Presentation Transcript

1. Nuclear Energy

   Cole Nickerson, Alianna Nelson, Meera Nair, Emma Muller
2. What is Nuclear Energy? Nuclear energy is a form of renewable energy harnessed from nuclear fission (splitting of a heavy nucleus either spontaneously or as the result of a collision). Unfortunately, nuclear fission results in particles that are incredibly toxic to people, and can result in cancer, radiation poisoning, and most likely death. It can also affect future generations.
3. Why use Nuclear Energy? The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement that, among other things, sets binding targets for the reduction of greenhouse-gas emissions by industrialized countries. 191 countries signed and ratified. The US has signed, but did not ratify.
4. How it Works/Potential Advances
5. Impact on Climate Change - Pros Nuclear power occupies a unique position in the debate over global climate change as the only carbon- free energy source that is already contributing to world energy supplies on a large scale and that is also expandable with few inherent limits.
6. Impact on Climate Change – Cons Nuclear power plants can stop working and contaminate everything in the area, the way Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi did. Following the nuclear disaster at Chernobyl 25 years ago, the Soviet government chose long-term evacuation over extensive decontamination; as a result, the plants and animals near Chernobyl inhabit an environment that is both largely devoid of humans and severely contaminated by radioactive fallout. Scientists estimate that in the first 30 days after the accident on 11 March, trees, birds and forest-dwelling mammals were exposed to daily doses up to 100 times greater – and fish and marine algae to doses several thousand times greater - than are generally considered safe. The Ministry of Environment estimates that Fukushima will have to dispose of 15 to 31 million cubic any land species, says Hinton, may get off relatively lightly because the accident happened early in the flowering season
7. Impact on Climate Change – Cons Decontamination can be really effective, [but] what you have is a tradeoff between dose reduction and environmental impact,” says Kathryn Higley, a radio ecologist at Oregon State University who has studied several decontamination sites in the United States. That’s because the radioactive particles the Japanese are trying to get rid of can be quite “sticky.” Removing them without removing large amounts of soil, leaves, and living plants is nearly impossible. The Ministry of Environment estimates that Fukushima will have to dispose of 15 to 31 million cubic meters of contaminated soil and debris by the time the decontamination projects end. Long-lived isotopes are expected to accumulate in the food chain and may cause problems such as increased mortality in fish and marine-mammal populations.
8. Safety of Nuclear Energy It’s based on radioactive materials and produces toxic radioactive waste There have been three major reactor accidents in the history of civil nuclear power – one was contained without harm to anyone, the second involved an intense fire without provision for containment, and the third severely tested the containment, allowing some release of radioactivity. Unlike coal and natural gas, nuclear power plants do not emit greenhouse gases when operating.
9. Safety of Nuclear Energy In 2007, 59 nuclear power plants scattered throughout France, which is smaller than Texas, generated 78% of their electricity Among other reasons, they turned to it because they have very few natural energy resources President Obama approved $8 billion worth of loan guarantees to build new reactors; plans are also underway to begin mining for uranium in Colorado. This would’ve been unheard of 30 years ago when Three Mile Island, the site of a 1971 core meltdown in Pennsylvania – turned public sentiment against nuclear power. Steers clear of fossil fuels, releases less radioactivity than coal-fired power plants and is unaffected by the fluctuations of oil and gas prices.
10. Reliability of Nuclear Energy Nuclear power is an established and reliable way of generating electricity. Nuclear power plants have maintained near-record levels of reliability and electricity production in 2010 Nuclear plants historically have achieved consistently high capacity factors, generating electricity day and night 75% of the UK’s nuclear capacity can be assumed to be available to meet the demand for electricity. This is given the basic conditions and a sufficient supply of fuel. These power stations were mostly designed and built in the 1970s and '80s; the next generation is expected to be even more reliable. Nationally, 104 nuclear-power plants provide 20% of our electricity and 73% of America's zero-carbon-emission electricity — the largest of all non-emitting sources. In the anniversary month of Fukushima, nuclear power in the United States stands upon its record of safety, reliability and performance; which has been outstanding.
11. Reliability of Nuclear Energy Nuclear energy is proven to be a stable, reliable way to produce electricity for Texas and for the country. Nationwide, the average generating capacity factor is More than 89%. Texas’ two nuclear plants, South Texas Project and Comanche Peak, have been safe, steady producers of inexpensive electricity for two decades. The nation’s 104 nuclear units supply about 20 percent of the electricity in the United States. The only fuel source that produces more electricity is coal, which emits greenhouse gases. U.S. nuclear energy plants use a low-enriched form of uranium for fuel. Uranium is a fairly abundant element that is created naturally and is about as common on Earth as tin. In 2002, 16 countries produced more than 99% of the world’s uranium. Compared to natural gas, uranium is relatively low in price and is less sensitive to fuel price increases. It does not take much uranium to power a plant from a volume standpoint: one pellet of uranium—the size of the tip of an adult’s little finger—is the equivalent of 17,000 cubic feet of natural gas. Nuclear energy is not dependent on unstable foreign suppliers; North America has abundant sources of uranium. Nuclear power is reliable, but a lot of money has to be spent on safety - if it does go wrong, a nuclear accident can be a major disaster. People are increasingly concerned about this - in the 1990's nuclear power was the fastest-growing source of power in much of the world. In 2005 it was the second slowest-growing.
12. Reliability of Nuclear Energy More disadvantages include, radiation poisoning, reactor costs and nuclear waste: Radiation poisoning: Radiation poisoning, formally known as acute radiation syndrome, is caused by the irradiation of all or a large part of the body. Radiation burns at only small parts of the body are not as lethal as an all-body exposure. If there is extreme damage to the victim, death is expected very quickly. Reactor costs: One of the largest economic drawbacks to nuclear energy is its inherently steep price. Nuclear power plants built in the 1970s were expected to run in the single-digit billions, with $5 billion as a high-end cost. Nuclear waste: The storage and management of nuclear waste has been a problem plaguing the nuclear industry since its inception. The storage and handling of nuclear waste has not been without incident. Containment failure at Chelyabinsk-65, a Russian reactor, led to increased incidents of leukemia and other symptoms of chronic radiation poisoning. It is possible to reprocess nuclear waste for further use as an energy source. However, its relatively greater expense than unprocessed uranium and its unwelcome byproducts have not made it a priority of the nuclear industry.
13. Long-Term Future "There is no question that the up-front costs associated with making nuclear power competitive, are higher than those associated with fossil fuels," said Dr. Moniz. "But as our study shows, there are many ways to mitigate these costs and, over time, the societal and environmental price of carbon emissions could dramatically improve the competitiveness of nuclear power” There are ways to make nuclear energy more viable: Giving countries that forego proliferation- risky enrichment and reprocessing activities a preferred position to receive nuclear fuel and waste management services from nations that operate the entire fuel cycle. Urging DOE to establish a Nuclear System Modeling project that would collect the engineering data and perform the analysis necessary to evaluate alternative reactor concepts and fuel cycles using the criteria of cost, safety, waste, and proliferation resistance. Expensive development projects should be delayed pending the outcome of this multi-year effort. Offering a limited production tax-credit to 'first movers' - private sector investors who successfully build new nuclear plants. This tax credit is extendable to other carbon-free electricity technologies and is not paid unless the plant operates; Having government more fully develop the capabilities to analyze life-cycle health and safety impacts of fuel cycle facilities Advancing a U.S. Department of Energy balanced long-term waste management R&D program. Placing increased emphasis on the once-through fuel cycle as best meeting the criteria of low costs and proliferation resistance
14. Job Creation By providing a reliable and affordable source of electricity, nuclear energy helps keep American business competitive. Nuclear plants a wayo are engines of local job growth. The private investment in nuclear energy will create jobs – lots of jobs. And lots of good jobs. The study assumes 52 new reactors will be operational by 2030 and estimates the creation of 350,000 jobs. Two things to keep in mind. First, these are high paying jobs. To build and operate nuclear power plants, the industry will require high paying manufacturing jobs as well as a slew of nuclear engineers. Secondly, a lot of these jobs aren’t going anywhere. Unlike a windmill that requires little or no man power after it’s built, nuclear plants will have an estimated 900 full-time jobs generated for each reactor. That’s 47,000 jobs by 2030 and these reactors last approximately 80 years. Over 200 nuclear power units were ordered in the United States during the late 1960s and 1970s, causing a significant expansion of employment and manufacturing capability in the nation. Architect engineers, constructors, nuclear steam system suppliers, component suppliers, and nuclear fuel production all rapidly expanded to meet the needs.
15. Job Creation The recent spark of interest in nuclear power is causing a reexamination of the role of nuclear power in this country. This renewed interest has led to questions regarding the capability and capacity of current U.S. industries to support a renewal of nuclear power plant deployment. This study was conducted to provide an initial estimate of jobs to be gained in the U.S. through the repatriation of the nuclear manufacturing industry. In the course of the study, related job categories were also modeled to provide an additional estimate of the potential expansion of existing industries. The results from the model show that approximately 610,000 jobs would be added to the U.S. economy by: Repatriating 37,000 to 38,000 nuclear manufacturing jobs Adding 72,000 to 79,000 plant construction and operations jobs Adding another 181,000 to 250,000 Indirect Jobs in the nuclear power industry Inducing an additional 218,000 to 242,000 jobs in the non-nuclear industries throughout the country
16. Sustainability Sustainability is a term coined in recent years to mean the goal of practices, methods and technology which provide growth but do not degrade the environment in the long term. Although this sense has been first and foremost, the definition has expanded over time as the debate about sustainability has taken shape. It encompasses the idea that present activities must not destroy sensitive natural resources, leave problems or debts for the future, that they must be economically sound, and, depending on the observer, a host of other ideals. Nuclear power, most definitely, is not seen as part of the future by most advocates of sustainable energy use. The debate on sustainability has not gone unnoticed by those who recognize the potential advantages of nuclear power. The concern about climate change, at a time when nuclear power's fortunes are declining in many countries, has been seen as a lever to revitalize interest in nuclear power. As the December 1997 Conference of the Parties to the UN Climate Change Convention has approached, those in the nuclear industry have increasingly discussed the sustainability of nuclear power. The research into the sustainability of nuclear and other electricity options in the UK shows that nuclear power could make a significant contribution to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 2035. However, that would require a huge expansion of nuclear, constituting 35% of the electricity mix by 2035, almost double the current contribution. If, however, the consumption of energy continues to grow as it has in the past, the role of nuclear power becomes much more important in meeting climate change targets. Expansion of nuclear power will depend on many factors, including availability of uranium, fuel used in today’s nuclear reactors. Uranium shortages could within a few decades constrain any significant global expansion of uranium nuclear plants, unless major new uranium reserves can be identified and exploited economically.
17. Cost But nuclear power comes with serious safety and security issues, and new reactors are more expensive The first generation of nuclear power plants proved so costly to build that half of them were abandoned during construction. By 1985, Forbes had labeled U.S. nuclear power "the largest managerial disaster in business history.” Between 2002 and 2008, for example, cost estimates for new nuclear plant construction rose from between $2 billion and $4 billion per unit to $9 billion per unit, according to a 2009 UCS report The industry has responded to escalating costs with escalating demands for government support. A 2009 UCS report estimated that taxpayers could be on the hook for anywhere from $360 billion to $1.6 trillion if then-current proposals for nuclear expansion were realized. Nuclear power relies on uranium, it's not a renewable source of energy
18. Environmental Considerations Nuclear power is a clean source of power that does not use fossil fuels or add greenhouse gases to the atmosphere It offers an appealing alternative to power from traditional coal-fired plants Yet nuclear energy is associated with troubling environmental issues like the problem of radioactive waste disposal Nuclear power makes no contribution to global warming Nuclear power also produces no notable sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, or particulates· when nuclear power is produced, nothing is burned in a conventional sense Heat is produced through nuclear fission, not oxidation Nuclear power does produce spent fuels of roughly the same mass and volume as the fuel that the reactor takes in
19. Environmental Considerations The spent fuels are kept within the reactor’s fuel assemblies, thus unlike fossil fuels, solid wastes at nuclear power plants are contained throughout the generation process No particulates or ash are emitted.· Nuclear waste is kept at the plant where it is going nowhere which creates the threat of a dirty bomb.· There is no safe place to keep radioactive waste The way nuclear energy works is, radioactive uranium bundles heat water into steam, the steam turns a turbine, the turbine turns the generator that produces the spark that is electricity. The water in the reactor is used to cool the reactor so temperatures can be controlled. We should really find a way to cool the reactors in a way that won't fail if the rest of the plant fails. The reactor needs to be able to cool without contaminating the surroundings
20. Sources http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-23/opinion/os-ed-nuclear-energy-safety-myword-032312-20120322_1_nuclear-power-plants-nuclear-plant-safety-fukushima http://www.carbonplanet.com/definitions#Definitions-K http://www.ehow.com/about_4578885_disadvantages-nuclear-energy.html http://www.edfenergy.com/energyfuture/energy-gap-reliability/nuclear-and-the-energy-gap-reliability http://www.nei.org/resourcesandstats/publicationsandmedia/insight/insightmarch2011/nuclear-energy-reliable-and-growing http://www.darvill.clara.net/altenerg/nuclear.htm http://nuclearenergyfortexans.org/reliability.php http://www.ne.doe.gov/pdfFiles/200411_JobCreation_VI.pdf http://blog.heritage.org/2008/09/16/nuclear-energy-job-creation/ http://www.nei.org/keyissues/reliableandaffordableenergy/ http://www.howstuffworks.com/nuclear-power.htm http://www.nuclearfiles.org/menu/key-issues/nuclear-energy/issues/health-environment/moens_nuclear_power_environment.html http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/ern/02mar/overview.php http://web.mit.edu/ipc/research/energy/pdf/EIP_09-002.pdf http://e360.yale.edu/feature/as_fukushima_cleanup_begins_long-term_impacts_are_weighed/2482/ http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_power/nuclear_power_and_global_warming/nuclear-power-cost.html http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/energy/nuclear-power-safe.htm http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf06.html http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_2bc78qjWZc8/R1jMCOcFzeI/AAAAAAAAAKQ/QOegASvxwXY/s400/nuclear+power+plants.GIF