Jump to content
Urch Forums

Nuclear power not a long term solution (Kaplan)


Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

Can you please review my following essay on the issue : "The drawbacks to the use of nuclear power mean that it is not a long term solution to the problem of meeting ever-increasing energy needs." Thanks :)

 

Nuclear power is a dream that failed.Incidents like Chernobyl and the recent one in Japan has clearly showed the devastation that nuclear energy is capable of. After the second world war, the world entered the cold war era, new weapons were invented to intimidate each other and to show who is the supreme. During this mad race, nuclear energy was used to create various types of nuclear bombs but at the same time ,nuclear energy also became a promising dream for the future. A furture that is filled with accidents, deaths, cities lost to future genration and gene mutations in generations to come.

 

Relying on nuclear power for a long term is too dangerous. Nuclear power plant require sophisticated technology thats both dangerous and costly. As is evident from the accidents caused by nuclear power plants,countries in the race to create more and more energy circumvents a few of the safety policies to meet the energy need for its people who are the main victims of such incidents.

 

Besides, the waste produced from such power plants have started to become an international problem. The nuclear waste contains lead and other poisonous elements which consumed in even slightest of the amounts can cause death or worse cause gene mutations which in turn leads to never seen hereditary issues.

 

There are many safer alternatives to nuclear energy like solar energy and wind energy which are fast replacing the nuclear power plant as the leading source of renewable energy. Such alternatives are not only 'Green' but also lot safer. As the technology is advancing, the solar and wind energy is getting more efficient and cheaper.

 

The nuclear technology is not safe to be mass produced in a power plant. We must discover or invent new safer, non polluting and cheaper source of energy.

 

Over and over again we seem to overestimate our capabilities and continue to avoid the mistakes done in the past.We with our stubborness continue to explore the sub-atomic world to harness more and more energy. Even after the accidents of Chernobyl, people continue to set up nuclear plants to produce energy. The recent tsunami which lead to the nuclear plant crisis in Japan shows that we didnt learn anything. Though Japan was able to avoid eterminating itself, it clearly proved to the rest of the world that nuclear energy is not the beautiful dream we dreamt once but a nightmare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
can any body enlighten me to compare the cost benefit(in simple language,ofcourse) between the expenditure of 3 billion US dollars for Nuclear plant and Solar energy(solar panel because the project is in tropics). Thank you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...