PROS AND CONS ON CONS OF NUCLEAR ENERGY 1
Nuclear energy is considered as the most efficient form of power.Some countries have put up nuclear facilities to produce energy forvarious uses. The form of energy is rather controversial due to itsbenefits and detrimental effects. As the chief-of-staff to thecongresswoman, the following pros and cons from internet research canadvise her on how to respond to the offer of putting up a facility inour state.
Argument / Fact in Favor of Nuclear Power | Source Supporting This Argument The information of the pros and cons of nuclear power are available from the Energy Informative website. The source contains reliable information on energy systems. The company educates consumers around the world on the most efficient methods and forms of energy and how to deal with waste emanating from energy production activities. As a result, it is an indispensable source of information. |
Nuclear energy produces minimal greenhouse gasses as opposed to other forms of power. It supports the efforts of reducing air pollution. Also, the production of nuclear energy has minimal negative impacts on land and water unless when transportation is necessary. | |
The production cost of nuclear energy is also low. The raw material, uranium, is cheap. Although the cost of putting up a nuclear power plant is high, the expenditure incurred in the production and maintenance of the facility is low. A power plant can last for about 60 years. Therefore, there is value in the capital invested. | |
Nuclear power is more reliable than the conventional sources of energy. For example, hydroelectric and solar power facilities are dependent on the weather. A nuclear reactor has the capacity of running continuously with minimal interruptions. | |
Argument / Fact in Opposition to Nuclear Power | |
The mining, transportation, and disposal of uranium pose a danger to the environment. During mining, the environment suffers degradation since uranium is non-renewable (Mehlum, 2013). The waste material is also radioactive and it is not fit for landfills (Mehlum, 2013). The state should consider the shortcomings before embracing the idea of putting up a nuclear reactor. Nonetheless, according to Mehlum (2013), a well-outlined disposal procedure can shield the community from radioactive elements. | |
In case of accidents in the nuclear plant, the effects can resonate to the surrounding community. For example, hydropower plants, the effects of an accident only result in minimal inconveniences to power supply. Nevertheless, any miscalculated occurrence in a nuclear plant affects its entire surroundings (Mehlum, 2013). The radioactive material can spread over a wide area (Mehlum, 2013). A prime example is the Fukushima incident in Japan whose effects are still pertinent. | |
Finally, nuclear power plants are soft targets for terrorists. Parties wishing to carry out a terror attack always target a facility that can have the greatest impact on a community (Mehlum, 2013).Therefore, putting up a facility poses a danger to the state. However, with effective security measures, any breach of safety can be addressed. |
In conclusion, the congressional representative can make an informeddecision on the viability of putting up anuclear facility in the state drawing from the research. Nuclearenergy is considered as the future form of energy for its efficiencyand low cost of production. The cons are not absolute. Consequently,it is possible to counter them throughefficient structures and preclusive mechanisms.
References
Mehlum, M. (2013). Nuclear energy pros and cons. EnergyInformative. Retrieved fromhttp://energyinformative.org/nuclear-energy-pros-and-cons/