Kim 1

Sanghun Kim
Mr. Davis
Government 1
1 November 2015
Nuclear Power
On April 26, 1986, there was an enormous explosion at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power
Plant in Ukraine. Many workers as well as civilians are known to have died from exposure to
excessive radiation. This incident should have alerted us that nuclear power plants are a
dangerous and risky way to generate electricity, but there are still many nuclear power plants
operating around the world. The United States is no exception. On March 28, 1979, there was
a nuclear meltdown in one of the Three Mile Island nuclear reactors. Despite this accident, all
99 nuclear reactors at 61 nuclear power plants in the United States are still operating (How
Many Nuclear). Many people believe that nuclear power is an ideal energy that is sustainable
and environmental. However, this is not true. Nuclear Regulation Act that would eliminate all
nuclear power in the country should become a law because nuclear threatens safety of
citizens, creates nuclear waste, and harms the environment.
Exposure to nuclear radiation can have a critical impact on human. There have been
many nuclear accidents that demonstrate nuclear power is dangerous. The Chernobyl disaster
is a very good example that shows how dangerous nuclear radiation is to human health.
According to NRC [Radiation] killed 28 of the site's 600 workers in the first four months
after the event. Another 106 workers received high enough doses to cause acute radiation
sickness (Backgrounder on Chernobyl). Approximately 134 plant workers and firefighters
battling the fire at the Chernobyl power plant received high radiation dosesand suffered
acute radiation sickness. Of those 134, 28 died from the radiation injuries that they sustained
(High Radiation Doses). According to the Chernobyl Union, a citizens group in Ukraine,

Kim 2
between 1986 and 1994, 5,000 people had died and 30,000 people had become disabled as a
result of the explosion (Daley 15). All of those examples show that human health is
significantly affected by nuclear radiation. On the other hand, wildlife can also be negatively
affected by radiation. After the Chernobyl incident, animals that had originally inhabited
around the city all vanished due to excessive nuclear radiation. During recent visits to
Chernobyl, we experienced numerous sightings of moose (Alces alces), roe deer (Capreol
capreolus) within the 10-km zone. We observed none of those taxa (The Chernobyl
Nuclear). Animals in the 10-km zone could not survive the excessive amount of radiation.
According to a research, in the Exclusion Zone [30-km zone] 90% of the trees died by
1997 (Goldenstein). Another recent nuclear accident at Fukushima, Japan revealed that
radiation affects bird species. According to the study by University of South California
biologist, Tim Mousseau, and his colleagues, the population of 57 different bird species that
had inhabited around Fukushima nuclear power plant declined (Powell). The previous nuclear
accidents showed how dangerous nuclear radiation is to humans as well as wildlife. The
threat of nuclear power plants is still around us.
Nuclear power plants keep producing great amount of nuclear waste that is highly
radioactive and should be safely stored. Since the nuclear waste is very toxic, it should be
isolated from the public from tens of years to millions of years. Some of the most
concerning byproducts from spent fuel are Plutonium-239 (half-life 24,000 years),
Technetium-99 (half-life 220,000 years), and Iodine-129 (half-life 15.7 million years)
(Madres). Since it takes so long for those byproducts to lose radioactivity, they should be
permanently stored in a safe place. However, it is very hard to find a permanently safe place.
Radioactivity of some waste does not last very long, but it should still be stored safely
because of its toxicity. Every year, one-third of the now-intensely radioactive fuel rods must

Kim 3
be removed from the reactor, because they are so contaminatedand must therefore be
stored for thirty to sixty years in a heavily shielded building (Caldicott 15). Once storage
system fails, the rods will release their radioactive inventory. There are five types of specific
containers available to transport wasteswhich are labeled V1 to V5Transport of the
radioactive waste in containers V2 and V4 is estimated to use per tonapproximately 20
petajoules [or 2x1016 joules] (Caldicott 14). Nuclear wastes are highly radioactive, so they
should be stored in a safe place. Once storage of those nuclear wastes fails, gargantuan
amount of radiation will be released into the atmosphere. Because it is very hard to find a
permanent location to store wastes, some of the wastes are being released into the
environment.
Nuclear power plants adversely affect the environment in various ways. During the
enrichment of uranium 235 isotope, uranium 238, or depleted uranium, which is still toxic is
produced. Then, depleted uranium is discarded and stored in barrels. However, Depleted
uranium is lying around in thousands of leaking, disintegrating barrels at the enrichment
facilities in Paducah, Kentucky; Oak Ridge, Tennessee; and Portsmouth, OhioDU has
contaminated the ground water, forcing the government to provide alternative drinking water
for the local residents (Caldicott 51). Because of inadequate storage, soil has been
contaminated with radiation. Contamination of drinking water had threatened health of local
citizens until the government found out that the barrels had been leaking. Since nuclear
power plants produce much heat, heat should be released. Some plants have cooling towers
for heat, but other plants use a large body of water, such as an artificial lake or a natural
body of water such as a lake or a river (Jaffer). Heat released into the aquatic ecosystem has
very detrimental impacts on the organisms in the ecosystem. Moreover, One particular
research done showed an average rise in sea level of about 3mm/yr of the Northeast coast of

Kim 4
U.S (Jaffer). Rising sea level contaminates drinking water and can damage aquatic
ecosystems, such as coral reefs and mangrove forests. Despite these negative impacts nuclear
power plants have, some people believe that nuclear power plants are beneficial.
The reason why so many people support nuclear power plants is that they are
economic, environmental, and long-lasting. They argue that nuclear power plants cost less
than other power plants and that nuclear power plants do not emit any greenhouse gases.
However, this notion is completely misguided. The nuclear industry says that nuclear power
costs only 1.7 cents per kWh, while coal power costs 2 cents, and gas-fired power costs 5.7
cents (Caldicott 19). However, the author of the book argues that they represent a classic
omission of capital costs from a pricing equationAn article in the New Scientist contradicts
the nuclear industry assessment, concluding that once realisticcosts are considered, the
price of nuclear electricity risesto 8.3 pence (about 14 cents) (Caldicott 19-20). When the
construction and operating costs are included, nuclear power plants cost much more than
other power plants do. Many people also argue that nuclear power plants do not release any
greenhouse gases and thus are environmental. It is true that a nuclear power plant itself does
not release any carbon dioxide. However, most of the energy used to create nuclear energy
to mine uranium ore for fuel, to crush and mill the ore, to enrich the uraniumcomes
from the consumption of fossil fuels (Caldicott 4). When fossil fuels are burned, they
produce carbon dioxide, which is a greenhouse gas. This shows that nuclear power plants do
release greenhouse gases and affect the global warming. Some people believe that nuclear
power plants are long-lasting; they have many resources to use unlike coal power. However,
this is not true. The high-grade uranium ores are limited; The high-grade uranium ores are
finiteglobal high-grade reserves amount to 3.5 million tons. Given that the current use of
uranium is about 67,000 tons per year, these reserves would supply fifty more years of

Kim 5
nuclear power (Caldicott 8). Once high-grade uranium runs out, we should use low-grade
uranium. However, the greater energy is used to extract low-grade uranium than high-grade
uranium. Then, there is a point at which the concentration of uranium becomes so low that
the energy required to extract and to refine a dilute uranium ore concentration from the
ground is greater than the amount of electricity generated by the nuclear reactor (Caldicott
7). This demonstrates that nuclear power is not a long-lasting method to produce electricity.
Therefore, nuclear power plants are not economic, environmental, or enduring.
Nuclear power plants should be eliminated in the U.S. because they can undermine
human health, produce nuclear wastes, and damage the environment. The largest problem
with nuclear power plants is that people do not know much about the hidden negative aspects
of nuclear power plants. This leads to peoples believing in the fallacious propagandas of
nuclear industry. With the correct knowledge about nuclear power, we can decide which
energy we should use.

References

Kim 6
Webs

"How Many Nuclear Power Plants Are in the United States, and Where Are They
Located?" U.S. Energy Information Administration. N.p., 22 Jan. 2015. Web. 24 Oct.
2015. <http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=207&t=3>.

"Backgrounder on Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant Accident." NRC:. N.p., May 203.
Web. 17 Sept. 2015. <http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/factsheets/chernobyl-bg.html>.

"High Radiation Doses." NRC:. N.p., 17 Oct. 2014. Web. 17 Oct. 2015.
<http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/health-effects/high-rad-doses.html>.

"The Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster and Subsequent Creation of the Wildlife

Preserve." The Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster and Subsequent Creation of the Wildlife
Preserve. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Sept. 2015.
<http://www.nsrl.ttu.edu/chornobyl/wildlifepreserve.htm>.

Goldenstein, Chirs. "Ecological Consequences of the Chernobyl Disaster."Ecological

Consequences of the Chernobyl Disaster. N.p., 21 Mar. 2012. Web. 17 Sept. 2015.
<http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2012/ph241/goldenstein2/>.

Powell, Steven. "Dwindling Bird Population in Fukushima." Dwindling Bird

Populations in Fukushima. N.p., 14 Apr. 2015. Web. 17 Oct. 2015.
<http://www.sc.edu/uofsc/stories/2015/04_tim_mousseau_fukushima_birds.php#.ViL
k7n4veUk>.

Madres, Brett. "Storage and 'Disposal' of Nuclear Waste." Storage and 'Disposal' of
Nuclear Waste. N.p., 18 Mar. 2011. Web. 18 Sept. 2015.

Kim 7
<http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2011/ph241/madres1/>.

Jaffer, Misam. "Impact of Nuclear Power Plants." Impact of Nuclear Power Plants.
N.p., 26 Mar. 2011. Web. 17 Sept. 2015.
<http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2011/ph241/jaffer2/>.

Books
-

Caldicott, Helen. Nuclear Power Is Not the Answer. New York: New, 2006. Print.

Daley, Michael J. Nuclear Power: Promise or Peril? Minneapolis: Lerner

Publications, 1997. Print.