You are on page 1of 7

Bautz 1

Nicholas Bautz
Mrs. DeBock
English IV Honors
8 Oct 2015
Nuclear Energy
A multitude of energy methods exist in the world today. Some of which are renewable
while others are nonrenewable. Some release large amounts of carbon into the environment
while others leave the tiniest carbon footprints. Thorough evaluation of mankinds energy assets
is critical for understanding the most efficient energy source. A cognizance of a pinnacle energy
source would mean huge strides for technologies used to generate energy in the future. Although
some critics may disagree, nuclear energy is still the most sustainable and efficient form of
energy for the intestinal fortitude of mankind. This is largely because nuclear energy emits
miniscule amounts carbon into the environment, requires an extremely small amount of fuel, and
releases no pollutants into the environment.
Firstly, an overview is necessary to understand nuclear energy in general. Nuclear energy
is created by the nuclear fission of a large, unstable atom splitting into two separate atoms, each
being more stable than the previous. This process releases an enormous amount of energy in the
form of heat which is used to heat water at high pressures to turn a turbine to generate electricity.
The water then condenses and is cooled in a nuclear power plants cooling tower, which can be
notoriously observed from miles away (Nuclear Energy). This technique, seeming fairly simple,
is actually rather complex. The fuel for nuclear reactors is Uranium 235 which is an enriched
isotope of Uranium 238; the U235 isotope is necessary for facilitating the nuclear fission reaction
that releases the gargantuan sum of energy needed to generate electricity (Nuclear Energy).

Bautz 2
Atomic fission reactions were first carried out in 1930s for means of military use. However, after
World War II, nuclear developments began to be used for nonmilitary purposes. The first
American nuclear power plants initiated operation in the early 1960s. Since then, nuclear power
has grown tremendously throughout the United States. When compared to other countries such
as France, where 75% of the electricity is generated from nuclear power, the US is behind in
nuclear energy, producing only 20% of its electricity with nuclear power (Alters). Today only a
small percentage of electricity generated in the US is generated by nuclear power. This is an
overview of nuclear energy as whole.
Nuclear energy is the most efficient form of energy production available in the world.
With that being stated, it is inevitable that one would ask the question: Why is nuclear power not
used unanimously all over the world? Three arguable motives against nuclear power are large
initial costs, nuclear accidents, and disposal of wastes. The substantial input cost of establishing
nuclear power plants is hindering the overall use of nuclear power throughout the world
(Josephson). For example, a private entity is considering adding a nuclear plant in the suburban
areas of Kansas and Missouri. Let it be known that the suburban population of Kansas and
Missouri is not substantial, and is currently powered by coal burning plants. Also, the average
energy consumption per capita household is considerably lower than the national average.
Because of these findings in their analysis, the private entity decides against the establishment of
a nuclear plant for three reasons. Due to the non-substantial suburban population, lack of
household energy consumption, and the prior existence of an energy generating party in Kansas
and Missouri, the officers of the private entity find that the investment of a nuclear plant would
not pay off (Kumar 72). This is just one example of how nuclear power could be hindered by
input cost in the world. Secondly, nuclear accidents cause anxieties over the implementation of

Bautz 3
nuclear plants near population centers. Due to the nature of nuclear technology, little room is left
for error in a nuclear fission reaction (Josephson). This means that the slightest miscalculation
could have tremendous repercussions. For example, a nuclear engineer who was recently named
plant employee of the month becomes pompous with his job and takes normal reactor conditions
for granted. He waits prolonged periods between fission reactor ECU checks. Furthermore, he
plays on his phone at his work station. Subsequently, the reactor is operating at 200 C above
normal due to a meticulous cooling system malfunction. However, this malfunction goes
unobserved by the insincere plant officials. This results in the beginnings of a nuclear meltdown,
and by the time the occurrence of a meltdown is discovered, the reactor is already significantly
damaged (Nuclear Energy). Moreover, the potential for release of fatally radioactive alpha and
beta particles is almost inevitable. If the radioactive particles were to be released into the
environment, massive numbers of fatalities and illnesses would result in the regions down-wind
from the plant. This is a prime hypothetical example of what could happen in the event of a
major nuclear accident. However, with that stated, only two accidents of this caliber have
occurred since the birth of nuclear power: Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi (Josephson). Lastly,
the disposal of radioactive wastes presents a concerning issue with the sustainability of nuclear
energy. However, scads of radioactive waste disposal methods have recently been implemented
(Evans). One specific example of a newly developed method is Dry Cask Storages. Dry Casks
are cement and steel bunkers that are impermeable to storms, floods, or bombings (Wernau). The
nuclear waste is enclosed and sealed in these bunkers for its eternity since the waste will
continue to be radioactive for hundreds or thousands of years to come (Wernau). Dry Casks are
just one solution, of many, to the issue regarding the disposal of hazardous radioactive wastes.

Bautz 4
Nuclear Energy is the most sustainable form of energy production available in the world
today when compared to other energy resources. Use of nuclear energy throughout the world
benefits and will continue to benefit those who make use of its efficient production. Nuclear
Power out performs its renewable and nonrenewable counterparts of coal, solar, and wind energy.
Coal, for example, is one of the most common forms of energy production in the United States
today. Coal is responsible for approximately 37% of the energy generated in the United States
(Kumar 21). Capitalism is simply the motive behind American dependence on fossil fuels. To
avoid being put out of business by alternative, greener forms of energy, fossil fuel companies that
produce coal, petroleum, and natural gas alike keep prices low enough to keep production costs
for producers low. Despite this keen incentive, fossil fuels release large amounts of carbon, ash,
and pollutants into the environment which can cause things like climate change, acid rain, and
the destruction of entire ecosystems (Nuclear Energy). Nuclear power is also far more efficient
than coal. While coal plants on average consume over 3 million tons of coal annually, a nuclear
power plant only requires 200 tons of Uranium, a rather common resource like coal (Nuclear
Energy). Unlike coal, green energy production methods like solar and wind energy hardly leave a
carbon footprint (Clayton). However, these methods are costly and are heavily affected by the
time of day. For example, at night winds are not as strong and the sun does not shine. Therefore,
the energy production of solar and wind energy methods is not significant for approximately 9
hours of the day, depending on geographic location. Furthermore, these methods of production
are not capable of consistently producing the sums of energy associated with nuclear power.
Moreover, nuclear energy outperforms all of its insignificant counterparts.
Although a few critics disagree, nuclear energy is still the most sustainable and efficient
form of energy for the intestinal fortitude of mankind. This is largely because nuclear energy

Bautz 5
emits small amounts carbon into the environment, requires an extremely small amount of fuel,
and releases no pollutants into the environment. After a thorough analysis, it can be easily
observed that all these claims of nuclear energy are indeed factual. Furthermore, United States
President Barack Obama just approved billions of dollars in subsides for nuclear developments
in the US over the next 15 years. It is time for Americas energy to become more sustainable,
efficient, and cleaner than ever before.

Bautz 6

Works Cited
Alters, Sandra M. "Nuclear Share of Electricity Net Generation, 1957-2007." Energy: Supplies,
Sustainability, and Costs. 2009 ed. Detroit: Gale, 2009. Information Plus Reference
Series. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 9 Sept. 2015.
Clayton, Mark. "Nuclear Power Does Not Compare to Other Renewable Energy Sources."
Nuclear Power. Ed. Lynn M. Zott and Helga Schier. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013.
Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "How Green is Nuclear Power?" Christian Science
Monitor (7 Mar. 2007). Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 9 Sept. 2015.
Evans, Kim Masters "Hazardous and Radioactive Waste." The Environment: A Revolution in
Attitudes. 2008 ed. Detroit: Gale, 2008. Information Plus Reference Series. Opposing
Viewpoints in Context. Web. 9 Sept. 2015.
Josephson, Paul. "Nuclear Power Poses Threats to Safety and the Environment and Should Be
Scrapped." Nuclear Power. Ed. Lynn M. Zott and Helga Schier. Detroit: Greenhaven
Press, 2013. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "Japan Nuclear Crisis: Seven Reasons Why
We Should Abandon Nuclear Power." Christian Science Monitor (14 Mar. 2011).
Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 9 Sept. 2015.
Kumar, Alok. "Nuclear Power." Encyclopedia of Energy. Ed. Morris A. Pierce. Hackensack:
Salem, 2012. n. pag. Salem Online. Web. 14 Sep. 2015.
"Nuclear Energy." Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection. Detroit: Gale, 2015. Opposing
Viewpoints in Context. Web. 9 Sept. 2015.

Bautz 7
Wernau, Julie, and Lisa Black. "Dry Casks Can Minimize the Health and Security Risks of Spent
Nuclear Fuel Pools." Nuclear Power. Ed. Lynn M. Zott and Helga Schier. Detroit:
Greenhaven Press, 2013. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage
Comes Under Scrutiny." Chicago Tribune 19 Mar. 2011. Opposing Viewpoints in Context.
Web. 9 Sept. 2015.

You might also like