and many other serious health problems. Scientists must be very careful when deciding how to dispose of nuclear waste.
Currently, most radioactive waste is stored in canisters in deep underground mines. These canisters are made of reinforced concrete and lead shielding. Their special design keeps the dangerous radiation from escaping into the environment. This storage policy does keep the waste far away from the human population on the surface, but it is not entirely safe. For example, much of the earth’s fresh water supply is found in underground aquifers. An aquifer is a large quantity of fresh water trapped deep underground in between layers of rock. If one of these protective canisters were ruptured or compromised in some way, radioactive waste could be introduced into the world’s fresh water supply. The waste would contaminate the water and make it unfit to support life.
The protective canisters could be compromised in several ways. First of all, a natural event, such as an earthquake, could cause the underground storage area to collapse. The canisters would be crushed and the waste would be introduced into the subterranean environment. Secondly, the radioactive waste could destroy the protective canister from the inside out. Scientists are not sure what kinds of effects radiation has on certain materials when they are exposed to it for long periods of time. The radioactive waste would be released into the ground. These possibilities leave many people concerned that nuclear waste cannot be stored in a safe manner.
Many people are against having a nuclear power plant near their home. They fear that a nuclear accident could jeopardize the lives of their families. Several severe nuclear accidents that occurred in the last several decades have caused people to fear nuclear power. One of the worst nuclear accidents in history occurred at the Chernobyl power plant in Russia. A reactor at that plant suffered a complete meltdown. A meltdown occurs when the nuclear reaction in the core of the reactor gets out of control and damages the reactor. Many safety features are installed in nuclear plants to prevent a meltdown from ever happening. In the case of the Chernobyl accident, the safety features failed, and the meltdown completely destroyed the reactor and the concrete safety cap the keeps the deadly radiation from escaping into the environment. The nuclear reaction continued out of control after the reactor and safety cap were destroyed. Chunks of radioactive debris and radiation were blown out of the plant and showered down on the nearby villages and farmland. Many people died from radiation sickness while others died years later from cancer caused by exposure to radiation. Many women who survived the tragedy later bore children with extreme birth defects. The crops and livestock on the nearby farms were also contaminated, making them completely unusable. Today, the effects of this terrible accident at the Chernobyl power plant are still being felt in Russia.
 
Another accident occurred at the Three Mile Island (TMI) nuclear plant in the United States. One of the TMI reactors also suffered a meltdown. During this accident, however, the dangerous radiation released was contained within the plant and did not contaminate the surrounding area. This American power plant had much better safety features than its Russian counterpart. After the accident at TMI, it was determined that the accident was caused by human error, not equipment failure(Walsh 34). This accident is proof that nuclear power is safe even when things go wrong. Despite the successful containment of the dangerous radiation, many people who lived near the plant panicked and fled their homes after the accident. Much of the panic was caused by the media. The media described the situation to be far worse than it actually was, and misinformed the public to the point of panic(Walsh 41). Panic could have been avoided if the TMI administrators would have been quicker to inform the public about the situation and what action they should take. The TMI accident was made much worse through bad communication.
Many people have an unfounded fear of nuclear power. Author Richard Rhodes attributes this fear to the cold war. People associate nuclear power with the weapons of mass destruction that bear the same name. A nuclear bomb, however, is completely different from a nuclear reactor. A nuclear reactor cannot cause the damage that a nuclear bomb can. Mr. Rhodes argues, “No one has been killed in a U.S. commercial nuclear power accident in three decades of successful operation, nor has commercial power released more than minimal amounts of radioactivity”(Rhodes 7). Mr. Rhodes wonders why the anti-nuclear power activists do not attack an industry that is truly dangerous. He argues that automobiles produce unhealthy smog and kill 50,000 people each year(Rhodes 7). Despite Mr. Rhodes arguments, nuclear power continues to be on of the most protested industries in the world.
In conclusion, the issue of using nuclear power to produce electricity involves its high cost, its waste, and the public’s concern of its safe usage. Nuclear power is very expensive and complicated, but provides reliable, efficient power. The radioactive waste produced by a nuclear plant, however, is very dangerous and difficult to store safely. Many people do not feel safe having nuclear plants near their homes. They fear that a nuclear accident could destroy their happy lives. As long as the world needs electricity, however, there will be nuclear power. People will continue to discuss the issue of nuclear power for a long time to come.

Discover more:

About this essay:

If you use part of this page in your own work, you need to provide a citation, as follows:

Essay Sauce, Is Nuclear Power beneficial to Scottish society?. Available from:<https://www.essaysauce.com/environmental-studies-essays/2016-2-3-1454529556/> [Accessed 19-12-24].

These Environmental studies essays have been submitted to us by students in order to help you with your studies.

* This essay may have been previously published on EssaySauce.com and/or Essay.uk.com at an earlier date than indicated.