The Fear Factory:
Are people’s attitude towards Nuclear Power justified?
This week Sarah Kennelly investigates the prospect of Nuclear Power as an alternative to Fossil Fuels.
We are all aware of the ever increasing demand for energy across the globe. Currently, our primary energy supply comes from burning fossil fuels to generate electricity. More and more we are searching for more efficient, cleaner, renewable sources to fulfil this role. There is one source of power that is clean, efficient and reasonably readily available, which already supplies 17% of the worlds power, but has the potential to supply a whole lot more. This source is nuclear power, but it is often immediately dismissed as being too dangerous and not environmentally friendly. The word “nuclear” seems to carry with it such a bad reputation that it cannot be included in everyday conversations without inciting fear. One such example of this is in the naming of MRI scans, the proper name being Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging. What has caused this fear of nuclear power and is it really justified?
People don’t often know or understand what actually goes on in a nuclear reactor or how the energy is produced. Nuclear fission is the main process involved in generating nuclear power. Most power stations use Uranium for this, but Plutonium can also be used. There is a mass of Uranium in the core of the reactor. This sample is bombarded with neutrons. When a neutron strikes an atom of Uranium, it is absorbed by the atom. This causes the Uranium to undergo induced fission. What this simply means is that the Uranium atom splits into two smaller atoms and releases two or three neutrons. These neutrons go and collide into more of the Uranium atoms and a chain reaction occurs. This process releases energy in the form of heat. This heats water into steam, which goes on to drive a turbine and generate electricity. This is an extremely efficient process. Just one pound of Uranium produces the same amount of energy as roughly one million gallons of gasoline.
There are no pollutants released directly into the atmosphere from nuclear reactors.
So let’s take a look at how fossil fuels perform, taking coal as a typical example. The coal is burned and the heat from this is often used to heat water to steam which then drives a turbine. However, as already pointed out this is an extremely inefficient process in comparison to nuclear fuels. But there is more to it than that. It is common knowledge that burning fossil fuels releases greenhouse gasses and carbon dioxide. Environmentalists everywhere are constantly battling to reduce the planets production of these gasses which cause global warming. Sulphur oxides and Nitrogen oxides are also released in the burning of coal, these cause acid rain and are harmful to our health. Perhaps the most surprising emission though, and something which many people don’t know about is the emission of radioactive gasses directly into the atmosphere. Uranium and Thorium are released when coal and other fossil fuels are burnt. More importantly, most people are unaware that a coal fired power plant releases more radioactivity into the atmosphere than a properly functioning power plant.
It is certainly true that there are dangers associated with nuclear power, but these dangers are often over exaggerated because of high profile disasters such as the one in Chernobyl in 1986. Modern day reactors are held inside a concrete liner which acts as a radiation shield. This in turn is kept inside a steel containment vessel which prevents leakage of radioactive gas or fluids. The absence of this outer steel container is what made the Chernobyl disaster so catastrophic. The real dangers of nuclear power arise in mining the Uranium, with miners often developing lung cancers. There are also problems with disposing of the spent fuel. This stays toxic for centuries afterwards and needs to be kept somewhere safe, permanently.
While there are dangers associated with nuclear fuel, I feel it can be a much cleaner, safer and efficient energy source than fossil fuels. With our fossil fuel supply quickly running out, we need to look to other sources. Nuclear power is just one of these sources, but it can easily be overlooked due to the general public’s negative opinion of it. There are difficulties to be overcome in relation to it, but I feel the possible benefits certainly justify more research on the matter.
It is often said that people are afraid of things which they don’t understand. So hopefully next time you here the word “nuclear” you won’t just automatically assume it implies danger. Before you make up your mind on the matter of nuclear power, be sure to look at the real facts and decide for yourself if the pros outweigh the cons.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
As your article notes, one of the difficulties when discussing our electric energy future is that most of our citizens have little understanding of our electric energy present. It is difficult to make large amounts of electricity - whether by fossil, nuclear or solar power. [One good reason why conservation and better efficiency should be at the top of any energy plan.] The real world of nuclear energy, in particular, is little understood (again, as your article notes.)
As better sense of perspective is definitely needed. I've worked in nuclear over 20 years and have never seen a good profile of the people, the politics and the technology in the United States. So I wrote one, in the form of the thriller novel "Rad Decision". It is available online at no cost to readers - who seem to like it, judging from their homepage comments - at RadDecision.blogspot.com.
"I'd like to see Rad Decision widely read." - Stewart Brand, noted environmentalist, internet pioneer, and founder of "The Whole Earth Catalog".
Rad Decision is also now in paperback at online retailers.
RadDecision.blogspot.com
Post a Comment