Only a small community of committed people is necessary to change the world

Translate it!

Thursday, September 9, 2010

Nuclear energy, is it worth it?

 Nuclear fusion
The combustion of coal to produce electricity is responsible for more than one-third of the air pollution in the United States and contribute to acid precipitation and climate change, while, nuclear power emit only few pollutants into the atmosphere. However, nuclear energy “generates radioactive waste in the form of spent fuel”, and nuclear plants produce radioactive material. These wastes are radioactive, thus, extremely dangerous and pose a major hazard for the environment and health of people.

Storage of nuclear waste is a major problem that did not find solution yet. In producing nuclear waste our generation has to think that this waste will be the heritage of future generation and our grandchildren would have to find solutions. Scientists opposed to nuclear energy contend that the replacement of coal-burning power plants with the replacement of nuclear power plants would not reduce climate change because “only 15% of the greenhouse gases come from power plants. Auto emissions and industrial processes produce most of the greenhouse gases and neither is affected by nuclear power”.

The nuclear industry must develop appropriate, long-term technology solutions to geological concerns about the development of nuclear energy with the use of uranium reserves, the storage of wastes, and economical parameter such as the cost of plants and equipment and transport, but there is also a social concern on the issue. Environmental Justice researchers had shown that Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities (TSDF) are located unfairly and that there is a “geographic association between race, ethnicity, economical indicators and area that contain hazardous substances”. Nuclear organizations must prove governments and the public that waste can be disposed safely and where.

Nuclear power is in competition with other energy sources, safer, cleaner and less dangerous. A balance of safety and cost must be found for regulation of the nuclear industry before any further development. The weaknesses in environmental regulations that the BP oil spill had revealed are bugs in the system that if happening on nuclear regulation can lead to enormous risks. Additionally, the use of nuclear fission is involved not only in the production of energy but also in the fabrication nuclear weapons, thus, increase terrorist threats because it only takes several kilograms of plutonium to make a nuclear bomb.

The position of the International Energy Agency (IEA) is that nuclear power has the potential to be a sustainable energy source of tomorrow but that there are no fundamental energy supply. Member countries of the IEA have stated they want to maintain nuclear power as an energy option for the future (IEA, 1998). Furthermore the IEA believes that nuclear power could make an important, contribution reducing carbon dioxide production for energy use because in developing countries, where electricity demand is growing, nuclear power could help in the search for a model of sustainable development (IEA, 1998).

References:
Berg, L.R., & Hager, M.C. (2009). Visualizing environmental science (2nd Ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Dr. John Paffenbarger of the Energy Diversification Division, working. IEA. Nuclear Energy Report (1998). http://www.iea.org/textbase/nppdf/free/1990/nuclearpower98.pdf
Ronald G. Burns, Michael J. Lynch and Paul Stretesky, Environmental Law, Crime, and Justice (2008).

No comments: