“Two minutes” says Teal Krech as he replies to a question posed to him bye an interested intern from within his cubicle at the “Village Voice” headquarters. The question he was answering was “How long can a human being survive unshielded radiation exposure from a broken fuel rod?” Teal achieved this research from the DoE (Department of Energy) who to this point “has no set plan for the transportation of the spent nuclear fuel rods through our major cities and states on their way to ultimate storage in the bowels of Yucca Mountain” (Krech 2002).
Yucca Mountain, located approximately 100 miles Northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada, is the site that President George Bush has endorsed for serious consideration as the location in which to store the nations nuclear waste. This nuclear waste, currently stored at 131 reactor sites around the nation, originates from nuclear fuel rods used for nuclear power generation, and national defense and weapons programs.
Since 1978 the Department of Energy has been studying Yucca Mountain. They have been trying to determine whether it would be suitable for the long-term geologic repository for spent nuclear fuel and high level radioactive wastes. In that time period and billions of American dollars spent of scientific research on everything from the potential seepage into groundwater to microbial growth within the Alcoves already trenched into the mountain’s core. Yucca Mountain has been determined the safest place in North America for such a site. The Department of transportation has sank nearly three decades of research and money into the site and have just this year began developing a concise transportation plan for the movement of this nuclear waste throughout our country to the Yucca Mountain site, says Energy Department spokesman Joe Davis. “With the licensing procedures expected to take 3 years” (Abraham 2002) and that license only granted through the construction period of the site, at which point and time the Department of Energy will have to reapply for licensing before they can begin to receive wastes, the project is at least 8 years away from completion.
The Term Paper on Nuclear Power The Future OF Energy
Nuclear power, a phrase that isn’t too far from its controversial disputes. nuclear powers debate began around the 1970s to late 1980s when American nuclear power plant in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania had a cooling malfunction that caused a part of one of its reactors partially melt inside the reactor core. Media outlets jumped onto this incident, and dramatizing the events that transpired; not ...
I personally think that eight years allows plenty of time for further development of transportation methods and protocols that will guarantee the safe movement and containment of this waste through our major cities. The Department of Energy will probably come up with special containers that will be specifically designed to withstand even the most violent of turnovers and impacts, just like they have done for the transportation of gaseous cyanide and chlorine which are transported bye truck and rail every day. Both of which would cause catastrophic levels of deaths if the containers integrity were to be compromised and its contents allowed to escape. Nuclear power generation is responsible for almost 20% of our nation’s power usage.
(Abraham 2002), and since the Regan administration we have been steadily increasing the number of nuclear power generating reactors across the country. We as a nation are dependant on electrical power for everyday life, so we shouldn’t expect to see the number of nuclear power plants decrease in any scope of the near future. We need methods of disposal for the wasted (spent) fuel rods that we currently have on hand in the amount of 40, 000 metric tons. (Abraham 2002) In 1978 before the Nuclear Waste Policy Act went into effect the nation looked into many different proposed methods of nuclear waste disposal, some of these methods include; rocketing the waste into outer space aiming for it to exit the solar system or to impact the sun. This method seemingly has potential for rocket failure resulting in the release of radioactive material throughout our atmosphere or potentially across our nation’s skies killing millions in its wake. The second method explored was forcefully injecting the waste onto the edge of the earth’s tectonic plates as to allow the waste to enter the earth’s mantle.
The Term Paper on Future of Nuclear Power in Sustainable Development
With the population increase and economic growth, energy is becoming an essential part for development. To some extent, in any development process, reliable access to modern energy services is needed. However, the world is facing the energy imbalance: that of energy generation have consequences for the environment so meeting this growth in demand while safeguarding the environment poses a growing ...
Several other methods involved Antarctica, such as allowing the nuclear waste to sink all the way to the Antarctic’s bedrock (approximately 2 miles) melting its way down using the spent materials own heat to do the melting and leaving it there, another method included the storage of the waste on the surface of the arctic and covering it with ice. There have been proposals for reactors that consume nuclear waste and transmute it to other, less-harmful nuclear waste. In particular, the Integral Fast Reactor was a proposed nuclear reactor with a nuclear fuel cycle that produced no transuranic waste; in fact, it could consume transuranic waste. It proceeded as far as large-scale tests but was then cancelled by the US Government. (Wickipedia 2004) All in all the general consensus bye the American congress and senate was that the underground storage at Yucca Mountain was the most economical and safe at this current age and time.
A consensus ringing so loud as the government has set aside 576, 000, 000 U. S. tax dollars into the Nuclear Waste Fund for fiscal year 2005 which will bring the Nuclear Waste Fund to nearly 15 Billion Dollars. “The purpose of the NW was to pay the full cost of disposal of nuclear wastes and to provide a steady stream of funding available exclusively for waste disposal” (Barton 2004) I personally think that since we already have the financial backbone in place for the project, that we should move forward in our quest for energy independence. The sooner we establish the storage of the radioactive wastes, the sooner more nuclear plants can be built and older more environmentally impacting methods of power generation (i. e.
The Essay on Nuclear Power Plants
Nuclear Power has its advantages and disadvantages. However it is a lot safer than most people think. The chances of a meltdown or a radiation leak are extremely small. There are many safety features, which make nuclear power one of the safest electricity sources. And every nuclear power plant is protected with thick layers of steel and concrete. Nuclear power is also very environmentally ...
: coal, natural gas and fossil fuels) can be phased out. There is new technology for power generation on the horizon that may eliminate nuclear power generation in the next fifty years, it is called Thermonuclear Fusion. Thermonuclear Fusion is a self sustaining generation of power that “makes stars shine and hydrogen bombs to explode” (Wickipedia 2004) and if realized could provide an unlimited power source virtually waste free. Later this year the ITER or International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor will begin construction supposedly in Europe or possibly Japan. The ITER project is internationally funded with America (who dropped its funding of the project between 1999 and 2003) and has now returned into negotiations about the construction and placement of the site. This experimental reactor will run in parallel with a materials testing facility (the IFM IF a.
k. a. International Fusion Materials Irradiation Facility) which will develop materials for use in the extreme temperatures and conditions of future fusion based power plants. Both plants would be followed bye a demonstration power plant, which would actually produce electricity, and prototypes of the DEMO plant would be used as the first power plants to generate commercial power. Do I think that Yucca Mountain is a good permanent nuclear waste disposal site? Yes I do. I think that Yucca Mountain will never see its capacity filled, with technology progressing at a breakneck pace and Yucca Mountains expected life span at 38 years I think it will be in the next 20 years that Fusion power is realized.
Once realized the implementation of the plants will be in a power company’s best interest. They wouldn’t have to worry about rising thermal waste treatments, disposal or containment of any kind and their profit margin would nearly multiply bye 1000 being that the fusion reaction is self sustaining. Possibly bye then we will have developed more reliable space traveling methods that would allow us to eventually empty Yucca Mountain’s holds into outer space and eliminate the impact on our planet indefinitely. Bibliography Get Nevada Glowing Environmental Ethics 1. Barton, Joe.
2004. 108 th congressional report to the House of Representatives. Nuclear waste Management. 2. Krech, Teal. 2002.
The Essay on Nuclear Waste Disposal At Yucca Mountain Right Or Wrong
Nuclear Waste Disposal At Yucca Mountain: Right or Wrong? As the United States' nuclear waste buildup becomes larger, the need fora permanent storage facility becomes more urgent. One proposed site is in the Yucca Mountains of Nevada. This makes many Nevadans uneasy, as visions of three-legged babies and phosphorescent people come to mind. This is an unfounded worry, as many reasons prove. In ...
The Village Voice, NYC. Nuclear Waste Makes Haste-Hazardous road to Yucca Mountain. 3. Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. 2004. web 2004.
Radioactive wastes. web waste 5. Wilson, Jim. Plutonium Peril. Popular mechanics website. web.
