posts >> william > nikolai
_________________________________________________________
William
The times they are a-changin’, truly. Going ‘green’ has come in vogue amidst some very real energy hikes and crisis’ that have spurred alternative energy’s profitability and highlighted some of its attractiveness. It is time that we take what we’ve learned about our environment, new technologies, and invest in a sustainable future of renewable energy. It is time to revisit one of the best ideas the U.S. ever had, nuclear energy, and move on from an overblown scare that happened at Three Mile Island nuclear facility 29 years ago.
The scare which stalled, if not intermittently ended, our civilian nuclear energy program which was begun under Eisenhower, has left us a country that is dependent on coal for half of its electricity. Coal is obviously not the answer since coal-fired power plants actually release more radioactivity than a nuclear plant and since they release tons of carbon and sulfur (etc) where nuclear power is clean. Other renewable sources of energy are not the answer either: an example of this point is that the Indian Point Energy Center creates the same amount of energy produced by 385 square-miles of wind turbines.
Ultimately we need to decide, how safe is nuclear energy, and what are the costs and benefits. Well first, the benefits. A small amount of uranium, smaller then a baseball, is equivalent to a 5 story buildings worth of gasoline. France is a prime example for the effectiveness of Nuclear energy, getting over ¾ of its energy from nuclear power. On issues of safety, the U.S. Navy’s shows critics an accident-free record in powering its 80 ships for over 5,400 reactor years without emitting any greenhouse gases.
On issues of safe removal and storage of nuclear waste, I would steer you to research Yucca Mountain and it’s approved capacity to store the pellet-form of waste in a safe manner away from civilization. Ultimately, the times they are a-changin’, France is peddling its Nuclear capabilities to other countries and stands to win big contracts and political capital all why we pay our homage to OPEC and a technology of the past. Times they are a-changin’; but are we?
Sources:
http://www.nei.org/
http://www.americanenergyindependence.com/uranium.html
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5j9kbCdss47gaPin6xZeeLKqBXnLg
http://www.howstuffworks.com/nuclear-power.htm
http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/
_________________________________________________________
Nikolai
There is no doubt that nuclear energy has been very beneficial to our society. Through this technology we have been able to decrease our dependence on foreign oil by about 12 billion dollars a year, and we aren’t releasing as much green house gas into our atmosphere. It’s also true that uranium goes a lot further in use than that of oil, coal or any other fuel that is used for making energy. If the information stopped there, deciding whether or not to use nuclear energy would be a “no brainer.” Unfortunately that’s not the case.
There are a few problems when using nuclear energy. The first being the waste it produces. What do you do with literally tons of nuclear waste? Nuclear waste remains toxic for thousands of years. Most of the plutonic waste is being stored in underground and water-filled basins or containment centers. Just because this method is seen as the safest way to store nuclear waste, does not make it safe. I would hate to think what could happen if this waste got in the wrong hands.
Another alarming issue with nuclear energy is the overall safety inside the plants while producing the energy. On March 28th, 1979 the plant located on Three Mile Island, PN experienced a partial meltdown. Nuclear emissions were released into the air when multiple safety features such as bypass valves failed to fully activate. It appears that the fallout was minimal but the problem is still relevant. There is no doubt that we as a country have learned a lot from this experience, but with that being said nuclear energy is far from perfect. We need to decide once and for all if the reward is worth the risk. Is energy more important than human life itself? We should be spending our efforts finding and creating safer and more natural energy.
Sources:
http://men.style.com/gq/features/landing?id=content_6424
http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/society/nuclear.htm
http://www.etsu.edu/writing/3120f99/zctb3/nuclear2.htm
http://www.solcomhouse.com/nuclear.htm
1 Comment
April 15, 2008 at 12:16 am
quote:
“but with that being said nuclear energy is far from perfect.”
nuts.
atomic power plants have to be 100 % perfect
otherwise there will be no permission for an atomic power plant to operate
in the same block you give an example of 3 mile island and than you write “but with that being said nuclear energy is far from perfect.”
absurd and unobjective.
regards,