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.
What else can I help you with?
Can nuclear power plants produce material that could be converted?
Nuclear energy is released from the nucleus when U235 fissions, it appears initially as kinetic energy of the fission fragments, these are then stopped in the fuel material and turned to thermal energy. We can't use the nuclear energy directly.
Energy stored in the nucleus of an atom is called?
Energy that is stored in the nucleus of an atom is called Atomic Energy or nuclear energy.
What is released during nuclear reactions?
Energy (in the form of heat), also free neutrons.Binding energy
Why has hydroelectricity come under criticism in recent years?
The environmental consequences are quite high.
Produced when two or more nuclei join together or when the nucleus of one atoms splits apart?
Nuclear Energy
What of the following is not environmental consequence of nuclear energy?
Air pollution is not an environmental consequence of nuclear energy, as nuclear power plants do not emit air pollutants such as carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, or nitrogen oxides during operation. The main environmental consequences of nuclear energy are the generation of radioactive waste and the potential for accidents that can lead to radiation releases.
Where in the former soviet union did an accident involving nuclear energy have long-term negative environmental and health consequences?
Chernobyl
What is the worst thing about nuclear energy?
The worst thing about nuclear energy is the risk of accidents such as meltdowns, which can have serious environmental and human health consequences. Disposal of radioactive waste is also a major concern as it remains hazardous for thousands of years. Additionally, nuclear proliferation poses a threat to global security.
What fullform of SENES?
Specialist in Energy, Nuclear and Environmental Sciences
What are the positive environmental effects of nuclear energy?
Positive environmental effects of nuclear energy revolve around air pollution. With nuclear energy, there is less waste that gets distributed into the atmosphere. The air is actually cleaner due to the fact that no air pollutants are released.
What are the potential consequences of a nuclear fireball?
The potential consequences of a nuclear fireball include widespread destruction, radiation exposure leading to health issues, long-term environmental damage, and potential societal collapse.
What are the key differences between hydrogen and nuclear energy in terms of efficiency, safety, and environmental impact?
Hydrogen energy is less efficient than nuclear energy because it requires more energy to produce hydrogen. However, hydrogen is safer to handle and has lower environmental impact compared to nuclear energy, which produces radioactive waste and poses risks of accidents.
Why is nuclear energy not clean?
Nuclear energy is not considered completely clean because of the risks associated with nuclear accidents, such as Chernobyl and Fukushima. Additionally, the mining and refining of uranium to fuel nuclear reactors can have environmental impacts, and the management of radioactive waste is a long-term challenge.
Which is a disadvantage to nuclear energy?
One disadvantage of nuclear energy is the potential for accidents, such as meltdowns like the one at Chernobyl or Fukushima, which can have serious environmental and health consequences. Another disadvantage is the issue of nuclear waste disposal, as radioactive waste remains hazardous for thousands of years and requires secure long-term storage solutions. Additionally, nuclear power plants can be expensive to build and decommission.
What are 3 drawbacks of this source of energy?
Nuclear energy produces radioactive waste that requires long-term storage and disposal solutions, posing environmental and health risks. Nuclear power plants are expensive to build and decommission, making them economically unfeasible without government subsidies. There is a risk of accidents and meltdowns at nuclear facilities, which can have catastrophic consequences for both human health and the environment.
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 worst source of energy?
Nuclear energy can be considered one of the worst sources of energy due to the potential for catastrophic accidents, long-term environmental impact from radioactive waste, and concerns about nuclear proliferation.
