Home > Environmental studies essays > Environmental impacts of nuclear power

Essay: Environmental impacts of nuclear power

Essay details and download:

  • Subject area(s): Environmental studies essays
  • Reading time: 4 minutes
  • Price: Free download
  • Published: 15 October 2019*
  • Last Modified: 22 July 2024
  • File format: Text
  • Words: 1,154 (approx)
  • Number of pages: 5 (approx)
  • Tags: Nuclear energy

Text preview of this essay:

This page of the essay has 1,154 words.

While doing this project I found a lot of different information on the topic of nuclear power both good and bad. I was on the negative side of the argument so my information is skewed towards that side of the argument. Some might wonder what the environmental impacts of nuclear power are. I found that In order to obtain uranium for nuclear energy it must be mined and refined and this is not a clean process. Surface mining or open-pit mining depends on the removal of all surface soil and rock covering the desired Uranium. While it is safer for the miners it blasts 30 times more topsoil than Uranium ore and the resulting land is left with radioactive, toxic elements and increased erosion, landslides and pollution of the soil and water. Then there is Underground mining which  requires drilling deep shafts into the ore bed. This technique employs water to prevent radiation exposure to laborers. This practice produces radioactive waste rock and exposes workers to more radioactive gases like radon.

What effects do the power plants have? Since the accident in chernobyl scientist have done studies on the wildlife there and in the hotter regions where there is more exposure there is 50% less biodiversity. There is also abnormalities in ecological life after Fukushima as well. In both areas there is a change in the color of the rings in trees right around the time of the disasters this shows that the ecology in the area is being effected and no one knows what these effects could mean for the environment as a whole.  A common question is, is this power source renewable/sustainable? No it is not a sustainable process because of the environmental impacts we just discussed and also because uranium is finite,so it is nonrenewable,  there is only so much that can be mined and once all of it is used its gone and we have lost the energy source.

What types of wastes are associated with nuclear power? There is low, intermediate and high level wastes and this is based on the amount of radioactivity. Once the uranium is used up it can’t just be thrown in a landfill. It is still very radioactive and dangerous. The waste is the left over material from the original uranium. So once the fuel is used since its still radioactive it requires geological disposal. The process of geological disposal is difficult because it’s hard to find the perfect spot to burry these radioactive materials. Once that land is used for geological disposal that land can’t be used for anything else and it is being wasted.

Can nuclear power help reduce emissions and fight climate change? Against the dirtiest of energy resources like coal, natural gas and oil it seems like nuclear power would be beneficial to reduce emissions but it still has so many other issues like environmental impacts and safety issues. So other clean energy sources like wind and solar are a lot less dangerous and still have the same benefits as nuclear energy.

An important question to ask is what are the risks to public safety? The main public safety risk is a nuclear accident. A nuclear power plant creates twenty metric tons of nuclear fuel per year and with that comes a lot of nuclear waste. The greater part of this waste transmits radiation and high temperatures, implying that it may eventually consume any compartment that holds it. This release of radiation could be catastrophic to the people and area surrounding the plant. There are three infamous examples of nuclear disasters. One is three mile island when a reactor partially melted and there was a risk of radioactive exposure so pregnant women and children were asked to evacuate. The second is chernobyl where there was an explosion and fire at the nuclear reactor which sent a plum of radioactive fallout that rendered a large part of the area uninhabitable. Then Fukushima happened Following a major earthquake and  a 15-meter tsunami disabled the power supply and cooling of three reactors. The second public safety risk is the possible risk of a terrorist attack, hacking into these plants and the possibility of causing great damage to the surrounding society.

What economic advantages and disadvantages are associated with nuclear power? The economic disadvantage with nuclear power is the cost to build maintain and decommission. It is so costly actually that half of the first generation of nuclear power plants were abandoned during construction.   According to a 2009 UCS report between 2002 and 2008, for example, cost estimates for new nuclear plant construction rose from between $2 billion and $4 billion per unit to $9 billion per unit. These rising prices could mean that the tax payers will be paying more money to build these plants they may not even want. The coast of disposing the nuclear waist is also extremely high and will unavoidably land on the tax payers as well.

Questions

What is your individual view on your topic of choice? Did the SAC change your opinion on your topic?

After learning about nuclear power in class I thought it was a great idea and a lot cleaner than most energy. It is, but after researching and seeing how it effects the people and the area around it I would want them to regulate the nuclear power industry a lot more so its saver. Or just go a different route with another clean energy provider that is more renewable.

Could your group come to a consensus?

Yes we came to the consensus that nuclear power though it may be cleaner is still not the best and the general public does not like it.

Do the current observations and data in scientific literature (information you used for your debate session) support your viewpoint on your topic? Yes it does there was so much information on why nuclear energy is not good especially in the safety section.

Was the SAC an effective tool for examining a scientific controversy? Did it provide you and your group a deeper understanding of your topic? Do you now have a more informed opinion on your topic?  Yes I do think it was effective because when you learn about both the negatives and positives it opens your mind to another argument so you can truly choose which one you think is the best option.

Sources

Gordienko, V. A., et al. “Nuclear Power Pros and Cons: A Comparative Analysis of Radioactive Emissions from Nuclear Power Plants and Thermal Power Plants.” SpringerLink, Springer, Dordrecht, 5 May 2012, link.springer.com/article/10.3103%2FS0027134912010055.

Ciprian-Beniamin, BENEA. “Directory of Open Access Journals.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, MDPI AG, 1 Dec. 2014, doaj.org/article/e3b969321fd44e2e92039d624c5fbb06.

“Nuclear Power and the Environment.” Chinese Coal-Fired Electricity Generation Expected to Flatten as Mix Shifts to Renewables – Today in Energy – U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=nuclear_environment.

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, Environmental impacts of nuclear power. Available from:<https://www.essaysauce.com/environmental-studies-essays/2018-5-4-1525394400/> [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.