The Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Essay

The Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Essay
This paper will address how the Fukushima Nuclear Power plant violated the following NSPE
Canons of Engineering Ethics: holding the paramount of safety, health, and welfare of the public,
and avoiding deceptive acts. The misjudgment and underperformance by the engineers during the
2011 Tohoku Earthquake caused a large uproar of rejection towards nuclear power in Japan, which
could have been prevented if the engineers had not misconducted before the events. On March 11th,
2011, the northern section of Japan was hit by a 9.0 magnitude earthquake, followed by a 15 meter
tsunami, causing the death of over 15000 people. (Spacey) Even though the earthquake and the
tsunami caused a tremendous amount of deaths in the northern region of Japan, the meltdown of the
Fukushima nuclear power plant caused a severe damage to northern Japan's ecosystem that people
still cannot go back to their homes; despite it is 4 years after the disaster. After the earthquake, the
tsunami destroyed the power supply used by Fukushima's three nuclear power stations, causing
severe levels of meltdown to be occurred inside the reactors in the timespan of 3 days. It was not
until 2 weeks after the tragedy, when the reactors were finally stabilized, and took several months to
approach what is called a "cold shutdown condition", in which the fission in the reactors are
completely stopped.(Fukushima A)
There were several decisions made before and during the Tohoku earthquake, which severely
impacted the
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

The Dangers of Nuclear Power Plants Essay example
Debates about the use of nuclear power plants in New York City have received much attention in the
last few years. Many scientists believe that the use of Nuclear Power would be beneficial for New
York City, since an abundant amount of electricity is necessary to fuel the Big Apple; however, one
primary argument espoused by opponents is that the use of nuclear power will bring about negative
effects like radiation exposure, debt and may allow the power plant to become a potential target for
terrorist attacks. This paper describes selected constitutional issues related to the use of nuclear
power plants with a focus on the risks it poses and concludes with implications for alternative
sources of energy.
II Safety risk is an issue ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
An example is that nuclear power emits more energy than fossil fuels. In an article called "The Pro
and Cons of Nuclear Power", Jeremy Smith states that Uranium, which is used to make nuclear
energy, can produce 20,000 times as much energy than fossil fuels (2011). This means that a small
amount of Uranium would be used to make an abundant amount of energy. On the other hand, the
process of acquiring the Uranium may be more dangerous that predicted. According to Jeremy
Smith, uranium mining exposes workers to radium, a highly radioactive element, which then turns
into radon gas. "Radon gas... can expose workers and nearby communities to an array of health risks
like lung cancer, bone cancer and lymphoma" (Smith 2011). In conclusion, although uranium gives
an immense amount of energy, it would not be worth it if thousands of workers become ill and
possibly die.
III Nuclear power plants should not be built due to the biological effects it poses during a meltdown.
Radiation is exposed to inhabitants during a meltdown but many people are not aware of the horrific
effects. An example of this is explained in the article "Biological Effects on Radiation". "The higher
the radiation dose, the sooner the effects of radiation will appear...this syndrome was observed in
many atomic bomb survivors in...1986 Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident...of these, 28 died
within the first three months from their radiation injuries. Two more patients died during the first
days..." (2012).

Pros And Cons Of Nuclear Power Plant
It is no doubt that Nuclear is very powerful and that it can cause some good things to happen but we
can not ignore the horrible things that it has done to our planet and ecosystem. There are two sides
to this argument if we should close nuclear power plants or we shouldn't in my personal opinion I
think that we should close these plants. But before I had to make my decision I had to do some
research on both sides so here is what I found.
One of the pros of Nuclear power is that, if we use Nuclear Power then we will use Fossil Fuels a lot
less than we normally use them, and this would help stop the greenhouse gases from going into the
air. (CO2 and others.) Also, another good thing about Nuclear power is that it is low operation costs,
nuclear power produces very inexpensive electricity. Also, even though the expense of setting up
nuclear power plants is moderately high, the expense of running them is quite low. These Nuclear
plants can be shut down if other resources are to be very high and when they are not in high demand
then the Nuclear plant can be up and running again. But then again, Nuclear power gives us new
ways to defend ourselves for wars for the future since we have used it in the past. However, the
normal life of nuclear reactor is anywhere from 40–60 years, depending on how often it is used and
how it is being used. Even if we run out of Nuclear power then we might be able to still use the
fission reaction to make more reliable resources in the future

Persuasive Essay On Nuclear Power Plants
Despite the fact the countries continue to increase the production of nuclear energy, my position is
that new nuclear power plants should not continue to be built. The current use of nuclear power
should be carefully evaluated with a plan to slowly decrease production throughout the world. The
negative implications to the environment and economy support my position. The production of
nuclear energy is not as safe and clean as some say that it is. The Oxford Research Group released a
report providing evidence that supports this point. It is clear that nuclear power plants do not
produce a lot of carbon dioxide when they operate, but it is the mining of uranium and the storing of
waste that produces the carbon dioxide pollution. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
There is yet to be a full proof way to store this toxic material (examiner.com). Disposal of the high
level nuclear waste that comes from nuclear power plants continues to be a big problem. It has been
challenging and costly to find safe ways to store this waste. According to a report from the U.S
National Academy of Sciences, it will take 3 million years for radioactive waste stored in the U.S. as
of 1983 to decay to background levels (thinkquest.org). Who wants this amount of waste stored in
the environment where they live? Currently in the U.S. nuclear power plants produce 3,000 tons of
this high level waste each year (thinkquest.org). If nuclear power continues to be produced, this
amount of waste will only continue to increase, causing a bigger dilemma as to what to do with the
waste. As the waste is removed from the plant it still contains a high level of radiation. Exposure to
radiation whether it occurs in the moving process or leakage from storage not only has a negative
impact on the environment but also can pose a major health threat to humans. Based on the level of
exposure, symptoms to humans can range from nausea and headaches to damage of nerve cells, loss
of white blood cells and even death (think .org). The potential risk of exposure is not worth human
life.
The use of nuclear power can have several negative impacts on the economy. The use of nuclear
power can be costly. The building of the plants can cost between $12 – $18

The Pros And Cons Of Nuclear Power Plants
research on both sides so here is what I found,
air. (CO2 and others.) Also, another good thing about Nuclear power is that it is low operation costs,
then the Nuclear plant can be up and running again. But then again, Nuclear power gives us new
ways to defend ourselves for wars for the future since we have used it in the past. However, the
fission reaction to make more reliable resources in the

Nuclear Power Plant Safety Systems
Topic 1 – Nuclear Power Plant Safety Systems IAEA Synopsis: In 1956, 81 member nations
unanimously approved The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Statute, the guiding
document for the creation of this committee. The objective of the statue stated that "the Agency
shall seek to accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy to peace, health and prosperity
throughout the world. It shall ensure, so far as it is able, that assistance provided by it or at its
request or under its supervision or control is not used in such a way as to further any military
purpose." As such, the IAEA was established in 1957 to respond to global fears about the potential
dangers of nuclear energy. Since its creation, the IAEA has responded to a wide variety of issues
related to atomic energy. At the time of its creation, the primary fear was that nuclear power could
be an avenue to create and use nuclear weapons. Indeed, this is still a concern today. Of late, the
IAEA has focused on ensuring the safety of nuclear power plants. Various safety–system failures in
nuclear power plants calls for the revision of the current safety standards and approaches for
maintain the safety of nuclear power sources. One such event that caused this shift in focus was the
Fukushima accident in 2011.
March 11, 2011–Fukushima Accident At 2:46pm Japan tremored under the Great East Japan
Earthquake, magnitude 9.0. Although the earthquake was offshore, the damage was catastrophic.
The

Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant ( Npp )
Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) was one of the biggest NPP that was supposed to move
Ukraine, the former USSR to advanced stages of development by providing energy. The
headquarters was located in Moscow regulated by the USSR Ministry of Energy, or Minenergo. In
April 1970, the main stakeholder and director/leader of the Chernobyl NPP was Viktor Bryukhanov,
who came from Tashkent the capital of Uzbekistan. He was dismissed from his position after the
Chernobyl tragedy and sentenced to ten years in prison. (Zhukova, 2016). There is s lot of confusion
with many stakeholders and conflicting interests. The extraordinary nuclear catastrophe at
Chernobyl happened simultaneously with a genuine debate regarding the information policy that
was ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Moreover, Soviet nuclear experts realized that there was not only unauthorized experiment and
operators' fault but there was more to the catastrophe. With Gorbachev's honest politics steadily
taking result, newly encouraged Soviet media began to publish accounts that held responsible the
reactor's construction (Schmid, 2011). However, this crisis involved the most famous nuclear
scientist of the Soviet Union Anatolii Aleksandrov and close coworker of Igor Kurchatov, who
developed the atomic bomb for the Soviet Union (Schmid, 2011). Anatolii Aleksandrov was blamed
for being accountable for holding too many authoritative positions at the same time when Chernobyl
explosion occurred. Additionally, he was blamed for avoiding complaints concerning operational
complications with RBMKs (light water–cooled, graphite moderated reactors) as he was the head of
Interdepartmental Technical Council MVTS, which was the most authoritative decision–making
organization for Soviet nuclear energy guiding principles (Schmid, 2011). Before 1986, Soviet had a
civilian agency "Minenergo" (the Ministry for energy and Electrification), which regulated the
majority of the country's NPPs. However, this agency was not liable to the KGB, but to the
"Planning Commission (Gosplan), the Soviet economy's principal coordinating agency" (Schmid,
2011). The main

For many decades, Nuclear Power Plants have become a growing argument between the educated
and uneducated. Some have grown towards the growth of these plants for their technological
innovations and environmental benefits. Others have walked away from the deal, repeatedly
exclaiming the risks and money that builds up over time. Though these problems remain open for
everyone to see, those arguments are outdated and overstated. In addition, there are far more
positives than the eyes can see, the negatives, however, are an eyesore. Nuclear power plants will
benefit towns for the strict safety standards, the pricing of a nuclear power plant, promotional
factors, and land requirements.
Since the Obninsk Nuclear Power Plant opened in 1954, scientists and engineers have improved the
technology towards today's nuclear reactors. These technological improvements have made power
plants more functional through time. The article "Advantages of Nuclear Energy" mentions that "It
[Nuclear energy] is very powerful and efficient than other alternative energy sources... many
countries are putting huge investments in nuclear powers... a small portion of the world's electricity
comes through"(Rinkesh,2013). This citation shows the potential of nuclear power, however, there's
doubt caused by many people who aren't aware of the improvements of the modern day nuclear
power plant. The same article mentions, "Developers of the current nuclear power plants have
drawn from the weaknesses of... disasters like

Pros And Cons Of Nuclear Power Plants
Uranium was found in 1789 by Martin Klaproth, who is a German chemist, and was named after
Uranus, the planet. This sparked electricity in many laboratories. In the 1900's work was found in
central Asia on nuclear minerals. The revolution in 1917 inspired scientific research. Nuclear fission
was finally understood by the 1940's.
What happens inside a nuclear power plant that brings pain into being? Imagine following a volt of
electricity into a wall plug, through miles of power lines to a nuclear reactor that created it. You
would come to the generator that makes the spark and the turbine that turns it. Then, you would find
the steam that rotates the turbine and finally the radioactive uranium that makes water into steam.
Then you would be in the nuclear reactor core. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
All you need to do is have a high school diploma and you have to take a test to show what you know
about the nuclear power plants. Everyone in my family has passed the test so far, so I am very
positive I can pass the test. Also once a year you have to take a 12 hour safety course and you get a
card showing that you took it. In the training courses you learn about the dangers of the nuclear
power plants. You also learn about what you can do to stay safe. Being safe and paying attention is a
very important role when working in the power plants. One thing I love about the career I am
choosing is you do not have to go to college to work in a nuclear power plant. That works out
perfect for me because I did not plan on going anyways. Working in a nuclear power plant brings
pretty good money. You make around 174,000 dollars a year. The work is dangerous, but it is
definitely worth it. The main reason I want to take on this career is because it seems very fun and
interesting. Also it has been in my family for many years. My father, grandfather, and most of my
uncles at one time have worked in a nuclear power

Nuclear Power Plants
In 1942, Enrico Fermi successfully sustained a nuclear fission reaction and created the world's first
functional reactor. What his experiments, and those of earlier scientists like Otto Hahn and Fritz
Strassman, showed was that by splitting the nucleus of heavy radioactive elements (like uranium
and cadmium), energy is released, and the reaction could be designed to generate a sustained energy
source (Schlager & Weisblatt, 2006). Subsequent experiments illuminated the promise of nuclear
energy as a reliable alternative to coal, and scientists and economists praised it as the future of
energy. While nuclear power remains the most efficient form of energy (Nei.org, 2013), its early
proponents failed to take into account the potentially devastating effects of a power plant
overloading and exposing radioactive waste to nearby populations, and catastrophic events like the
Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters have substantially undermined the promise of Nuclear Energy.
The question of whether nuclear power will become the standard of energy production remains a
hotly debated topic among economists and environmentalists alike. The economic costs of nuclear
energy are vast, ranging from government oversights and barriers to entry, to variable human capital
costs and fiercely competitive substitutes. By analyzing the economics of the establishment of a
nuclear power plant, we can get closer to answering the question of whether nuclear power will
become the true future of energy. In the

Pros And Cons Of Nuclear Power Plants
I think that we should not build the nuclear power plant in East Pennsboro township because it is a
bad idea and could wipe out their entire town. Few reason are power plants are big targets for
terrorism, also a lot of money goes into making this plant and next thing you know it could have a
meltdown or produce deadly waste. Another reason is the waste won't go away for 200–500
thousand years, which could affect our water sources and pollute our waters. Also there are high
risks and unknown risks of what could happen to the power plant. So I think that we shouldn't have
a nuclear power plant. These power plants are big targets for terrorism because of a few reasons.
One if terrorists decide that they want to wipe out a town they put a bomb on the power plant and
that will cause a big explosion. Also they could cause leaks in the plant and that cause nuclear waste
to leak out into anytown or waters and harm or ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
One high risk that we know of is radiation. Radiation can cause skin problems, fatigue, long–term
side effects, head and neck problems, chest problem, and more. There are some effects of the power
plants people don't even know about that could happen. All it takes for any damage to be done is
one person to slack of or one person not do something correctly and the whole city or town can be
destroyed. So there is another reason why I think we should not build a power plant. Nuclear
accidents are another big reason why we should not have a power plant. Randomly out of the
ordinary a nuclear accident may happen and it will end up harming people and making them move
out of town. Therefore the town's population will decrease and less people will live there and the
point for the nuclear power plant is gone. Also it could end up killing all of east pennsboro and
possibly even more.
So I think we shouldn't build the power

In a world where global warming is a very real threat and electricity powers everything, Nuclear
power plants are growing in popularity as a source of energy. Nuclear power plants operate by
splitting atoms (atomic fission) as opposed to atomic fusion, which joins atoms together. This
happens when a neutron hits an atom (usually Uranium–235)with enough force that it splits the
atom into two new, different atoms. After this happens, a few neutrons are discarded and are sent
flying off, hitting other atoms and causing a chain reaction. The energy from the reaction created by
splitting the atom is collected, and believe me, it is a lot. Atomic fusion isn't used because it is
harder to fuse atoms together than separate them, and also because ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
There are many other sources of energy that are even more clean and renewable than nuclear power,
such as solar power, wind energy and hydroelectric stations over rivers and dams. These energy
sources will operate for years, without the need to tear them down and rebuild them like nuclear
power plants. One downfall is that they don't produce as much energy as a nuclear power plant, but
once you have a lot of them, we'll be set energy wise for years. In regards to advancement in nuclear
power, "The first so–called Generation III advanced reactors have been operating in Japan since
1996. These have now evolved further. Newer advanced reactors now being built have simpler
designs which are intended to reduce capital cost. They are more fuel efficient and are inherently
safer." stated the World Nuclear Association. So we haven't made extremely large advancements in
that area, but we are still constantly moving

"No one in the United States has become seriously ill or has died because of any kind of accident at
a civilian nuclear power plant." says Joe Barton. This is a highly controversial topic where there are
many conflicting opinions. Some people believe that these plants are too dangerous to exist while
other think that they are the edge of tomorrow. When analyzing it from a purely statistical and
analytical standpoint, nuclear energy is clearly worth the possible risks they pose. The plant uses the
heat from fission to heat water and create steam to spin a turbine in order to produce electricity.
These plants uses fuels rods with fissile U–235(three to four percent) and nonfissile U–238(ninety
seven to ninety six percent). After they are used,

The First Commercial Nuclear Power Plants
The first commercial nuclear power plants were constructed in 1950. The public was promised a
non–polluting and resourceful type of energy. Although there are less than 500 nuclear power plants
in the world, but many nuclear accidents have already been endangering civilian lives, such as the
accidents in Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and the most recent Fukushima Diichi. Nuclear energy
may appear to be the ideal source of energy for the future. However, there are uncontrolled
situations that cause the reactor into meltdown and lead to disaster. On March 11, 2011 Japan
experienced an earthquake, which has become the most terrible and destructive in the history of this
country. In term of geography, Japan is situated in the earthquake–prone area, on the junction of four
plates: the Eurasian, Pacific, North American and Philippine. The Eurasian plate is slowly moving to
the east, and three others – to the west, so their friction causes earthquakes. Japanese know about the
danger based on their country geography, but they were not ready for this kind of disaster. A 9.0
magnitude earthquake struck at 2.46pm about 70km east of Tohoku at an offshore subduction zone,
where two tectonic plates collide and one slides beneath the other. According to IBT news, Its centre
was on the seafloor at a 24km depth, this earthquake was so powerful it shifted Earth on its axis of
rotation. The energy released by the earthquake produced a huge tsunami, with waves up to 30ft
beginning to hit the

Nuclear Energy: The Shipping Port Nuclear Power Plant
Nuclear Energy Extra–Credit Research Paper On May 26, 1958, President Eisenhower opened
Shippingport nuclear power plant, the first commercial nuclear power plant in the United States.
Since the introduction of commercial nuclear power through the Atoms for Peace program, nuclear
power plants combined with coal–fired power plants now represent approximately 60% of the
nation's electricity supply. In nuclear power plants, the heat used to produce steam is created when
uranium atoms split – called fission. Nuclear fission is either a nuclear reaction or a radioactive
decay process in which the nucleus of a particle splits into smaller parts (lighter nuclei). The fission
process often produces free neutrons and photons (in the form of gamma rays) and releases a very
large amount of energy.
The fission within a nuclear reactor begins with a neutron–emitting source and ends with all of the
produced neutrons from the reaction being absorbed by the control rods. In both types of nuclear
reactors found in the U.S., water is turned into steam, which then drives turbine generators to
produce electricity. Pressurized Water Reactors keep water under pressure so that it heats, but does
not boil. This heated water is circulated through tubes in steam generators, allowing the water in the
steam generators to turn to steam, which then turns the turbine generator. In Boiling Water Reactors,
the water heated by fission actually boils and turns into steam to turn the turbine generator.

Nuclear Plant : The Environmental Effects Of Nuclear Power...
Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, and the Fukushima Daiichi plant are a few of the many nuclear
power plants around the world. At some point in time, these three plants have been more dangerous
than predicted. The radioactive gases these plants contain have detrimental effects to the body and
the environment. In contrast, while the radiation is contained, nuclear power plants are healthy for
the environment. Nuclear power plants are considered to be environmentally friendly because they
produce the least amount of greenhouse gases. However, even though these power plants are better
for nature, they can also damage it. Nuclear power plants are a hazard to all living organisms on
earth and should no longer be in use. They are unsafe because they can have a meltdown, crack, or
the reactors could explode, which will release radiation. The radiation leak can do damage to people
and their habitat located nearby. Abolishing nuclear power plants will prevent potential catastrophes
in the future. Nuclear power plant's radioactive gases can cause numerous fatalities and damage to
the surrounding communities, which can be deemed uninhabitable if radiation were to be leaked.
One way a radiation leak can happen is if they crack due to aging structures or the fractures can be
caused by natural events such as earthquakes, tsunamis, and tornadoes. In March of 2011 the
Fukushima Daiichi plant was cracked by the massive earthquakes and tsunamis that occurred in
Japan. The radiation affected

Nuclear Energy : Nuclear Power Plants
For the past 50 years, the United States has been using nuclear energy as one of it's main non–
renewable energy sources. The source of nuclear energy comes from nuclear power plants, which
efficiently generates large quantities of energy and has low greenhouse gas emissions, compared to
traditional coal power plants. Currently, there are 61 nuclear power plants operating in the U.S. and
using nuclear power plants as a main energy source has always been a controversial problem within
U.S. society. By the time nuclear power plants bring people convenience, they bring more
disadvantages instead. Nuclear electric power generation uses thermal energy that is created by
nuclear fission, which is similar to thermal electricity power generation in coal power plants.
Compared to coal power plants, nuclear power plants have extremely low greenhouse gas
emissions; such emissions are the main factors in the increasing climate change today. The public
and the government both want to decrease our greenhouse gas emissions, so nuclear energy would
be the best option in that sense. But replacing all coal power plants is unrealistic, so more nuclear
power plants have arose to solve this issue. Secondly, scientists and researchers have already
invested time and money in the nuclear generation technology needed to make power plants. With
the knowledge of nuclear technology, we are able to generate more efficiently with methods in
nuclear power plant development. A main advantage of nuclear

Argumentative Essay On Nuclear Power Plants
Nuclear power plants have many great benefits. However, there are also many costs that the general
public is very concerned with. These costs include nuclear accidents that lead to catastrophic
harmful affects towards the public health and the environment when not careful. This is what makes
it a very controversial subject on whether a large city, such as Houston, should rely on nuclear
power plants for energy. So, what is nuclear energy and how do nuclear power plants work? Nuclear
energy is the product of a neutron splitting a uranium atom. When this happens it produces a very
large amount of energy. Then three neutrons from splitting apart a uranium atom then split other
uranium atoms and produce even more energy. This process becomes self–sustaining as more atoms
are split. The energy created is used to generate steam and the steam is able to spin turbines. When
these turbines spin, they can create electricity. This process is similar to the traditional processes of
forming energy. However, instead of generating steam, the other processes would burn fossil fuels
in order spin the turbines. The burning of fossil fuels contributes to the increase of green house gas
emissions, and this can be an environmental concern. This is why nuclear energy is considered a
"clean" source of energy since it does not produce any greenhouse gasses. Nuclear power plants
have actually become more common because of the benefits. In fact, the US has the largest overall
generation of

Pros And Cons Of Building Nuclear Power Plants
Most countries are starting to build more and more nuclear power plants. Nuclear power plants are
factories that produce electricity. It starts of by control rods, usually made uranium, silver and
boron, heat up water. Then the water turns into steam and turns the turbines. The turbines then
power up the generator than power. The power stored in generators are used to power up a city. So,
would building a nuclear powerplant be good for your community? Building a nuclear power plant
could be a good decision and could also be a bad decision. The Mayor is thinking of building a
nuclear power plant in the border between South Saint Paul and Inver Grove Heights. Nuclear
power plants is a very typical source of electricity in many countries, but usually has some
downsides with it too. Nuclear power plants are very big and south saint paul is not very known for
its size. South Saint Paul is small the area of it is 6.1 square miles. If they do decide to build a
nuclear power plant other buildings like houses, stores, and gas stations will be destroyed to obtain
enough space to build the power plant. It will cost a lot of money to construct the power plant. On
average it costs 500 million dollars to ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It is the easiest and best way to create power in the world because every other source of power uses
large masses of natural resources that cannot be renewed or reused after it is used. Which wil lower
the amount of natural fuel we have. Building a nuclear power plant can also increase jobs available
in the South Saint Paul / Inver Grove Heights area. With more jobs this can lead to more people
moving into the Minneapolis / Saint Paul metro region. This will cause a bigger population in the
metro which will lead to more tax money so that the government can build more public places such
as schools, stores, and entertainment

Koodankulam Nuclear Power Plant
KOODANKULAM NUCLEAR POWER PLANT
Koodankulam Nuclear Power Plant is a nuclear power station currently under construction in
Koodankulam in the Tirunelveli district of the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu. Project
investment cost to India was estimated to be US$ 3.5 billion in a 2001 agreement.
History
An Inter–Governmental Agreement on the project was signed on November 20, 1988 by Prime
Minister Rajiv Gandhi and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev. The project remained in limbo for
10 years due to political and economic upheaval in Russia after the post–1991 Soviet breakup, and
also due to objections of the United States on the grounds that the agreement does not meet the 1992
terms of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).[2]
There are ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
However, the present Tamilnadu government have defended the Koodankulam project
INDIAN REACTORS ARE SAFE, SAYS SCIENTIST–'INDIAN NUKE POWER PLANTS SAFE'
Bangalore: Japan's killer earthquake that caused a nuclear reactor to shut down and a radiation scare
are unlikely to negatively impact India's ambitious nuclear power programme, says a nuclear
scientist and former official of the atomic energy regulatory board (AERB)"I honestly am not
worried about the Japanese incident casting a 'scientific' shadow in India," K.S. Parthasarathi, who
was until recently the secretary of AERB, told IANS. "I know the country will stand it."
The committee was set up in the wake of the nuclear disaster in Japan, triggered by an earthquake
and a tsunami simultaneously hitting the Fukushima nuclear power plant on March 11, 2011 The
committee, appointed by the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) of India in March, put out
the a bare–bones report earlier this month. The final detailed report is still under AERB review. He
said the Kudankuam site was in a very low seismic category zone and that the

Nuclear Power Plant Advantages And Disadvantages
"Every dollar spent on nuclear is one less dollar spent on clean renewable energy and one more
dollar spent on making the world a comparatively dirtier and a more dangerous place, because
nuclear power and nuclear weapons go hand in hand" (Mark Z. Jacobson).
Nuclear power plants are widely considered to be one of the most effective methods of producing
electricity, however, they come with disastrous potentials. They are more preferred than the toxic
burning of fossil fuel, which produces high amounts of greenhouse gases (Health Research
Funding). However, I believe that the disadvantages and potential hazards of using nuclear power
plants demean the advantages, and thus they should not be considered as a solution to energy
problems. The disadvantages include the usage of non–renewable fuel and the potential of long–
lasting destructive effects on the environment and health. Health effects
Accidents
A nuclear power plant acts like a thermal power station in which nuclear reactors act as the heat
source (European Nuclear Society). All typical conventional thermal power stations work similarly,
where heat is used to generate steam which drives a turbine connected to a generator that produces
electricity (European Nuclear Society). There are four hundred nuclear power plants functioning in
the world, with many in the United States and Japan (Nuclear Energy Institute, "World Statistics").
One of the main drawbacks of using nuclear power plants is

The Pros And Cons Of Fukushima Nuclear Power Plants
Despite citizens opposed nuclear power plants, the government positions nuclear power plants as
"important baseload power supplies" and shows the posture to utilize it as well as before nuclear
accident six years ago, government decided to "reduce it as much as possible". In other words,
people's resistance failed. The government wants to supply stable electricity at low cost, and Japan
is an island country with few resources, and if there is no nuclear power will be insufficient when it
is emergency. In addition, from the dangers of nuclear accident occurrence, citizens raise
demonstrations or requests compensation. There are many people who oppose restarting in Japan
because there are many people who think that safety is more important than ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
Indigenous people requested compensation and made a huge organization to resist the government
and nuclear power plants. I partly agree with their opinion. Because if you continue to use the
nuclear power plant from now on, there is a possibility that accidents like Fukushima will happen
again. Because Japan has a large number of occurrences of earthquakes, I do not know when it will
happen. It is time to think together how we can increase renewable energy usage. Asah Rehman
says, "I see communities, who were thrown into the front line. I see the incredible transformation,
they become stronger, they stand up" (This Changes Everything). My parents' house is located 30
kilometers from the nuclear power plant, and still people who have evacuated from areas with
nuclear power plants live. Before the earthquake occurred, I have never felt the threat of nuclear
power plant, so I did not think there was anything dangerous near our lives. Immediately after the
accident, going out was prohibited, and daily necessities were not transported because of radiation.
Due to this accident, people all over the world learned of the dangers of nuclear power plant. We can
only protect our lives by our hands. In order to leave a clean earth to future generations, we should
make use of past experiences and connect to the

research on both sides so here is what I found,
air. (CO2 and others.) Also another good thing about Nuclear power is that it is low operation costs,
then the Nuclear plant can be up and running again. But then agian, Nuclear power gives us new
ways to defend ourselves for wars for the future since we have used it in the past. However the
fission reaction to make more reliable resources in the

Nuclear Power Plants In The United States
Nuclear power plants or renewable energy power plants? Dirty plants or clean power plants ?
Harmful power plants or secure power plants? All these things should come to Americans minds
when they are trying to decide on what path they should go on to get there energy from. Although
Americans could choose nuclear power plants, I believe they shouldn't because they are expensive
and not time efficient, harmful to people and the environment, and they're susceptible to accidents.
As a matter of fact, there is lot's of chemistry behind the use of nuclear plants. In the United States
there are two types of reactor nuclear power plants, boiling water reactors and pressurized water
reactors. Commercial nuclear power plants in the United States are ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
According to the article At U.S. Nuclear Sites, Preparing for the Unlikely they say "The fact that the
odds of a nuclear accident are unknowable and the risks hard to measure make it in some ways more
frightening than the known – and greater – risks of driving without a seat belt or breathing the fumes
from a coal–burning power plant." (11) This emphasizes the fact that when using nuclear power you
will never be aware of when an accident or explosion can happen. For example, in the article
Nuclear Power Safety Concerns they mention the explosion at Chernobyl in northern Ukraine. The
Chernobyl accident in 1986 was the result of a flawed reactor design that was operated with
inadequately trained personnel. Furthermore, the resulting steam explosion and fires released at least
5% of the radioactive reactor core into the atmosphere and downwind and two Chernobyl plant
workers died on the night of the accident, and a further 28 people died within a few weeks as a
result of acute radiation poisoning. This exemplifies how an accidental explosion of a nuclear power
plant was unplanned, killed people, and left over radiation on to the site till this day which people
had died

The City Is The Nuclear Power Plant
The day began like any other. A city full of life woke up to continue its normal routine. Early
morning sunlight glinted off of surroundings along the horizon. Shiny cars crawled through the
streets. Pedestrians exited their homes and walked along the sidewalks. Bright, luscious green trees
and colorful gardens lined the streets. Children crossed the roads to get to their favorite
playgrounds. Teenagers headed to the beaches that bordered a lake in the center of town. Massive
concrete flats, serving as apartment buildings, created grids throughout the city. As usual, workers
constructed new buildings for an ever growing community. A giant Ferris wheel, one of the city's
most iconic landmarks, towered over the fairgrounds in the distance. Statues stood in the many
public squares that occupied space between buildings. One of the most noticeable features of the
city is the nuclear power plant, centrally located near the middle of the metropolis. The town of
Pripyat, Ukraine, home to almost fifty–thousand people, was developing into a model city. Little did
the citizens know that their lives were about to change. In the case of the Chernobyl nuclear reactor
accident in 1986, the calamity came as a complete and utter shock to the people involved. Far too
often, this is also the case for individuals involved in other disasters. Lives are built for the purpose
of moving forward, and one unfortunate mishap can send them spiraling in the opposite direction.
Problematic factors that

Tma Nuclear Power Plant
Should PA help to support the continued use of the TMI nuclear power plant? In my opinion, I
would suggest that they should close TMI. The power plant has not been profitable for five years.
Why would the government support TMI when they don't make money off of it? The fact that
nuclear power plants cost millions of dollars to operate does not help TMI's case to stay open.
Most people believe that nuclear energy is a renewable when really it's not. Uranium will only be
around for 70–80 more years. Though that is projected to last longer than oil, which is only expected
to be around for another 50 years, it will be out outlived by both natural gas and coal. We have
enough coal to last us another 150 years at the current rate of production. At the rate the U.S has
been using natural gas, we are projected to have enough for an estimated 85 more years.
Even though fossil fuels are the most well known for pollution, they are not alone. Air, water, and
land can all be affected by the mining of uranium. If not handled correctly, the mining of uranium
can pollute the local water sources. Though the pollution is not from the power plants themselves, it
is still linked to them.
Nuclear power plants generate nuclear waste. It does not directly affect the ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
There has already been a meltdown at TMI before. The accident occurred 38 years ago on March
28, 1979. Luckily, there were no fatalities. Since then there has been 2 more nuclear meltdown
accidents. On April 26, 1986, a nuclear meltdown occurred in Chernobyl (city in Ukraine). Over
4000 deaths were caused by the meltdown. Since these two meltdowns and another one in
Fukushima, Japan in 2011 that resulted in over 500 deaths, the security and safety of nuclear power
plants have improved. The plants are now monitored for reactor safety, radiation safety and security.
These precautions have been made, but there is still a chance another meltdown can

I Support Building A Nuclear Power Plant
Hypothetically, let's say a college student, named Steve, rented an apartment and had to pay the rent
but was low on money. What could he do? He was only in college working at a job that didn't pay
him much. Well, one day he reads the newspaper and sees that there is a nuclear power plant being
built where he lives. Steve is a very smart man and thinks that he can find a job there. He sends his
application and gets the job. Now, he makes enough money to pay his rent and still buy other
necessities. Although transporting radioactive material such as waste is dangerous, several methods
are used to assure it safe; therefore, we should allow a nuclear power plant to be built in Sparta. I
support building a nuclear power plant ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Transportation of radioactive material will not harm a person's health. First and foremost, the
companies in charge of the transportation of radioactive material have rules and regulations that are
followed to reduce health risks. The quality and adequacy of the transportation vehicle have to be
evaluated by NRC and DOT. The vehicle operator must have formal training. The waste
transporting companies are accorded a safety rating based on inspection results, accident results, and
the size and number of the vehicle. Another good reason is, certain routes are taken to lessen the
harm of the environment and it's people in case the radioactive material spills which would be very
dangerous, but it's an unlikely case. DOT's and NRC's rules state that the driver must take routes
that minimize radiological risk. The audit program uses information on accident rates, transit time,
and population density and activities are used to determine the level of radiological risk. The time of
day and day of the week is also utilized to determine the route that is to be taken. The interstate
system bypass or beltway around the city must be used when available. About 72 incidents have
occurred since 1949 to the present. To restate the previous statement, about 1 or 2 accidents happen
a year and that is a pretty good statistic considering that over 35,000 shipments were transported in
the last 35 years which is about 80

Nuclear Power Plants And Nuclear Energy
Nuclear power plants and nuclear energy is a very controversial and very argued about topic. People
on both sides have come to the table with very legit and convincing argument. Nuclear power plants
and nuclear power is one of or the best green energy sources for working to get of fossil fuel for the
following reasons. Nuclear power plants and nuclear power is one of the cheapest forms of green
energy, Nuclear power plants have the technology to burn most of the nuclear waste the plant
creates, Nuclear power plants are one of the most condense forms of fuel of all the power plants,
And nuclear power can be harnessed to do many other things Nuclear power plants are one of the
cheapest energy creators for how much energy the power plants ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Nuclear power is shut down by many people without them even knowing how it actually creates
energy. Nuclear power is pretty basic when it comes to power plants they use rods of uranium heat
them up by using nuclear fission (Two atoms create new atoms creating atoms and power). When
the rods get warmed up to a certain temperature the water surrounding the nuclear rods create steam
which turn a big turbine and create electricity without creating carbon emissions. The fact people
shut down nuclear power without even knowing how the energy can and is being created is one of
the problem that nuclear power is facing. It's not the people hating nuclear energy it's the people not
knowing what nuclear power is.
Nuclear energy can also do many things than just create energy. Nuclear energy creates heat and
when the heat is created it can create steam and water vapor so it can take saltwater boil it and create
power and clean water for different third world countries. Nuclear energy can also create many
different styles of job for the starving job market. The nuclear power industry is also due for a
update. Creating different nuclear and more advance power plants. That will lead to construction
jobs in high demand and many different types of

Nuclear Power Of A Nuclear Plant
A nuclear plant is a power station that generates electricity using nuclear energy by heat. Fukushima
Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant is a disable nuclear power plant in Japan. It was first committed in
1971. An accident happened on the 11th March 2011 and high radioactive releases within a week
has made huge damages and impact on the environment & the population. Only two events like this
have happened in the history. The other one was Chernobyl accident in April 1986.
Nuclear plants work the same way as plants that burn oil or gas, which then boils water to produce
steam that turns turbines and produce electricity. But the difference is that nuclear power plant do
not burn anything like others do, instead, they use uranium 235. All these processes will be
happening in a sealed environment, which in Japan was the Fukushima Daishi Nuclear Plant
Station.
All the disasters were started by an earthquake. The huge earthquakes then caused a 15–metre
tsunami disabled the power supply and cooling of three Fukushima Daiichi reactors. As the tsunami
wave keep on hitting all the pools, reactors and where the generating of heat takes place, all parts of
the station have had huge losses and damages. All 4 units had lost power at 3.42 pm, almost an hour
after the quake, when the entire site was flooded by the 15–metre tsunami. Eleven reactors at four
nuclear power plants in the region were operating at the time and all shut down automatically when
the quake hit. When the diesel generators

Imagine a world in which millions of people are wiped out within minutes due to men's desire to put
their materalistic desires before the well being of others: this is the dangerious path we'll be
undertaking if nuclear energy is used to fill the void left if coal and gas were not available. There
should be steps taken to make it unlawful to construct additional nuclear power plants in the United
States because these power plants are extremely dangerious to our environment and people; it's also
unclear how radiation exposure can effect people in the long–term; and there are other sources of
energy that are available, such as solar energy.
First, nuclear reactors have destroyed many lives. Though Quinson argues in support of building
more ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Though, only 20,000 people were killed during the Fukushim Daiichi nuclear reactor accident, there
is no garantee that many more people may not die from long term impact of radiation
exposure."And that's the problem with radiation–you often don't see most of the impact for
decades."
Why put thousands and even millions of lives at risk when there are other forms of energy available
such as solar energy? Even if solar energy can not replace coal and gas, this energy can fill the void
left by the absence of nuclear power, notes Patrick.
Moreover, though some may argue that radiation exposure in the US is mostly from natural sources
and not man–made, why add to this exposure by building more nuclear plants. For example, a graph
named, "Sources of Radiation Exposure in the United States" notes that about 82% of radiation
exposure is not from man–made sources like nuclear plants, but from natural sources like Radon.
Nevertheless, even with this being the case, we can not forget that just one incident with nuclear
reactors killed off thousands, so it would be senseless to use this data to build more nuclear bombs
(or nuclear power

The Destruction Of The Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant
The destruction of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in March 2011, caused by an
earthquake and subsequent tsunami, resulted in massive radioactive contamination of the Japanese
mainland. In November 2011, the Japanese Science Ministry reported that long–lived radioactive
cesium had contaminated 11,580 square miles of the land surface of Japan. Approximately 4,500
square miles – an area almost the size of Connecticut – was found to have radiation levels that
exceeded Japan's allowable exposure rate of 1 mSV (millisievert) per year. For perspective, 1 mSV
is equivalent to 100 milliRem, which is the standard unit of dose used here at the shipyard. In a
normal background radiation field, an individual is exposed to .02 milliRem/hr dose. Studies of the
disaster have identified design changes, response actions and other safety improvements that could
have reduced the amount of radioactivity released from the plant. As a result, nuclear plant safety
requirements around the world have been reexamined, including here in the United States. Figure 1
shows normal operation of a reactor along with the meltdown process to put in to perspective the
summary of Fukushima Daiichi disaster events. In Short it does something like this: The Tohoku
earthquake, March 11 2011, triggered a tsunami both of which caused damage to the 4 power plants
at Fukushima. The damage caused equipment failures and a loss–of coolant accident due to the in
ability to supply the reactors with cooling

Nuclear Power : The Pros And Cons Of Nuclear Plants
TMI has been providing electricity since 1979. The Exelon Corporation might shut down the plant.
There are many pros to nuclear power and many cons. I think we should keep the plant open. Here's
why, if we close the plant, employees will lose their jobs. Also, nuclear energy is clean energy. If we
close TMI down, then it would take years to build a new kind of energy source. You wouldn't like it
if you lost your job, would you? No, because that would be terrible. Think what would happen if
you lost your job. They wouldn't make money for a while, till you found another job. Finding
another job quickly might be hard. What if you are the only parent and you don't have a
husband/wife to make money for your family while you look for another job. In addition, if you
shutdown the plant, then there would still be waste still left behind. Who know what that would do
to our economy/environment. If you just let the waste sit there, it could eventually run off into the
water and kill organisms living there. Also, it could soak into the ground and kill organisms there
and demolish plants that are growing there or could possibly grow there. As you see, waste that just
sits there will just ruin things. So why not make the waste a little more environmentally friendly and
keep it stored in the perfectly fine power plant. 19.5% of electricity is nuclear. If you take that away
from people, they will not be happy. People use it because it is clean energy. When you take that
away, you are

Nuclear Power Plants and Nuclear Waste
The purpose of a nuclear power plant is to produce electricity for supporting increases in
consumption. Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation (ENEC) defines nuclear energy as "the energy
released by a nuclear reaction, especially by fission or fusion. In general terms, nuclear energy uses
fuel made from mined and processed uranium to make steam and generate electricity" (ENEC
2011). Nuclear power plant currently producing electricity in the U.S include the Pressurized Water
Reactor and the Boiling Water Reactor. To illustrate the importance of nuclear energy to the United
States, 20% of our nation's electricity production comes from the 104 commercially operating
reactors (Funk and Socacool 2012). However, security issues surrounding nuclear power lead to the
U.S nuclear regulatory agencies imposing strict regulations on the production of nuclear energy.
As a result, development and construction time of a nuclear power plant is a complex process.
Before an applicant can start building a nuclear power plant, it must receive approval from the U.S
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Previous regulations required that a nuclear power plant was
licensed under a two–step licensing process (NRC 2004). This former process required both a
construction permit and an operating license (NRC 2004). In 1989, the NRC established an
alternative licensing process which formed a joint license between the construction permit and an
operating license (NRC 2004). Following approval from the U.S NRC

Pros And Cons Of Building Nuclear Power Plants
I advise you not to build a nuclear power plant at the point in West fairview. If you were to build a
nuclear power plant there, we would have to remove people from their homes just to build the plant.
If we were going to take people from their homes it would kind of defeat the purpose of building a
nuclear power plant in that area. If everyone moves there is just going to be too much power,
because there will be no one to use the power.
Also we would need to be very careful if you were to build it, since it would be almost in the middle
of Pennsylvania. If there was an accident we would have to evacuate hundreds of thousands of
people. Just take Chernobyl and Fukuyama nuclear power plants, for example, they both melted
down and the surrounding

Advantages And Disadvantages Of Nuclear Power Plant
INTRODUCTION :
Nuclear Power maybe is the best choice to aid electricity generating in Malaysia as it is low in cost,
long lasting power source.
Malaysia established Nuclear Agency and been actively involved in the periodic of reviewing the
option to apply nuclear energy, however, currently there is no further plan to embark on nuclear
power programme.
Technically, it is impossible to build a nuclear plant with 100% safety security. A minimum failure
will always occur and it can due to devastating and catastrophic for human and nature. (spinka)
Most of the countries in the world begin to realize the importance of technology which is more
environmentally friendly and willing to invest millions of dollars in developing hybrid power ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Placement problem as planting the nuclear energy needs a lot of water supplement to activate and
generate, need to be far from civilization area, not suitable for Malaysia.
–
–
–
4. Nuclear energy is cost effective but it is too RISKY (refer to Fukushima, Chernobyl Nuclear
Power Plant in Ukraine and northern France's accidents).
–Malaysia is considering to built nuclear power plant to support the growing needs of energy in
congested areas but the idea halted after what has unfolded in Japan when Fukushima Power Plant
had a nuclear meltdown.
–Naoto Kan, Japan's Prime Minister when Fukushima struck, had this to say: "Prior to Fukushima, I
believed that such a severe accident would not happen in Japan, I continued nuclear power under
this belief. When Fukushima hit, I clearly knew that my beliefs until then had been completely
wrong." (Malaymail)
–
5. No solution to radioactive waste
France, Russia and UK conduct reprocessing nuclear waste but it will create more hazardous waste.
Nuclear reprocessing plants discharge a large volume of until can cause hazardous radioactive waste
and give serious environmental

The Lifetime Of A Nuclear Power Plant Essay
The lifetime of a nuclear power plant is planned to be 40 years. Recently there are trails to raise this
life in new constructions as well as the old ones to 60 years (1–4). During this prolonged lifetime
components are exposed to degradation that may affect safe operation of the plant. Such influences
affect pressure retaining items of the plant including reactor pressure vessel, reactor piping, bolting
and threaded fasteners, steam generator materials and several other items (5). The Reactor Pressure
Vessel (RPV) is the most critical component in the LWR pressure boundary. It is the only
component in this boundary whose failure is considered to be of such low probability that it is
considered essentially incredible. NRC regulations require that RPV steels maintain conservative
margin for fracture toughness so that flaws do not threaten the integrity of a RPV during either
normal operation and maintenance cycles or under accident transients such as Pressurized Thermal
Shock (PTS) (6). The major technical issues regarding aging of RPV include: high fluences, for long
times that may lead to high emrittlement creating large uncertainties for emrittlement predictions
(7). Increasing nickel content in the RPV steel, all other factors being equal, causes increasing
emrittlement (7). The degradation mechanisms that may affect RPV include Irradiation
embrittlement, Thermal ageing, Temper embrittlement, Fatigue and Corrosion (8). Concerning
nuclear piping the main degradation

Should Nuclear Power Plants Be Banned
Should nuclear power plants be banned?
Nuclear power plants have been around for many years. The first nuclear power plant was built in
1954. The controversy over them is whether they are harmful or beneficial to the environment and
to humans. We as humans tend use a lot of energy. Nuclear power plants are so called a "strong
candidate" for supplying our energy. There are many harmful remarks on nuclear power plants, and
today I am here to talk about why they should be potentially reduced if not banned. For starters it
can lead to cancer for children young of age, it can be used a weapon for destroying or targeting our
country, and how expensive they are related to other fuel factors. For instance, nuclear power plants
are shown to have an effect on kids with cancer. According to Ten Strikes Against Nuclear Power,
"There are growing concerns that living near even accident–free nuclear plants increases the risk for
childhood leukemia and other cancers. One Texas study found increased cancer rates in north central
Texas since a nuclear power plant was established in 1990, and a recent German study found
childhood leukemia clusters near several nuclear power sites in Europe" (source 2). These power
plants are causing innocent kids to get cancer and leukemia which plays a huge role in a child's life
who suffers from one. Even though it is accident free it can still lead to other types of accidents. In
many cases nuclear power plants can be used as a weapon for many things involving nuclear.
According to Ten Strikes Against Nuclear Power, "Nuclear reactors represent a clear national
security risk, and an attractive target for terrorists" (source 2). Nuclear missiles, bombs, and other
sorts of weapons can be used to destroy or target our country. Robert Kennedy had found out that
"there are at least eight relatively easy ways to cause a major meltdown at a nuclear power plant"
(source 2). Most nuclear power plants are used as a target and advantage for war on other countries,
including ours. In addition to the reasons why nuclear power plants are harmful is the fact that they
cost so much money to build. According to What is Nuclear? "Nuclear reactors are generally large
and complex, with lots of reinforced

Nuclear Power Plants and Safety
Nuclear Power Plants and Safety
Since the humans use energy sources such as wood, coal, and oil to produce electricity, people want
to use better energy sources to produce electricity more. By the mid twentieth century, scientists
found the method of making incredible energy by using uranium as nuclear fission. Today there are
about 400 nuclear power plants around the world and more than 100 nuclear power plants in United
States (Howstuffworks). In addition, nuclear reactors produced a lot of energy and they affected
quality life styles by using nuclear energy (Howstuffworks). Nuclear power plants are providing
about 17 percent of electricity of the world and several countries generate electricity about more
than 50% of their using ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This energy was compared with hundreds of pounds of TNT and this explosion blew the top of the
reactor away (Lewis 25). Immeasurable amounts of radioactive were released into the atmosphere
and it spread through Eastern Europe (Lewis 25). The Chernobyl nuclear power plant was very
poorly designed and its reactor operated in improper way (Howstuffworks). This is kind of
technological disaster that several things went wrong such as "systems fail, humans err, designs
prove faulty, and engines misfire" (Erikson 2). As a result of this accident, 31 people died from
radiation, 200 people had hospitalized and 135,000 people were evacuated from 30 kilometers of
Chernobyl nuclear power plant (Lewis 26). Soviet Union science researchers estimated that of the
people who lived around Chernobyl nuclear power plants in the next 70 years from the accident,
only 14,000 people would die naturally and hundreds of people would die as cancer from nuclear
radiation (Lewis 27). However, another estimate stated that 15 million people out of 100 million
people would as cancer by affecting the radiation (Lewis 27). This accident also affected national
energy policies, agricultural communities of the Soviet Union (Lofastedt 2). Agricultural products
were infected with radioactive and it also gave bad affect to people who eat those products (Erikson
3). This toxic radiation

Pros And Cons Of Nuclear Power Plant
The way a nuclear power plant produces energy is by a process called nuclear fission which is
splitting the nucleus of an atom. Fission turns water into steam and the steam makes pressure. Then
the steam that is made turns a turbine that is connected to a generator and the turning of the turbine
forces the generator to produce electricity ("Nuclear Fission"). The energy source for a nuclear
power plant is Uranium and it is a very rare resource. Once it's gone then it's gone forever and when
that happens then we cannot produce anymore nuclear energy. Depending on the demand of
Uranium, it is estimated that this element will only last another thirty to sixty years. I am not for
nuclear energy because I think that the cons out weigh the pros.
There are tons of issues with nuclear energy. Some bad stuff that happens are the high cost to build a
nuclear power plant, it's not a renewable source of energy, the nuclear waste it produces, and nuclear
accidents. The question to ask is do the pros outweigh the cons? France is concerned about all those
problems so they are looking to close up to seventeen nuclear power plants by 2025. They want a
renewable energy source but if they do this then they run into a problem which is seventy–five
percent of their electricity comes from nuclear energy which is the highest percentage in the world.
Frances plants are also getting old. The average life span of a plant is built to last only forty years.
Fifteen out of fifty–eight of them are over

The Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Essay

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Brenda Potter

More from Brenda Potter (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Essay