Nuclear Energy Thesis

Thesis: Nuclear power plants do provide a lot of energy for consumers and it doesn’t harm the environment with its emissions but nuclear waste is too big of a problem to ignore. Nuclear power should not be considered as a dominant alternative energy source until the problems with nuclear waste are solved. Some of the processes that are used to deal with nuclear waste are dangerous and can lead to harmful leaks and exposure to the environment.

A.
1. Introduction and address issues that are involved with nuclear energy and its waste.
2. Maybe ask the reader a few questions to get them to think about the problem.

B.
1. Explain how the processes of nuclear waste are a rising problem
2. Where does nuclear waste go and what is it?

C.
1. The economic issues of nuclear energy
2. Statistics of the start up costs and the cost of decommissioning a nuclear power plant

D.
1. Address the problems again and conclude the paper


Buleen, Chad. Average Salary of a Nuclear Engineer . 2010 18-February .
Climate Progress. Nuclear Bombshell. 2009 15-July. 2010 18-February .
Nuclear Energy Information Service. Some Important Facts About Nuclear Power ... . 1997 April. 2010 18-February .
Nuclear Energy Institute . Nuclear Power Plant Fuel. 2010 18-February .
Rust, John. On the Optimal Lifetime of Nuclear Power Plants. 2010 31-January. 2010 18-February .
United States Department of Labor. Power Plant Operators, Distributors, and Dispatchers . 2009 17-December. 2010 18-February .

Food, Inc Post III

I thought Chapter 10 was important. I liked how the issue of the food industry was discussed and talked about in the previous chapters and then this chapter hit you with the take action step. It addressed the things you could do. An example was buying locally from a farmers market or an actual farmers house. It also talked about building a garden and how that can help you as well as your neighbors and community. It made suggestions on what to do to make the food industry better and healthier. It recommended buying fruits and veggies that were in season rather than out so that way it was cutting the cost of food having to travel across long distances. All of these suggestions made since and none of them seemed unreasonable.

Position Argument/Food Inc.Post 2

I never thought that the corn business could have such a negative impact on the world. The impact it has on global warming is phenomenal. The corn business effects the world in a much bigger way than I ever would suspect. The corn that is taking up space and being used for profit rather than feeding the hungry. The government also had a big part in the corn business. I also liked how the book explained ways to deplete pollution and greenhouse gases by not supporting or buying the food that comes from another country or state. The book suggests to buy from local farmers and to even build a garden. Building a garden does more than just create crops to eat. It keeps you outside and not using electricity inside, and allows you to give away some of your produce to neighbors. This can have a great impact on the environment.

I like the fact that nuclear energy doesn't emit greenhouse gases and prevents toxic gases to be released into the atmosphere but the danger that is involved with nuclear energy and the fact there are no ways to detoxify the nuclear rods after they have been used in an efficient an safe way bothers me. So besides some of the good things that come about with nuclear energy I think that the negative impacts are just as bad if not worse as regular coal power plants. Unless scientists and researchers find a way to safely get rid of nuclear waste without burying it in the ground or just taking up space for thousands of years, I will not support nuclear energy. I don't think that it should be discarded and forgotten about, but it also shouldn't be accelerated and expanded. Research should still continue but building more nuclear power plants should not happen until the nuclear waste problem is fixed in a more efficient manner.

Food, Inc Post I

I found it interesting that the film showed through text that just about every business except the Danon yogurt company denied interviews and showing of certain battery cages. This was alarming to me because if the company doesn’t want the public to see it, then it is something that shouldn’t be occurring. My guess is that businesses felt if they showed it to the public (consumers), they wouldn’t want to support that and quit buying food from them. Tyson, which is a leading brand in meat and chicken, denied access and interviews to Food, Inc, I think because they have something to hide. Maybe they are trying to hide something from the USDA because Tyson knows they are breaking rules. This would hurt the company’s profits. Another fact that I learned was the antibiotics and fast growing chemicals used for the growth of chickens. The Food, Inc showed how chickens are forced to grow too big and cant take more than a step or two without falling to the grown. I am not a person really concerned with treating animals like humans but force feeding and force growing a life form to me is unethical, even if it means more profit. I don’t like the fact that I will be eating that chicken that has been enhanced unnaturally and fed harmful chemicals that can affect me. I think the book and the movie work perfectly together to reiterate the point that something needs to be done. The book describes animal cruelty that made me realize that something needs to be done by America. I don’t like reading at all but I find myself interested in this book. I think part of the reason too, is the fact that there is a movie that goes along with the book. That helps me visualize and engage my brain into the subject at hand. The book helps with enforcing the facts and the things that people can do about this problem. The movie makes it interesting and provides visuals to the problem making it more real to the viewer. Anyone can make a movie and anyone can write a book. But to write a book and movie that seamlessly connects all the dots is something that needs to be paid attention too. I also loved what the farmer in the movie Food, Inc said about big businesses and natural farming. I agreed with all of his statements about the need for letting animals naturally do what they do. Another fact that I never thought about was E coli and how it has occurred throughout food. The feeding of cattle with corn is the cause for it. This should be able to be prevented, and companies are interrupting the natural process. Cattle should eat grass not be fed corn that can cause E coli in the meat.

Bibliography

Bibliography
"The Challenges of Nuclear Power." Nuclear Info. Ed. Andrew Martin. The Writing Centre. Web. 29 Jan. 2010. .
"Nuclear Power in the USA." World Nuclear Association | Nuclear Power - a Sustainable Energy Resource. Ed. Andrew Martin. The Writing Centre. Web. 31 Jan. 2010. .
"UNSCEAR assessments of the Chernobyl accident." United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR). UNSCEAR, 19 July 2009. Web. 31 Jan. 2010.

Intro Nuclear Energy

Nuclear Energy is the process of splitting uranium atoms called fission. Fission creates heat that is used to produce steam. The steam turns a turbine to generate and create energy. There are positive and negative effects of nuclear energy. The positive aspects of nuclear energy are an emissions free energy source, its discharge is not harmful to the environment, and it generates high amounts of electricity with just one nuclear power point. The negative effects of nuclear energy are radioactive waste is created, radiation poisoning if a meltdown or accident occurs, potential terrorist targets, the use of uranium because it is a scarce and limited resource, and it can take a long time to build a nuclear power plant. These issues need to be considered and researched. Nuclear power plants help the environment by not emitting green house gases, however the nuclear power plants can be devastating if they are not carefully watched and monitored.
The United States of America currently has 104 nuclear power reactors in 31 different states. Nuclear energy makes up 20% of the electricity used in the United States. Nuclear energy is efficient and used in the U.S. however a nuclear power plant has not been built in the U.S. since 1977.
Although nuclear energy may not emit carbon dioxide into the Earth’s atmosphere there is a concern with the nuclear waste. Nuclear waste is highly radioactive and needs to be contained safely, usually deep under ground for at least 100,000 years.
Something to consider with nuclear power plants and the things that can go wrong are the incidents at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl.
The Three Mile Island incident happened in the United States in Harrisburg, PA. On 28 March 1979 there was a partial core meltdown of the reactor. However there were no substantial losses. The nuclear material was contained and no one was killed or injured during the melt down. However, there was one death that occurred from radiation poisoning.
The accident at Chernobyl reactor occurred on 26 April 1986 during an experimental test. The accident happened when operators shut down important control systems and allowed the reactor to reach unstable conditions. A sudden power surge caused a steam explosion. This caused the reactor core to be destroyed and damaged the building. A graphite fire burned for ten days releasing radioactive waste into the air. Thirty workers died within a few weeks and many others suffered injuries. There was an evacuation of the region and devastation took place in the area, physically as well as psychologically. The Chernobyl ordeal is the largest accident to occur.
These incidents shouldn’t be taken lightly but they need to be taken into context. Both incidents happened because of design flaws and poor operator training. The operators and workers who were involved with these accidents did not obey the safety regulations that are associated with nuclear power plants.
Nuclear energy can be helpful for the environment and save on natural resources but need to be carefully monitored and watched. For the most part nuclear power plants need to still be utilized and researched. The biggest unresolved issue with nuclear energy is the storage and disposal of radioactive waste. Given the information, nuclear power plants are beneficial but can pose a threat if the plants are not carefully monitored and tracked.

A Forest Returns

The video was nice to watch. I learned a lot about the Wayne Forest and forests in Ohio. I didn't know that the government bought the land and tried to get a forest going. I found it interesting when Ora Anderson made the comment about the best way to let a forest grow was to leave it alone. The result of the growth in the forests in Ohio has been because everybody has left it alone and let nature take its course. I liked the music in the background as well. It helped with the emotional side of the film. It put you in a calm and peaceful mind set. Overall I enjoyed the film.

Video

Maywhoor's Presentation

David Maywhoor’s presentation was informative. I found it interesting and helpful of his view about getting people to a middle ground. One of his jobs is to get people to stop taking trees from state owned forests and to find other places to get their wood. He talked about prescribed burning and how that can do harm and damage to trees and wildlife living in those forests. I found that one of the facts that he used was interesting. That a squirrel could get from Pennsylvania through all of Ohio without ever touching the ground. He said that Ohio was at one point 90% forest area. Now that percentage is around thirty percent. I felt that his information was helpful and interesting.

Nuclear Energy

Nuclear energy is the process of splitting uranium atoms by using a process called fission. This process is used to create heat for producing steam that is used for a turbine to generate and create electricity. Some of the pros for using nuclear energy are that it is an emissions free energy source because nothing is burned to create the electricity. Nuclear energy doesn’t emit carbon dioxide or other harmful gases that may cause global warming. Another positive aspect is that it doesn’t discharge any harmful pollutants into the water system and doesn’t have a negative impact on aquatic life. The technology is already available and doesn’t have to be developed first. One more positive thing about the use of nuclear energy is that it can generate high amounts of electricity with just one nuclear power plant.
Cons about nuclear energy are the radioactive waste created, a meltdown or accident would cause humans and wildlife to suffer, they can be potential terrorist targets, the energy source for nuclear power plants is uranium which is a scarce and limited resource, and it can take a long time to build a nuclear power plant. The estimated time is from 20 to 30 years to build and get one up and running. Another problem with nuclear energy is that it is not a renewable resource because it uses uranium to power it and that source is scarce and is only projected to last 30 to 60 years.

Research(EnvironMentalIssues

The effects of nuclear power help the environment but pose a threat if a meltdown occurs. A question that could be discussed for this issue is would it be worth the risk to have many nuclear power plants around the U.S. to save energy and pose a threat to a meltdown? It costs a lot of money to build one and start it up. The price to build one is around six to ten billion dollars. Is it better for our future or would problems arise as time goes on?
Another thing I found interesting was the effect of water bottles. It is something that does cost money, and causes waste with the plastic that contains the bottles. Researching this topic seems interesting to me and I think that if I research it, it would have a good effect on the people who read it. It would be informative and let the readers know how water bottles are useful and/or bad for the environment. I found out that during transportation of water bottles to the consumer, that when the air reaches a high temperature plastic bottle releases chemicals into the water. It doesn’t harm the consumer right away but over years of this it could bring harm to their health.
E-waste is also called electronic waste is something that anyone could prevent. It harms health and causes unnecessary pollution because some of the things contain lead, mercury, and beryllium. It is dangerous for the workers and communities and needs proper disposal to prevent any of the chemicals from leaching out from the landfills. The equipment has to be properly dismantled and put into certain categories. For example; metal frames and plastics, circuit boards. A positive thing of this is that it allows people to recycle or repair unharmed parts but the downside is that this type of work doesn’t pay very well, and has one of the lowest safety and health standards.

Lost Mountain Part 3

Part A
A rational mind is one that is concerned with things that are of the human race. Benefits to their own self and worth. A rational mind focuses on power and money but doesn’t consider the outcome or consequence of things. If a rational mind can gain power or money or both, it will not let anything get in its way. A sympathetic mind understands that things need to be considered and thought through and that money and power should not be the center focus of things.

Reece shows his sympathetic mind by talking about the damage of strip mining and its failures. He uses Wangari Maathai as an example of his sympathetic mind. She won the Noble Peace Prize for planting trees. He explains that the benefits that came from her work were substantial and that Americans should really consider reclaiming land the right way and that strip mining should be cut back.

Another example that he expresses his sympathetic mind is his sharing the stories that he found about coal truck drivers and the hazards they cause on roads in Kentucky. He tells us stories of people who had died from coal truck drivers driving to fast and abusing drugs. His concern for the lives of others because of strip coal mining drivers shows his sympathetic mind.
Another example of this thought is when he talks about visiting the mountain a year ago and the destruction that took place in only a year. He described the spot that was once full of trees and wildlife was now a desolate land, and showing no signs of life or excitement. His concern for the mountain and its existence shows his sympathetic mind. His belief that mountains are important for the future of human existence is most certainly not a rational mind of thought.

Part B
I think one of the most important quotes he has in the conclusion is the one on page 227 of Lost Mountain. The middle paragraph that states:

Science without compassion, science without ethics, has given
us the modern war machince, the industrial farm, the dead
zone in the Gulf of Mexico, the strip mine. What this science
has left out is everything the mad farmer stands for
(talking about a poem written by a farmer of Kentucky)…….
Practice resurrection..…… Among them: practice and emulate
the seasonal resurrection of the forest, understand and enact the
miraculousness of this world, practice waking up to a world
that is itself a miracle, plant a tree.

This statement completes the thoughts of a lot of his arguments. He is letting everyone know that because of our destruction and distraction from detail we have created a terrible situation. He lets us know that we need to not only address the situation of coal mining with words and speech but to actually do something about it. He gives us the example of plant a tree. He tells us that everyone needs to realize the worth and beauty of the world and its mountains and to practice resurrection by fighting for the cutting down of strip mining. We need to think long term and for the future of wildlife and that will in turn keep the human race alive much longer.

Lost Mountain Pg 162

I was more interested reading these pages than the beginning. There were a few things that bothered me about the coal industry and the federal government. Erik discusses and gives information about how the coal industry funded certain government officials and people to get a certain position. The relationship that goes on with money and politics and government makes me sick. It just shows another reason why our government is corrupt and that people get screwed over, for example those who live near strip mining sites in Kentucky, because some company made too much money and funded a government official into office in returns that that certain government official would protect the company. Another thing that made me mad was the fact that coal mining companies would offer money to households near a mountain in returns that the coal industry would be allowed to strip mine the nearest mountain. The part that is terrible is that when it came time to pay the household the coal company would file bankruptcy and not have to pay up. Erik Reece gave a couple of examples of that. He also wrote about the reclamation of areas and that coal companies wouldn't properly make a reclamation of the land. They would just do enough to keep certain programs off their back and to keep from getting sued. The lies and excuses that he used in these pages were eye opening for me. In one area of Kentucky a church had been fine until a coal company started strip mining near it. The churches roof got a crack in it and when the coal company was addressed they just said that it was an old roof. When clearly it was their fault. I am bothered that coal companies are ruining the Kentucky area and not taking responsibility for their actions. The fact that the government isn't doing much about it and ignoring this serious problem...... well it is unacceptable and ridiculous.

Lost Mountain Pg 85

Erik Reese brings up a lot of good points about the destruction of mountaintops. The problem that it causes on the environment and the animals that live in the forest are not to be overlooked. As I am reading Lost Mountain it is making me more aware of the trouble and problems that mountain top removing is causing. The homes that are in the area of Lost Mountain are at risk of cracking walls and shifting the base and foundation of the house that can cause it to fall or become almost useless. The streams that are buried and valleys that are filled are not worth it. The wildlife and trees that are being destroyed is not healthy for humans and animals. I thought he brought up a good point about how coal companies will destroy the land and then try to rebuild it and call it a tourist attraction. And that it can be used for ‘public use’. I knew that strip mining wasn’t good but I was unaware of the destruction and desolation that it causes in a beautiful forested area. The process of strip mining is devastating to the Appalachian Mountains.

I was in a category of ‘didn’t care’. This was because I was unaware of the facts and the true desolation of the forests and effects on the forest and wildlife that strip mining has. I am still undecided about the issue but I do think that it needs to be taken care of sooner rather than later.

Clean Coal

Honestly after viewing the sites from both sides, my mind has not changed. I never really thought about the problem or the argument about clean coal ads and that idea. I agree with the fact that there is no such thing as clean coal and that such ads from the coal industry should not be used. Advertising those clean coal ads is a waste of money that could be used on other things. On the “this is Reality” site the quote, “Clean coal is like a healthy cigarette” explains that clean coal is really not possible right now with the technology we have.
According to the site of the amaericaspower.org the coal industry has tried to improve pollution. The information provided on that site is supposedly from a reliable source, the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). Instead of saying clean coal maybe their ads should say something with “Cleaner Coal than in the past” or “Our coal today is not as dirty as the past”.
The audience of both sides is to the public and even the rest of the world. What the heart of the matter is that America needs to decide whether they want to spend their money on new ways of producing electricity or finding/creating the technology for coal plants not to release C02 and other chemicals. Not spend millions of dollars for advertising on the pros and cons of coal. I really don’t know what I would do because I don’t know the extent of or the trouble you would have to go through to convert all coal burning plants to another new technology or method. Would it be worth it? How would it affect America’s jobs and people? These are questions that would have to be debated and argued.
The site that I found the most entertaining was the This Is Reality. I liked the visuals they used for providing the information of “clean coal”. I also liked watching the yellow bird fly into each sentence and do different things. That was my favorite site. The others were plain and not as exciting. I spent the most time on This Is Reality but the other sites had some good information to consider with this topic and discussion of clean coal.