Pros and Cons of Nuclear Power
Thursday,
Nov 13
Nov 13
Are you looking for additional information on nuclear power?
Nuclear energy benefits debate- safe or not?Nuclear power plants- can we live without them?
5 most dangerous nuclear power plants in the U.S. - part 1
5 most dangerous nuclear power plants in the U.S. - part 2
7 unknown reasons why nuclear power is bad- part 1
7 unknown reasons why nuclear power is bad- part 2
The possibility of terrorist attacks are a very real threat when it comes to nuclear power plants, and Uranium or radioactive waste in the wrong hands can have devastating effects for the entire globe and every person on it. The radioactive waste which is created during the power generation process involving nuclear power can be used to produce nuclear weapons. The knowledge that is involved in the nuclear power process to design nuclear power plants can be used to design nuclear weapons and build them as well, and this is known as nuclear proliferation. Uranium is the energy source used to generate nuclear power, and this resource is scarce on earth, with a thirty to sixty year supply left at best but this will depend in a large part on the level of demand for this material.
When it comes to nuclear power, the disadvantages far outweigh the advantages. One of the biggest drawbacks of nuclear power is the resulting radioactive waste that is created during the energy generation. The standards for the EPA mandate that the radioactive waste from nuclear power plants must be carefully monitored and stored for the next ten thousand years, which means for many generations to come. Radioactive waste is extremely dangerous and highly toxic, which is a very poor legacy to leave future generations. Nuclear power poses risks of problems and accidents that can result in radiation escaping and posing a serious threat to surrounding populations. Events like Chernobyl have proven just how deadly radiation exposure can be, not just for this generation but for generations to come. Deformed and mutated babies being born, cancers that are normally rare occurring frequently because of radioactive changes in the DNA and cell structures in the body, radiation sickness and poisoning, and much more can be the result of an accident at a nuclear power plant. The risks to humans and the earth are just too high, and the more nuclear power plants there are in operation, the higher the risks that an accident will happen. No Nuclear power plant can be secured one hundred percent.
Nuclear power plants can take decades to go from an idea to an actual nuclear power plant that is ready for operation. The usual length of time involved in the process can take from twenty to thirty years, and we can not afford to wait that long to stop global warming and switch from fossil fuels to alternative energy sources. Nuclear power is not renewable nor is it sustainable, and the risks that this energy source poses to humans and the environment can have an effect on many future generations that will come after us.
Related Posts
- A Few Words about Fossil Fuels Formation
- The Wrong Direction of U.S. Energy Independence
- Nuclear Power Plants: Can We Live Without Them?
- Nuclear Energy Benefits Debate: Safe or Not?
- BP’s Settlement: are They Getting Away with a Slap on the Hand (and Lots of Profits)?
25 Responses to “Pros and Cons of Nuclear Power”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Top Popular Posts
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
Head Writer and Editor
How do you think this will continue or be affected in the next 5 years?
September 5th, 2010 at 9:44 amWonderfully engaging article that is right to the point with a lot of great suggestions.
September 3rd, 2010 at 9:44 pmwe should take care of our earth,O(∩_∩)O~
September 2nd, 2010 at 4:23 pmthank you
August 26th, 2010 at 1:04 pmSound good. Its also my favorite topic.That’s great andthanks for the fine sharring.
August 17th, 2010 at 3:07 pmGeorge Washington, the world will NOT end in 2012, the sun has enough fuel to keep burning for thousands of years to come. No one has to worry about the 2012. What we need to worry about is fiding a way to power things that isnt dangerous and everyone can afford. Nuclear power will work for now but hopefully someone will find out how to make everything solar powered and replacee things that pollute and hurt the enviroment.
January 12th, 2010 at 11:01 pmYA! GOSH! WHATS WITH ALL THIS?!? HOW COME WE CANT FIGURE OUT HOW TO USE SOLAR POWER ON EVERYTHING OR SOMETHING? IF NUCLEAR ENERGY IS SO DANGEROUS WE SHOULD STOP BEING SO LAZY AND WORK SOMETHING ELSE OUT!
January 12th, 2010 at 10:54 pmyou guys are overthinking this stuff why not just use gas? seriousloy, it will last until at least2012
December 3rd, 2009 at 11:08 amYou are forgetting the biggest CON of all.
November 12th, 2009 at 12:23 pmThat would be NIMBY = Not in my Back Yard.
Nobody wants a nuke plant anywhere near where they live. That’s why no new plants have been started in the last 2 or 3 decades. The Feds could force the issue but it’s too much trouble. Also, a nuke plant can take 15-20 yrs to build on average. We need to move much faster than that.
According to the UK’s National Radiological Board, doses from the entire nuclear industry amount to less than 1% of our total exposure… Whats more, compared with known cancer risks such as smoking and poor diet, it reports that the risk from non-medical, man-made radiation is about 1/100th of one percent… In my opinion, people are just troubled by instinctive fears of nuclear energy due to exaggerated reports such as this… And the worry of terrorist threats on nuclear plants… tests have shown that no aircraft can penetrate the concrete cladding of a modern reactor…
July 23rd, 2009 at 9:28 amIf this isn’t a biased article then I don’t know what is. A nuclear power plant produces very limited amounts of nuclear waste. The amount of nuclear waste produced in TWO years of operation would fit in your briefcase. ALL of Canada’s nuclear waste would fit in ONE Olympic sized swimming pool. The dangers of Nuclear Waste have been greatly exaggerated. Also, nuclear reactors are designed so that they need close monitoring and constant management to avoid Shutting Down. If someone on shift happened to be lazy, the plant would automatically shut down. I, for one, would love to live beside a nuclear reactor. How many of you would like to live by a coal power plant?
June 24th, 2009 at 3:18 pmalso there is, with breeder reactors, a 1000 year supply of fuel for nuclear plants since they can run on Plutonium, thorium and Uranium…so the time period you give is false
May 14th, 2009 at 7:55 pmi would like to invite all those opposed to nuclear power to open their eyes
1. while many claim that Three Mile Island was a disaster it was in fact a tremendous success since all of the containment structures performed their tasks perfectly this incident resulted in no injuries and no deaths
2. nuclear waste is cabalble of being refined into more fuel that will result in less waste and it will be less radioactive this process is called a breeder reactor
3.Coal Plants Generate 100 times the radiation than nuclear plants do also a list of what is spewed around the globe by coal power is here:Radium
Radon
Polonium
Bismuth
Lead
Potasium-40
Uranium
Thorium
so as you can see the pros actually out weigh the cons
May 13th, 2009 at 8:27 pmOne lady said that nuclear energy is hard on the environment but it’s been proven that there is more wildlife and plants around nuclear powerplants than there are coal power plants. So why isn’t anybody trying to stop them? Nuclear power is not the only power resource that poses a threat on the environment.
April 27th, 2009 at 3:40 pmi agree with Charles. Nuclear energy is working for us today. yes many people are not telling the truth to the citizen! We need more information . And it all be the real truth about whats going on , so that people know what in there economy is going on.?
April 27th, 2009 at 12:32 pmI agree with Yocelin’s comment. This makes no sense to us high schoolers and helps me none at all while doing a research on the pros and cons of energy sources. It is very confusing having to take the pros and cons and reword them and then explain them in a portfolio piece!
March 12th, 2009 at 9:46 amNuclear energy is actually working for us today but most people do not want to admit that fact. Chernobyl and Three Mile Island were exceptions to most of the nuclear energy rules and both of those plants actually helped us learn and grow from our mistakes and make the industry safer than before.
February 23rd, 2009 at 12:41 pmI think that I will have to do some more research on this subject but I have to agree with Susan, I don’t think that using nuclear energy is going to work.
February 10th, 2009 at 12:18 pmI definitely do not think that nuclear energy should be used. Not only is the radioactive waste a threat, but it hurts the environment!
February 10th, 2009 at 12:17 pmIf nuclear energy is such a threat to the world then why are we even considering it? It appears that this is something that really needs to be looking into further.
February 8th, 2009 at 9:24 amI find this area of information quite interesting. I am looking forward to see what else scientist and technology can come up with.
February 7th, 2009 at 8:45 amWhile I agree with Rabalski in the fact that it is a HUGE threat against the world, if it is used properly then it can benefit us greatly. The real question is can this be used properly?
February 6th, 2009 at 9:02 pmNuclear power is really dangerous when gets out of control, so why not use and develop some less risky energy sources – there is a plenty of those just read a couple of posts from this site
February 6th, 2009 at 2:45 pmyou guys should give information that high schooler can understand…and more informative info
February 6th, 2009 at 12:39 pmThis post was quite informative. I have been more thoughtful of my enviroment lately but I am not sure of my opinion on nuclear power as of yet.
February 6th, 2009 at 8:47 am