|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
1.0 INTRODUCTION In our society, nuclear energy has become one of the most criticized forms of energy by the environmentalists. People are scared of what could happen in a nuclear accident. Are their fears warranted? Has the environmental lobby generated a hysterical view of a very safe and efficient energy source? Even in today’s energy crisis, nuclear power remains much malign What is nuclear energy? Nuclear energy is heat energy produced by the process of nuclear fission within a nuclear reactor. The coolant that removes heat from the reactor core is normally used to boil water. The resultant steam drives turbines that rotate electrical generators. Fission is the process of splitting a heavy atom into two or more lighter atoms upon absorption of a neutron. This process generates a large amount of energy and usually at least two neutrons. The act of fissioning is also referred to as burning. The fuel used to today in nuclear reactors is called Uranium. Uranium is the heaviest element normally found in nature. The principal fuel material used in today's nuclear reactors is the fissile isotope uranium-235. Lewis Munford, an analyst, once wrote, "Too much energy is as fatal as too little, hence the regulation of energy input and output not it’s unlimited expansion, is in fact one of the main laws of life." This is true when dealing with nuclear power. Because our societies structure and processes both depend upon energy, humans are searching for the most efficient and cheapest form of energy that can be used on a long term basis. And because we equate power with growth, the more energy that a country uses, - the greater their expected economic growth. 1.1 Background The environmentalists believe that nuclear energy should not be used for various reasons. First of all, the waste product, i.e. plutonium, is extremely radioactive, which may cause the people who are working or living in or around the area of storage or use, to acquire leukemia and other cancers. They also show how billions of dollars are spent yearly on safety devices for a single reactor, and this still doesn't ensure the impossibility of a "melt down." Two examples were then given of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, in 1979, when thousands of people were killed and incapacitated. Finally, the environmentalists claim that if society wastes less energy, and develops the means to use the energy more efficiency, then there would be a definite decrease in the requirement for more energy producing plants. On the other hand, some business men and economists say that the present conditions should be kept intact, as the other forms of energy, e.g. oil, natural gas and coal, are only temporary, in dealing with surplus, and give off more pollution with less economic growth. Concurrently, countries wanted a more reliable, smokeless form of energy not controlled by OPEC, and very little uranium was required to produce such a high amount of resultant energy. Lastly, they said that renewable energy is (a) unreliable in that the wind, for example, could not be depended upon to blow, nor the sun to shine, and (b) were intermittent in that a 1,000 mega-watt solar farm may occupy about 5,000 acres of land, compared with less than 150 acres of land for a similar capacity nuclear power generation station.
Approximate Word count = 2001
Approximate Pages = 8
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|