After All, How Nuclear Can We Get? In the 1950s, nations around the globe raced to master the science of nuclear fission. Scientists discovered how to sustain a nuclear reaction allowing a new kind of energy that opened the door to many prestigious opportunities. Nuclear proliferation, being the primary motivation in hopes to aid the military in the war, had stressing theories on how to achieve a reaction. Whichever nation contained mastery of nuclear weapons would essentially win the war. As the nuclear race came to a close, german scientists accomplished the very first controlled atomic fission reaction. The nucleus of an atom can trigger a reaction in which atoms begin to separate. When contained in a power plant, heat is generated and …show more content…
Fossil fuels primarily powers the world through natural gas, petroleum, and coal. Fossil fuels are non-renewable and eventually will completely dissipate. Fossil fuel plants cost more to operate than nuclear power plants. A coal fired power plant will require three million tons of coal; generating the same amount of energy a nuclear power plant would produce using two hundred tons of uranium fuel annually. (Gale 1). Nuclear energy can be reprocessed to help reduce radioactive waste. Chemically, waste is broken down into a form that can be used to generate power. A years supply of waste can be turned into a block of glass mixed with sand and other materials; this process is called vitrification. Vitrification is an expensive treatment because it recycles nuclear fuel and isn’t easily accessible . (Lerner …show more content…
Generally, there are two types of radioactive wastes. Front end waste is usually a result from extraction in the mining fields, and back end waste is produced by spent fuel rods. Back end waste is significantly more radioactive than front end waste. Once the enriched uranium is spent, it becomes extremely dangerous and radioactive. Proper storage is required to prevent harmful radioactive contact. Large barrels of radioactive waste is transported to isolated areas where a bunker would be built. Ground water and active fault lines are heavily considered. If a fault line were to trigger an earthquake, the bunker could be damaged contaminating groundwater which is essential for our fresh water supply. Radioactive elements can not be disposed due to the isotopes’ half-life. Uranium 238 takes up to 4.5 billion years to decay. Uranium 235 takes up to 704 million years to day and uranium 234 takes up to 245 thousand years. The half life of the uranium isotope used in nuclear power marks nuclear waste as permanent considering how long it takes to decay. High-level waste is converted into rock-like form, placed in the deep bedrock of the Earth. (Bernard 1). Low-level waste is not as dangerous as high-level waste. It is far less radioactive and much easier to recycle. Using Ken Kingery’s method to recover enriched uranium from spent and contaminated materials, he can recycle nuclear materials. About ten percent
In order to remove nuclear waste after they come out of the reactor from the fuel cells, (Leslie Corrice, 2015) it requires heavy shielding that can be stored in large stainless steel
Nuclear waste should be stored at Yucca Mountain. There are many positive reasons of why the waste should be stored on Yucca Mountain, such as the fact that no one lives on Yucca Mountain. There has not been an recent earthquake on the mountain. There is also the fact that it does not rain a lot on the mountain. So this is why nuclear waste should be stored on Yucca Mountain.
However, there are few opposition opinions. “Rebuttal”: a) Environmental Impact - The process of mining and refining uranium hasn’t been a clean process. b) Nuclear Accidents - The Chernobyl accident that occurred on 26 April 1986 at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine was the worst nuclear accident in the history. c) High Cost - At present, the nuclear business let waste cool for a considerable length of time before blending it with glass and putting away it in enormous cooled, solid structures.
The low level waste gets put into a system of containers underground where the waste will sit until non-radioactive. To get rid of high level waste you have to decontaminate it until it reaches low level of radiation. Then start the same system as the low level until the byproduct is finally at a neutral state. This system is done by the NRC and the Department of Energy. Nuclear waste has to be handled carefully or it could be harmful.
Nuclear fission was one of the biggest outcomes that came out of World War Two from science. With nuclear
Many fear that the high number of earthquakes in the region could cause a possible leakage. This would most definitely harm not only our environment but also eventually infiltrate our drinking water. What if a big earthquake released a portion of the nuclear waste before we could contain it again? This is where Muller does a great job of explaining to the reader that more research must go into leakage prevention rather than absolute containment. Muller uses mathematics and science to show how we have the possibility of being exposed to less radioactivity with the toxic waste, than if we never dug the uranium up in the first place.
Nuclear energy may be the solution that eliminates our concern for energy production in the future, but it still remains a huge issue for the environment. Despite its wide use in many developed countries, nuclear energy poses many threats to both the
Current usage is about 63,000 tU/yr. Thus the world's present measured resources of uranium (5.7 Mt) in the cost category less than three times present spot prices and used only in conventional reactors, are enough to last for about 90 years. This represents a higher level of assured resources than is normal for most minerals. Further exploration and higher prices will certainly, on the basis of present geological knowledge, yield further resources as present ones are used up.
One cannot deny that some nuclear waste is produced and that it is radioactive. However, according to the World Nuclear Association in many countries, nuclear waste accounts for just 1% of all toxic wastes. This means that only a small amount of waste is produced and it would be easy to contain. Furthermore, the BBC states that you are able to reprocess nuclear waste and reuse up to 97% of it. This means that waste can be reduced even further and that that supplies of Uranium can be sustained for longer.
Should Nuclear waste be stored in Underground salt mines and Sinkholes ? Some scientist think that we should send some nuclear waste into sinkholes and Salt mines because they think that it is a safe place and can't damage anything. But they are wrong because Nuclear waste can be very deadly when it is left unattended deep underground or in a Salt mine. The most common rock in the United States is Limestone.
The use of nuclear power can cut down on pollution. “The strong likelihood that the plutonium would be required in the relatively near future would render continuous reprocessing of irradiated fuel, using the existing capacity, the most economical way of providing this resource for future generations. At the same time, it would simplify the management of high level waste, as the half-lives of nearly all the other isotopes present in the waste would be much less than that of plutonium. Storage of the accumulated plutonium in a single, high security facility should, in UK conditions, avoid the possibility of any of the material being acquired by terrorists; the non-plutonium bearing high level waste would be an unattractive target for terrorists.” Not only does this solve for the issue of clean energy, it also can solve for the issue of dirty bombs.
Even with repositories, more and more would be needed in order to hold the nuclear waste that is created as it takes thousands of years to return to its original form because of this a many new reactors have been designed that allow for the recycling of nuclear waste that breaks apart the actinides and separates them allowing for reduced thermal load and increasing the capacity of the storage sites. Some of which can be used as a byproduct to form a uranium that isn’t found in nature as another source of fuel for the reactors. These new models are not only energy efficient but are safer with the new and ever-changing technology. One of which is the high-temperature gas cooled reactor that has a higher heat capacity of the core allows for fuel to have longer response times, and has a higher proliferation resistance than other reactors. It is seen that today’s standard for safety can be kept less than one serious release of radioactivity every 50 years from “all” fuel activity.
From the premise of the above project, it can be deduced that nuclear reactors release wastes that persist for a long time, provoking some experts to categorize them as unforgettable. If it is a responsibility of modern generation to safeguard future ones, then nuclear waste becomes a burden and imposition. Nuclear waste can be described as a destructive issue for generations to come for various rationales. First, it is expensive as much as the waste might not be leaking. Nuclear inputs expenses to future generations and current taxpayers whilst denationalizing immediate advantages to nuclear companies.
Nuclear energy has long been considered a great way to generate power for the lights and heating and cooling systems we use at our homes. It can generate electricity without greenhouse gas emissions. However, after a few terrible disasters in Nuclear power plants around the world, people have become more aware that, when not treated carefully, nuclear power poses rather a significant threat to our way of life. There also have been safety and health concerns involved in storing nuclear radioactive waste. Usually, when nuclear waste is disposed, it is put into storage containers made of steel that is then placed inside a further cylinder made of concrete.
e34a1d29. Accessed 24 Oct. 2017. Schlosser, Eric. " Today’s Nuclear Dilemma. " Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, vol. 71, no. 6, Nov/Dec2015, pp.