Nuclear Technology vs Nuclear Weapons - Essay Example

12th November Nuclear Technology vs Nuclear Weapons Introduction The use of nuclear technology invarious spheres of life is rising although it has met stiff resistance from environmentalists. Some argue that nuclear technology is a problem, but others say its the solution.When Henri Becquereldiscovered radioactivity in 1896, he laid the foundation for the adoption of nuclear technology.The main forms of nuclear technology are nuclear medicine, nuclear weapons and nuclear power and its uses have been utilized in various fields. For instance, smoke detectors are made using this technology. Medical radiography is the largest application of nuclear technology in the medicine world. Through this technology, doctors use x-rays to get images of areasin the human body to assess injury or damage. In Agriculture, nuclear technology is used in the production of better species via induced mutation.Biologists also use it in insect control by sterilizing male insects (Carbon 2). While some advocate for destruction of nuclear weapons, others argue that the latter is vital for world peace.This paper discusses the issues both positive and negative arising from the use of nuclear technology. This paper explores the pros and cons of the latter to draw a conclusion. It will also explore possible solutions to problems brought about by nuclear technology. This paper will attempt to answer the question of whether the concerns of the critics are founded. It will also try to show whether proponents are honest when they say that it is the safest and green energy to use. This report will also explore whether radioactive waste is a permanent problem or can it be solved. Problems and issues of nuclear technology Nuclear energy accounts for about 16% of the world’s electricity. This kind of energy is produced through nuclear fission, a process by which a nucleus absorbs a neutron then splits into two lighter ones.Nuclear fission produces energy that drives the explosion of nuclear weapons which are highly destructive. For instance, a nuclear weapon weighing just over a ton produces the same explosive force as that of at least a million tons of TNT. Developed countries are turning to nuclear energy as an alternative source of power. The united States is the largest producer of nuclear energy in the world and accounts for at least 30% of the world’s nuclear electricity generation. Developing countries are investing millions into research and exploration of this kind of energy.Green house gas emissions by nuclear power is smaller as compared to coal (Lovins 35). In order to stem the spread of nuclear weapons, counties came together and formed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) whose objective is enlarging and accelerating atomic energy’s contribution to health, prosperity and peace throughout the world. The use of nuclear weapons in World War 2 had devastating effects on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, effects that are being felt to date. Many experts have argued that nuclear energy can help fight climate change. This is because a nuclear power plant emits very little or no carbon dioxide an argument that has been challenged by Mark Z Jacobson. In his analysis, Jacobson found that the use of nuclear energy leads to carbon emissions that range between 9 and 25 times more than that of wind power (Barton 1). The radiations released during the production of nuclear energy increase the risk of diseases like cancer. Therefore, those living near nuclear plants or working in them have a higher risk of getting cancer. An analysis by Baker et al shows that leukemia rates are elevated among children residing near 136 nuclear power plants in USA, Canada, France, United Kingdom,Japan, Spain and Germany. A single nuclear reactor produces at least 20 tons of high-level waste annually. Nuclear power plants and their waste can be the target of terrorists who can also use plutonium to make bombs because civil nuclear reactors use MOX fuel. Another predicament is that the use of nuclear energy increases the energy debt leading to serious financial implications that are passed on to tax payers (Barton 1). For example, estimates show that in UK and France, the nuclear debts have reached several hundred billion Euros. Studies show that radioactivity regarded to be harmless in official nuclear health risk models may be harmful. The ever growing problem of radioactive waste has not had a solution since the 1940s. In Moscow, a dump site exploded in 1957 killing dozens (Gronlund 55). At times, spills by waste containers pollute rivers, watersheds and seas. This poses a threat to both humans and marine life. Nuclear power plants The raw material for Nuclear energy is uranium, a scarce resource whose supply may last for only 60 years depending on demand. It would take a developed country at least 20 years to bring up a fully operational nuclear power plant, hence sustainability is problematic. The fact that nuclear energy is not renewable only makes matters worse. Further still, the life span of a nuclear reactor is only 50 years (Lovins 44). Sometimes, the fission can go out of control leading to a meltdown. Such an accident causes the emission of huge amounts of radiation. An accident in Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Russia, led to the deaths of dozens. As a result, hundreds of people will probably die of cancer related ailments due to the radiation. Some experts are of the opinion that the very existence of nuclear weapons maintains world peace. This is because no country can threaten another as the effects of a nuclear war would be felt for years due to the radiations present in the environment. On the other hand, nuclear energy has low operation cost compared to other forms of energy. Some quarters argue that the headache of nuclear waste can be solved by recycling. Procedures of setting up a power plant coupled with compound radiation suppression systems make nuclear energy hashigh construction cost. The use of this energy is also said to pause unknown risks to humanity. A major limitation of nuclear energy is that the uranium used is just as finite as any other energy source. Storing the nuclear waste in outer space is the best way of managing this waste. Alternatively, it can be buried in the sea bed as the rocks there are relatively stable. Scientists are evaluating these two options. The nuclear power plants should be isolated in order to zero rate the effects of an accident to humans. Compared to coal mining, uranium mining has less impact on the environment. Environmental deaths in coal mines are much higher than in uranium mines. During the enrichment of uranium, large amounts of carbon dioxide are released into the atmosphere. An accident in a nuclear power plant can cost the government billions of dollars (Hatch et al 57). Nuclear reactors discharge millions of radioactive elements into the water and air annually. The nuclear industry considers these elements to be biologically insignificant. These elements contain argon, xenon and krypton gases which if inhaled; it can lead to mutation of genes in the sperms and/or eggs and eventually cause genetic diseases. The militaries of countries with nuclear bombs spend large percentages of their respective budgets on their maintenance. Russia and USA signed the Strategic Offensive Reduction Treaty (SORT). SORT requires the two nations to decrease the nuclear weapons that they deploy. This treaty was followed by another treaty under different terms. The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) required the signatories to reduce by half the number of nuclear missile launchers (Gronlund 35). Some elements that are made in nuclear power stations are very dangerous. For instance, strontium induces leukemia, bone cancer and breast cancer. Another toxic gas is cosium, which concentrates on meat and is said to cause sarcoma. Plutonium alone causes generic diseases and testicular cancer (Hatch et al 55). Although nuclear weapons are said to have protected humans since early 1900, their use is considered immoral. It is evident that a country does not need to own nuclear weapons to be developed and powerful. Australia, Spain and Germany do not have these weapons of mass destruction but are very developed. The nuclear warheads in the world today have the potential to wipe out the entire civilization as we know it. 95% of these weapons are owned by Russia and the US. Others are owned by France, UK, India, China, North Korea and Pakistan. In case of a civil war in any one of these nations, rival groups can use these weapons on each other. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission admits that there is a high risk of a disastrous meltdown in the US. The Commission did this after witnessing the Chernobyl disaster. In 2003, the United Nations estimated that over 15,000 people living in contaminated areas in Chernobyl had died of radiation exposure. Today, 25 years after the Chernobyl disaster, the environment, people and governments are still feeling its effects (Hatch et al 59). However, if extreme precautionary measures are taken, then such a disaster can be averted (Hatch et al 60). The mining of uranium is likely to draw conflicts in different parts of the globe because most of its deposits are in lands controlled by indigenous tribes of those areas. The threat of nuclear terrorism is high during the shipping of nuclear waste. For a country to keep a non-proliferation policy then it will have to enact anti-nuclear energy policies. Nuclear radiation however is used to kill cancerous cells. On the other hand unlimited radiation for instance like that found in radon in basements cause cancer. To this effect, a federal regulation slaps a limit on the quantity of radiation exposure to people living near nuclear plants and/or its workers (Hatch et al 65). There are also limits to the number of medical exposures annually. Comparison of cost Since uranium is readily available in the US and plutonium is a byproduct of nuclear fission, the use of nuclear energy can help the nation to attain energy independence. However, the United States Department of Energy says that nuclear power is expensive compared to other ways of generating electricity. Natural gas, coal and wind power cost $52.50/MWH, $ 53.10/MWH and $55.60/MWH respectively, while nuclear power costs $59.50/MWH (Carbon 86). The waste materials are radioactive and in the wrong hands can be used to make ‘dirty bombs’. On a positive note, nuclear engineering as a career has huge benefits because those who venture into it are few and they get to work for multinationals that millions. With environmentalist and interest groups campaigning against nuclear energy, it’s politically dangerous to implement the shift to nuclear energy. Consequently the US hasn’t built a new nuclear power station since the Three Mile Island meltdown (Weinberg 12). Possible solutions In order to ensure the safety problems are eliminated, NRC should develop and sustain a safety culture. Congress on the other hand should order the NRC to outsource for managers who would implement such a culture. The reactors should also be designed with features that prevent and mitigate accidents. Such a move will reduce reliance of the less dependable operator interventions. Congress should also get rid of the Price- Anderson liability protection act. This would lead to removal of financial disincentives and hence the owners and designers of reactors would have to improve safety. The Act reduces the liability of owners in case of an accident. As a result the owners may show laxity in investing in safety. During licensing of nuclear power plants, NRC should demand comprehensive environmental reviews. The commission should also order the removal of spent fuel from reactor sites. This would significantly reduce the country’s vulnerability to terrorist attacks. The government should impose a ban on the reprocessing of used fuel. This would eliminate the risks posed by reprocessing. Countries with interest in nuclear power should sign a treaty that forbids the production of plutonium. Nuclear reactor should be built in away that they can withstand an aircraft’s impact. Programs to make and deploy fast reactors should be terminated. Congress should increase the NRC budget so as to invest more on safety (Carbon 99) Conclusion Nuclear technology has its fair share of problems. However the biggest concern is safety and management of nuclear waste. If these concerns are addressed as stated in this paper, then nuclear energy is the way to go. With respect to exposure, nuclear power plants should be located far away from human settlement in order to reduce exposure significantly. The adoption of nuclear power will diversify the energy industry. This would introduce competition that would see energy prices go down significantly. With the potential to produce hydrogen fuel used for transportation, nuclear power is the solution to greenhouse emissions. As the paper has shown nuclear power has fewer emissions than other sources of power like coal. Works Cited Atkins, William. Science News: Radioactivity Discovered by Becquerel, 28 Feb. 2008. Web. 11 Nov 2012. Barton, Charles. Energy from Thorium, 11 Dec, 2008. Web. 11 Nov 2012. Carbon, Max. Nuclear Power: Villain or Victim? Madison: Pebble Beach publishers, 2006. Print. Gronlund, Lisbeth et al. Nuclear Power in a Warming World. Cambridge: Union of Concerned Scientists, 2007. Print. Hatch, Maureen et al. The Chernobyl Disaster: Cancer following the Accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant 27.1 (2005): 56-66. Print. Weinberg, Alvin. “Nuclear Energy” Some Necessary Conditions for Rebirth of Nuclear Energy (2001): 163-165. Print. Read More