0
Short answer: Contamination is a risk. Also, if you factor in all the work required to set nuclear energy into motion, you will see that it also contributes to adding carbon to the atmosphere.
Nuclear energy is not carbon-free as many believe. Mining and extraction costs carbon in fossil fuel; transportation costs carbon in fossil fuel; processing costs carbon in fossil fuel; building the nuclear power station costs carbon in fossil fuel. Then there's the question of highly radioactive waste storage for hundreds of thousands of years, leaks into the environment, coastal flooding of nuclear power stations like Sizewell. And the question of the added energy from splitting atoms which is extra to solar radiation and thus adds to the net energy input to the planet [an issue never even addressed]. It takes at least ten years to build a nuclear station so no quick fix, and decommissioning is even longer. It also costs billions, a price no government could hope to get taxpayers to pay, yet private industry won't fork out that sort of money. It's a pipe dream, something to use against those who argue renewable power is the only way to go.
It is true that nuclear energy is not purely carbonless. However, once you factor in the production and transportation costs, neither are solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, tidal, or hydroelectric power. One aspect that all of these energy sources, including nuclear, has in common are that once they are functioning they are emitting less CO2 into our atmosphere than coal and oil. Regardless of your feelings about coal and oil, they are not found on the earth in limitless supply, so therefore we as a society need to begin developing more renewable energy.
Obviously there will be environmental impact of mining the uranium (or another element thorium) that will be used to fuel the power plant. Uranium mines are under very strict guidelines that will help to prevent the surrounding mining area from any overly adverse affects (probably no more than what the uranium was doing naturally). Furthermore, nuclear power plants emit less radiation to the surrounding areas than coal fire power plants because the nuclear power plants are built more durably. The radioactive waste is a concern because right now our federal government will not allow this waste to be refurbished to be used again in a nuclear reactor like France does. Right now each power plant maintains their own waste. Decommissioning nuclear power plants is expensive but this is necessary in order to protect the environment . Overall, nuclear is one of many, not the only, solutions that our country needs to progress towards.
Rhett Strosin
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Why are nuclear bombs good?
They do major damage, for one thing. However, they cause environmental problems and mass radiation, so i really don't encourage them.
What are the main environmental implications of using nuclear fuels as an energy source?
Good: no pollution due to carbon dioxide or sulfur or other nasties Bad: the need to store the spent fuel safely for hundreds if not thousands of years
What are the effect of nuclear explosion to the environment?
That depends mostly on yield and now many are used.a few devices similar to the ones used in ww2 (~20 kiloton) has minimal environmental effect outside the immediate blast area.an all out nuclear war with thousands of multi-megaton devices will ignite worldwide forest fires, causing a nuclear winter that could exterminate well over 90% of life on the surface of earth from a combination of cold and lack of food.
Use nuclear in a sentence?
It was a nuclear bomb. Everyone was afraid of a nuclear bomb. The nuclear power plant malfunctioned. The Cold War was about fear of nuclear attack.
What is difference between cause and consequence?
A cause is the reason why something happened. A consequence is the result of an action. For example: The cause of the stain on his shirt was that his pen leaked ink all over it. The consequence of forgetting to put the cap on his pen was that it leaked all over his shirt.
Which is not an environmental consequence of nuclear energy?
Water pollution
What are environmental consequences of nuclear energy?
The primary environmental consequence of nuclear energy is unwanted radioactive contamination. This can be in aerial release of steam, or water pollution in the cooling cycle and in affected groundwater. The spent nuclear materials from reactors (nuclear waste) must be stored away for thousands of years before they pose no threat to biological organisms. They have the capacity to pollute large areas unless properly handled. A secondary and limited consequence may be thermal pollution from the waste heat released into the environment. However, this is only a factor at a minority of reactor sites.
What is the most harmful consequence of environmental abuse is?
Acid Rain
Is an environmental consequence of nuclear energy?
The ultimate result is the pollution of the environment. Any nuclear accidents leave the area unusable for centuries. When the nuclear reactor melted down in Russia in the 80's it left the entire area radioactive. People can no longer live there and any plants and animals are affected by the radiation that still exists.
What has the author G G Eichholz written?
G. G. Eichholz has written: 'Environmental aspects of nuclear power' -- subject(s): Environmental aspects, Environmental aspects of Nuclear power plants, Nuclear power plants
What are the environmental effects of nuclear fallout?
"The environmental radioactivity is increased." That's it?
Is global warming an environmental consequence of the use of fossil fuels?
Yes.
Is Environmental damage an inevitable consequence of development?
Environmental change is an inevitable consequence of development. Damage can be mitigated and reduced in most cases by careful planning, including green methods of building and species transplantation.
What environmental consequence is caused by constructing roads and buildings in undeveloped areas?
deforestation
Is radiation good for nuclear energy?
Radiation is a consequence of nuclear energy. In fact, without the radiation of a large neutron flux, nuclear energy would not exist.
What are the environmental hazard of nuclear power reactor?
poda
What are the release dates for Streams of Consequence - 2013?
Streams of Consequence - 2013 was released on: USA: 12 January 2013 (Wild and Scenic Environmental Film Festival)
