The Arguments For and Against Nuclear Power Essay

Submitted By fredddeeiie
Words: 870
Pages: 4

Arguments for Nuclear power.
The main argument for the use of nuclear power is that using nuclear power does not contribute to global warming. Burning fossil fuels causes problems for the environment due to the fact that they’re non-renewable. Burning fossil fuels release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere which helps contribute to global warming and also causes acid rain which can destroy crops and limestone.
Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and scientists are more than 90% certain that most of it is caused by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases produced by human activities such as deforestation and burning fossil fuels. Coal is used mainly to drive a power station because it is efficient. However, coal is a fossil fuel and is therefore non-renewable energy source. Our coal will run out in about 40-50 years at the rate we are going at, according to scientists. If we use less coal and more renewable sources, it is sure it will last much longer, but the high demand for coal in industry is always rising as our world modernizes. This makes way for nuclear energy! Nuclear power can open our options when talking about energy that is efficient and renewable. Nuclear power is a sustainable way of producing energy without disturbing the environment around. Nuclear power plants create jobs for the unemployed people around that area.

Arguments against Nuclear power.
As well as for factors there are also factors against the use of nuclear power and in this section I will explain the factors against.
Radioactive wastes contain radioactive material. Radioactive wastes are products of nuclear power generation and other applications of nuclear fission or nuclear technology, such as research and medicine. Radioactive waste is hazardous to most forms of life and the environment, and is regulated by government agencies in order to protect human health and the environment. This is one reason why Nuclear power is harmful.
Radioactive waste takes time to diminish so it takes up space on our planet and can destroy habitats and ecosystems. However, low level waste with low levels of radioactivity like medical tools and industrial waste produce breaks up quickly but high level wastes, which are things like spent nuclear fuel or by products of nuclear reprocessing, must be stored for thousands of years which damages the surrounding environment and costs a vast amount of money to keep up. Current major approaches to managing radioactive waste have been segregation and storage for short-lived wastes, near-surface disposal for low and some intermediate level wastes, and deep burial or transmutation for the long-lived, high-level wastes.
Some very strong arguments against using nuclear power are the happenings of Chernobyl and Fukushima. These two disasters were caused by nuclear power stations exploding and releasing a spread on nuclear waste across the area, contaminating the surroundings and making it a ghost town. While it is difficult to establish the total economic cost of the disaster, in Belarus the total cost over 30 years is estimated at US$235 billion. On the explosion there were 56 direct deaths and over a further 20 years around 5,000 people had died of cancer related illnesses or mutations. Up to the year of 2005 more than 6,000 cases of thyroid cancer