Nuclear power plants
This is an excerpt from the paper...
Nuclear power plants, or using nuclear power to generate electricity, are a controversial topic in contemporary society. Proponents of nuclear power believe that the amount of inexpensive energy derived from nuclear power plants far outweighs the danger, while critics of the industry often point to the extraordinary dangers that could occur if an accident happened. For instance, imagine that a nuclear power plant is located on a natural geologic fault. The fault produces a powerful earthquake of a higher magnitude than the designers of the plant ever envisioned. During the earthquake, the reactor core is cracked, and poisonous radioactive particles are released into the air forming a dangerous cloud. As the prevailing winds push that cloud over a larger area, it drops poisonous debris over the land, killing and changing the ecological balance of the area. This story, antagonists of nuclear power say, is not that difficult to imagine. The Diablo Canyon plant, built and operated by Pacific Gas and Electric on the California coast and just twelve miles distant from San Luis Obispo, is, in fact, located near a dangerous fault ("A Nuclear," 1976, p. 74). In the 1980s however, nuclear power has become an even greater political issue that has been thrust into national prominence. Indeed, the dangers of nuclear power have taken on an international format, especially after the recent Chernobyl disaster in the Soviet Union. That disaster, say many scientists and policy make
. . .
hibitive. In the same light, if nuclear power plants can contribute to environmental efficiency, by preventing the loss of nonrenewable natural resources, then the scale is tipped toward the use of nuclear power as a viable option. As a power source then, some still see that safety measures can be effectively enforced and nuclear power plants can be made to function for a ever "energy needy" population, albeit, not without expense and precaution (Bennet, 1989, pp. 14-26).
But, where does the safety factor fit in? Proponents of nuclear power believe that the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission), a remake of the older Atomic Energy Commission, is both powerful and sufficiently educated to establish safe and effective controls on the industry. For example, the health and safety effects of a coal generating plant can be severe. Even a small plant operating normally has the potential to damage from 10 to 200 people per year without an accident. Yet, nuclear plants, properly regulated, produce far less of a threat to society as a whole (Wood, 1983, pp. 51-54). In contrast:
For those who see nuclear power not just as an energy source, but as a symbol of disturbing trends in society, no amount of nuclear safety is enough, and
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Energy Commission, Kaku Trainer, Federal Agency, , Neck Connecticut, Soviet Union, nuclear power, Luis Obispo, Glasstone Jordan, Dell Field, Yale Review, nuclear power plants, power plants, benefits nuclear power, kaku trainer, nuclear plants, nuclear safety, energy source, benefits nuclear, wood 1983, kaku trainer 1982, trainer 1982, glasstone jordan 1980, 1977 nuclear, nuclear power energy,
Approximate Word count = 1958
Approximate Pages = 8 (250 words per page)
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
