• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

nuclear power

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Should nuclear power be used?

Nuclear power stations use uranium -235 to create heat which is used to heat up water, the steam from the water is used to turn a turbine which powers a generator which creates electricity. Susie believes nuclear power is clean energy with very little effect on the environment. However Alan believes nuclear power is dangerous because it is unsafe and could damage the environment and be dangerous to humans.

What Susie has said is true; nuclear power is clean energy because it does not release any pollutants or toxic gases. This is because the energy created in a nuclear power station is done by using the power of the atom to create heat energy. Although it doesn’t release pollutants in the air it releases radiation. This however does not get release outside of the container which is lined with lead to stop any radiation escaping. This allows the area surrounding the nuclear power station to be safe. The area can be contaminated if the protective dome of the container becomes damaged or cracked. This would allow radiation from the station to escape. This is but a small issue as all nuclear power stations are fully maintained to prevent any harm to the environment. There is a vast amount of uranium so uranium -235 would be a fuel that could be used for years to come.

...read more.

Middle

When the protective barrier which stops the radiation from escaping becomes damaged through lack of maintenance the nuclear core could explode. This could result in tons of nuclear waste being released into the environment. This would severely affect the humans, animals and plants in the area causing their DNA to be altered and damaged. This could result in the children born to these people to have mutations because their DNA is not normal.

A famous example of a nuclear core exploding is the nuclear power station is Chernobyl Ukraine. The area around the power station was hugely contaminated with radiation. The radiation also formed clouds which caused the water molecules in the clouds to become radioactive causing the rain to be radioactive. When the clouds formed some were blown over other parts of Europe causing other countries to have radioactive rain falling on them.

Fuel

Immediate fatalities
1970-92

Coal

6400

Natural gas

1200

Hydro

4000

Nuclear

31

This table shows that the immediate deaths from nuclear fuel were far fewer than coal, natural gas and hydro electric fuels. The immediate fatalities of nuclear are nearly 38x less than natural gas. This however cannot is not sufficient to allow nuclear power stations to be built because it may take people many years to die from radiation poisoning.

...read more.

Conclusion

The most important aspect of any power station is whether it is safe to the general public and also the surrounding area and ecosystem. Most of the nuclear power stations that had nuclear meltdowns did not have many immediate deaths, but deaths in the following years. Some deaths in the surrounding areas today may have been caused by the nuclear meltdowns.

After taking both points of view into contention I find I agree more strongly with Susie. This is because nuclear fuel ultimately will someday have to replace fossil fuels as they are running out. Another reason is 75% of French power is from nuclear energy and there have been no disasters in France due to nuclear energy. France now has significantly reduced their co2 emissions into the atmosphere as they burn much less fossil fuels for electricity. There is still the risk that the nuclear core of a nuclear power station could explode causing the area to become contaminated. This is a risk countries may have to take  if they want to reduce the levels of co2 they produce.

...read more.

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Radioactivity section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Radioactivity essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Is nuclear power the future? Should we build more nuclear power stations in ...

    4 star(s)

    Nuclear power is also cost effective. Constructing nuclear power plants has very high capital costs but low operating costs and even lower fuel costs. This means that once a plant is up and running, the costs are very low. The table on the right is from a Royal Academy of Engineering report [6] in 2004 showing the operating costs of different energy sources.

  2. Mutagenesis: The Effect of Radiation on Radish Seeds.

    Additionally, p values calculated using the Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test were 0.96 for control versus 50,000 rads, 0.022 for control versus 150,000 rads, 0.008 for control versus 500,000 rads (Table 5).

  1. Should we build more nuclear power stations?

    I got the information needed to make this graph from the OCR handout so it is reliable and should not be biased. Conclusion In conclusion to the question, should we build more nuclear power stations, I think that there are many positive aspects of using nuclear power.

  2. Should we use Nuclear power in the UK

    however the cost of building a nuclear power station is very expensive also the cost for all the safety measures are just as bad if we look back at the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster Chernobyl disaster where the nuclear reactor accident happened resulted in a severe release of radioactivity into the environment following a massive power excursion which destroyed the reactor.

  1. Should we use Nuclear power in the UK

    Every town needs energy to power their microwave or gas to heat their house imagine this on a city scale, then on a country scale, and finally on a worldwide scale.

  2. Should radioactive smoke alarms be a compulsory purchase?

    The fall in non-fatal causalities where a fire alarm was absent might partly be explained by the decline in the number of fires generally over this period. Perhaps the increasing use of flame retardant materials in furnishings has also contributed to this figure.

  1. Radiation: are mobile phones unsafe? Mobiles use electromagnetic radiation in order to send and ...

    The study included information on over 2,500 people. They found no link between the amount of mobile phone use, length of time since first use, lifetime years of use or number of calls made." If there were only a few studies proving a link to cancer, this would not be very reliable.

  2. P2 Assessed Home-Learning Are Mobile Phones Harmful?

    There have been various studies conducted to further probe the outstanding issue of the effect of radiation on children. This image shows how radiation penetrates and is absorbed by the brain through different aged users. Younger children have a considerably greater absorption rate than adults, increasing the risk of cancerous tumours developing.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work