Student Article High School Science Journal Author: Mikhail Stal

Nuclear Disasters and Energy of the Future

July 12, 2006

The reason for choosing this topic was that nuclear reactor accidents seemed the most enjoyable to do out of all the other topics. Another reason why I chose this topic is that I was born in Kiev, Ukraine four years after the Chernobyl accident and would like to find out more about the area. The final reason for why I chose this topic is that, finding information would be easy, since there are so many facts and descriptions about what happened on the Internet and in books.

The way I found was information was online. I went to a popular search engine named Google and typed in “nuclear disasters”. I got information from sites like wikipedia, infoplease.com, and other government and non-government websites.

“The first nuclear reactors were used to generate plutonium for nuclear weapons,” (Wikipedia.com) but in the 1950’s the Soviet Union and other countries were expanding into nuclear research for non-military forms. The first reactor to, “generate electricity for commercial use was at Obnisk, Kaluga Oblast, Russia.” (Wikipedia.com) But with nuclear accidents from Canada to Ukraine nuclear power is a dangerous alternative. When nuclear disasters happen the effects are devastating. Nonetheless nuclear power is a viable solution to the world’s energy crisis, but with disasters as terrible as Chernobyl, Tokaimura, Japan, and Three Mile Island, nuclear energy may never be taken as a safe alternative.The most asked question when talking about nuclear power is: “is it safe”. With word about past disasters such as Chernobyl, Kiev, Ukraine on April 26, 1986 where an “explosion and fire in the graphite core of one of four reactors released radioactive material that spread over part of the Soviet Union, eastern Europe, Scandinavia, and later western Europe.” (Infoplease.com) The total amount of casualties is unknown and Chernobyl is considered the worst nuclear reactor accident to date. Another deadly disaster occurred on March 28, 1979 in Three Mile Island, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, “one of two reactors lost its coolant, which caused overheating and partial meltdown of its uranium core … radioactive water and gasses were released.” (Infoplease.com) Three Mile Island is considered the worst U.S reactor accident. Sept 30, 1999 in Tokaimura, Japan an. “uncontrolled chain reaction in a uranium-processing nuclear fuel plant spewed high levels of radioactive gas into the air.” (Infoplease.com) Two people died and one was injured in this disaster. With accidents happening all over the world is it even possible to find funding for commercial use of these reactors?

Funding is an issue that comes frequently while discussing nuclear reactors. Some ask, why is there funding for these reactors if they are so dangerous and a full-size explosion could kill thousands if not millions over time. Funding comes from the government of the countries, which view nuclear power as a viable alternative to fossil fuels. In the United States, the Department of Energy (DOE) funds these projects. “The U.S. government is funding Nuclear Power 2010, a program to build at least two nuclear reactors by 2010.” (Energy Information Administration) With new reactors being built to produce more energy for the years to come more countries are joining the “nuclear reactor” club, the “Generation IV International Forum (GIF), an association of ten nations that seeks to develop a new generation of commercial reactor designs by 2030.” (Energy Information Administration) with other countries alongside the United States pushing for new technology in the field of nuclear reactors it seems as if the world is considering nuclear power as the energy of the future, but is nuclear energy really safe? And can nuclear reactors really give the world the energy it needs?

Yes nuclear energy can provide the world with its energy needs; currently 20% of the world’s energy comes from nuclear reactors. The reactors that we have now are, “very likely good for some hundreds of years” (John McCarthy). These statistics are very satisfying; imagine having a power source that will not run out for hundreds of year. Even though nuclear power is promising there will always be resistance from the angle of the safety issue with nuclear reactors, arguing that what if a large scale Chernobyl happens, what would the world do then?

Overall nuclear power is a safe alternative and very possible alternative for the world’s energy needs for the hundreds of years to come. Since a nuclear plant cannot blow up like a bomb because, “A bomb converts a large part of its U-235 or plutonium into fission fragments in about 10^-8 seconds and then flies apart” (John McCarthy) but if the reactor is not properly maintained like Chernobyl it will in fact explode, “The Chernobyl plant reached 150 times its normal power level …and blew the plant apart, thus extinguishing the nuclear reaction.” (John McCarthy) Nuclear power is the true energy source of the future.

Bibliography

John McCarthy. Frequently Asked Questions About Nuclear Energy. October 17,

1995. Stanford. 10/15/05. http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/

nuclear-faq.html

Nuclear and Chemicals Accidents. 2005. Information Please. 10/15/05. http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001457.html

Nuclear Reactor. October 14, 2005. Wikipedia. 10/15/05. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_reactors

Ron Hagen. New Reactor Types. August 26, 2003. Energy Information Administration. 10/15/05. http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/plugs/plnrd.html

 
Back to the Apple Blossom