The waste from coal power stations has virtually no radioactive waste where as a
nuclear plants waste is nearly all toxic.
Completely Wrong. All coal waste is toxic. Coal fired power plants chuck out all the radioactive elements that were in the coal that was burned. This is fairly old news from the 70's. Excellent source: http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html .
More facts that are totally ignored by the media as governors and industrial groups lobby to continue to launch toxic, hazardous and poisonous elements and compounds into the air from the stacks, and onto the land downwind.
The following is quoted. There is no copyright on this article at this website. Thanks to ORNL.
Web site provided by Oak Ridge National Laboratory's Communications and External Relations
ORNL is a multi-program research and development facility managed by UT-Battelle for the US Department of Energy
"Because existing coal-fired power plants vary in size and electrical output, to calculate the annual coal consumption of these facilities, assume that the typical plant has an electrical output of 1000 megawatts. Existing coal-fired plants of this capacity annually burn about 4 million tons of coal each year. Further, considering that in 1982 about 616 million short tons (2000 pounds per ton) of coal was burned in the United States (from 833 million short tons mined, or 74%), the number of typical coal-fired plants necessary to consume this quantity of coal is 154.
Using these data, the releases of radioactive materials per typical plant can be calculated for any year. For the year 1982, assuming coal contains uranium and thorium concentrations of 1.3 ppm and 3.2 ppm, respectively, each typical plant released 5.2 tons of uranium (containing 74 pounds of uranium-235) and 12.8 tons of thorium that year. Total U.S. releases in 1982 (from 154 typical plants) amounted to 801 tons of uranium (containing 11,371 pounds of uranium-235) and 1971 tons of thorium. These figures account for only 74% of releases from combustion of coal from all sources.
Releases in 1982 from worldwide combustion of 2800 million tons of coal totaled 3640 tons of uranium (containing 51,700 pounds of uranium-235) and 8960 tons of thorium.
Based on the predicted combustion of 2516 million tons of coal in the United States and 12,580 million tons worldwide during the year 2040, cumulative releases for the 100 years of coal combustion following 1937 are predicted to be:
U.S. release (from combustion of 111,716 million tons):
Uranium: 145,230 tons (containing 1031 tons of uranium-235)
Thorium: 357,491 tons
Worldwide release (from combustion of 637,409 million tons):
Uranium: 828,632 tons (containing 5883 tons of uranium-235)
Thorium: 2,039,709 tons
Radioactivity from Coal Combustion
The main sources of radiation released from coal combustion include not only uranium and thorium but also daughter products produced by the decay of these isotopes, such as radium, radon, polonium, bismuth, and lead. Although not a decay product, naturally occurring radioactive potassium-40 is also a significant contributor.
According to the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), the average radioactivity per short ton of coal is 17,100 millicuries/4,000,000 tons, or 0.00427 millicuries/ton. This figure can be used to calculate the average expected radioactivity release from coal combustion. For 1982 the total release of radioactivity from 154 typical coal plants in the United States was, therefore, 2,630,230 millicuries.
Thus, by combining U.S. coal combustion from 1937 (440 million tons) through 1987 (661 million tons) with an estimated total in the year 2040 (2516 million tons), the total expected U.S. radioactivity release to the environment by 2040 can be determined. That total comes from the expected combustion of 111,716 million tons of coal with the release of 477,027,320 millicuries in the United States. Global releases of radioactivity from the predicted combustion of 637,409 million tons of coal would be 2,721,736,430 millicuries.
For comparison, according to NCRP Reports No. 92 and No. 95, population exposure from operation of 1000-MWe nuclear and coal-fired power plants amounts to 490 person-rem/year for coal plants and 4.8 person-rem/year for nuclear plants. Thus, the population effective dose equivalent from coal plants is 100 times that from nuclear plants. For the complete nuclear fuel cycle, from mining to reactor operation to waste disposal, the radiation dose is cited as 136 person-rem/year; the equivalent dose for coal use, from mining to power plant operation to waste disposal, is not listed in this report and is probably unknown.
Although trace quantities of radioactive heavy metals are not nearly as likely to produce adverse health effects as the vast array of chemical by-products from coal combustion, the accumulated quantities of these isotopes over 150 or 250 years could pose a significant future ecological burden and potentially produce adverse health effects, especially if they are locally accumulated. Because coal is predicted to be the primary energy source for electric power production in the foreseeable future, the potential impact of long-term accumulation of by-products in the biosphere should be considered. "
Personally, more concerned about the complete waste slate, but the radioactive portion always deserves mention.
Simple search by high school chemistry students found the West Virginia coal trace elements shown in an average ppm for nearly 800 samples.
To determine emissions of these elements just follow the example above with the Thorium and Uranium and factor from those tons.
No. The products of nuclear fusion are not radioactive.
nuclear, produce radioactive waste but keep it contained in the core as long as the plant operates properlycoal fired, do not produce radioactive waste but emit both ash and smoke which contain radioactive uranium that was naturally present in the coalother types, neither produce nor emit anything radioactive___________________________________________________________Coal fired power plants release radioactive materials 100 times that of nuclear power plants of the same rated power.
Radioactive waste is a waste product containing radioactive material. It is usually the product of a nuclear process such as nuclear fission, though industries not directly connected to the nuclear power industry may also produce radioactive waste.
No, but they produce radioactive waste.
Yes. The products of nuclear fission are usually highly radioactive.
Yes; the average nuclear power plant yields about 3 tons of radioactive waste each year.
It contains a higher amount of radioactivity
The biggest disadvantage of nuclear power is the waste generated. This waste is highly radioactive and lasts for a long time.
The exact contents of radioactive waste from a nuclear power plant and radioactive fallout from a nuclear weapon can vary widely but are likely to be similar in their primary isotopes.The major difference between the radioactive waste from a nuclear power plant and radioactive fallout from a nuclear weapon is that the waste is normally contained and will not enter the environment (unless an accident happens) while the fallout is dispersed into the environment and is carried by the wind (sometimes all the way around the world multiple times).
All plants have radioactive waste, especially fossil fuel plants.
Because nuclear power whilst producing radioactive waste does not produce carbon dioxide like coal power plants. Also they produce alot more power than burning coal.
yes, Nuclear fission as used in nuclear power plants produces radioactive waste with long half lives. However, this creates no problems. This wastes are either confined in the spent nuclear fuel (that is stored either in wet storage or in dry storage facilities) or stored as vitrified nuclear waste.
It is a waste material that is radioactive, particularly the waste from nuclear reactors and medical treatment and research.
shorter half lives
The waste product of nuclear fusion is helium, an inert gas and not radioactive. The waste products of nuclear fission reactions are radioactive.
they store it until it becomes less radioactive
Two disadvantages of nuclear waste are: disposal of nuclear waste is very expensive and takes a long time, and nuclear waste is radioactive. The advantages are: nuclear power plants are usually built on a coast, so the risk of contaminating drinking water is low; nuclear waste does not emit carbon into the air.
Nuclear Energy produces radioactive waste because if there isnt any sign of nuclear waste/energy in the sullotion/object then it wouldnt be counted as 'Radioactive'.
Carl E. Behrens has written: 'International agreement to cut off production of nuclear weapons material' -- subject(s): Nuclear nonproliferation 'Nuclear waste management' -- subject(s): Radioactive waste disposal 'Nuclear waste management' -- subject(s): Radioactive waste disposal, Government policy, Radioactive wastes, Management, Hazardous wastes 'Nuclear nonproliferation policy' -- subject(s): Nuclear nonproliferation 'Nuclear power' -- subject(s): Accidents, Nuclear power plants, Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant (Pa.) 'Enriched uranium supplies for nuclear power plants' -- subject(s): Uranium enrichment, Nuclear power plants 'The Convention on nuclear safety' -- subject(s): Convention on Nuclear Safety, Design and construction, Nuclear power plants, Safety measures
Yes in a way. It produces nuclear waste of different strengths which is radioactive
Nuclear Power Plants are used to help generate electricity. The advantages of Nuclear Power Plants are the efficiency and low immediate pollution. The disadvantages are the radioactive waste and possibility of a meltdown.
Nuclear power plants produce large amounts of energy which are generally better then using fossil fuels. The downside, in case you wanted to know, is the waste product is nuclear waste which is highly radioactive, and can give you radiation sickness, or cancer. The waste takes approx. 100,000 years to stabilize.
Because it is radioactive