Developing Nuclear Power as Alternative Energy
Many researchers believe that harnessing the power of the atom in fission reactions is the most significant alternative energy resource that we have, simply because of the immense power that it can generate.
Nuclear power plants are very “clean-burning” and their efficiency is rather staggering. Nuclear power is generated at 80% efficiency, meaning that the energy produced by the fission reactions is almost equal to the energy put into producing the fission reactions in the first place. There is not a lot of waste material generated by nuclear fission—although, due to the fact that there is no such thing as creating energy without also creating some measure of waste, there is some. The concerns of people such as environmentalists with regards to using nuclear power as an alternative energy source center around this waste, which is radioactive decay products which have to be packaged and contained.
The splitting of an atom releases energy in the forms of both heat and light. Atomic power plants control the fission reactions so that they don't result in the devastating explosions that are brought forth in atomic bombs. There is little chance of an atomic power plant exploding like a nuclear bomb, as the specialized conditions and the pure materials used to unleash an atomic bomb's vicious force do not exist inside a nuclear power plant.
The risk of a “meltdown” is very low. Although this latter event has happened a couple of times, when one considers that there are over 430 nuclear reactors spread out across 33 nations, and that nuclear reactors have been in use since the early 1950s, these are rare occurrences, and the events of that nature which have taken place were the fault of outdated materials and human error.
Indeed, if nuclear energy could become a more widely accepted form of alternative energy, there would be little question of their upkeep being maintained. Currently, six states in America generate more than half of all their electrical energy needs through nuclear power, and the media is not filled with gruesome horror stories of power plants having problems.
The major draw back to using nuclear is the radiation from these decay products lasts for an extraordinarily long time. The waste must be contained and stored for thousands of years. However, the volume of waste produced by the nuclear power plants is small in comparison to how much ash is produced by the burning of coal in a coal fired power plant. While the radiation is certainly the more deadly by far of the waste materials produced, the radiation can be contain and store.
Many people do not understand that burning coal not only produces solid waste but also radiation from the trace amounts of natural uranium and thorium found in the coal. In spite of environmental concerns, nuclear power is considered by some to be an environmentally friendly alternative energy, and the risk of radiation getting out is actually quite low. With a relatively low volume of waste material produced, it should not be a difficult thing at all for storage and disposal solutions for the long term to be developed as technology advances.
Having said that, there are major issues about storage and treatment of the radioactive waste. The problem stems from who is ultimately responsible for storage and containment and where do you store it. Most people want the lower electric costs but do not want the waste in their back yards. If the cost of storage and containment are factored in, the true cost is prohibitive. Unless a program of reprocessing and minimizing are also developed. The government (you the people) will pay for final storage and containment costs and any new technology development costs. If not thought out carefully we could be passing on a substantial legacy to our children. Radioactive waste will be here for 100+ generations.
| Next > |
|---|