The low volume of nuclear waste as compared to wastes from coal-fired power production is what attracted the early conservationists...
A 1,000 Megawatt coal-fired power plant produces solid wastes at a rate of 1,800 pounds per minute, waste that includes 19 toxic metals...
A coal-fired plant also produces 50 times the radioactive emissions of an average nuclear power plant... going nuclear even reduces CO2 emissions by 600 pounds per second...
Note that unlike wastes from nuclear power plants, all products of coal combustion are either sent into the atmosphere or into landfills where they remain toxic forever.
Even with that extensive list of negatives, the danger from coal-fired power plants pales in comparison to a far more serious danger — a lack of access to electrical energy...
We see the toll from a lack of energy each time we have a natural disaster where people flee to the nearest place where the comfort, sanitation, and safety provided by electrical power is available. We also see this dramatically in countries where work is performed primarily by human labor and the combustion of wood is a primary source of energy — and the population lives in the squalor that we always see under such conditions. The surest way to a low standard of living is energy poverty.
So why doesn’t the United States, like other countries possessing nuclear power, reprocess its fuel, removing the high-level radionuclides and reusing the uranium and plutonium isotopes? It is owing to the perceived — rather misperceived — dangers of the plutonium in the “spent fuel.”...
High-level wastes give up their energy in a short period of time and then become stable and harmless, while the unused fuel (uranium and plutonium) are so weakly radioactive that their emanations are only dangerous in the minds of those who are dead set against nuclear power...
If we used the same philosophy about naturally occurring radioisotopes as we do nuclear power plant wastes, we would have to dig up, encase, and rebury the State of Virginia because of the large uranium deposits that have been found there...
Many states besides Virginia... have ore deposits that are sufficiently concentrated for commercial mining, without harm to the population or causing radioactive pollution of the groundwater. And, for the record, these naturally occurring ores aren’t vitrified, encased in stainless steel, or stored in a dry environment...
The underlying cause of the nuclear-waste “problem” is an exaggerated fear of radiation. We have been conditioned for many years to accept the premise that even the slightest bit of radiation is dangerous — a premise that is not borne out by any experimental evidence.
It is certainly true that high doses of radiation can sicken or kill, and lower but still very substantial exposures can increase one’s propensity for developing cancer. But contrary to “common knowledge,” examination of the data shows that low levels of ionizing radiation often have a beneficial effect on human health known as hormesis...
Radioactivity surrounds us. Human beings and all we come into contact with contain radioisotopes. Uranium in the soil will still be radioactive in 10 billion years when our sun runs out of hydrogen. It is a natural part in our universe. To fear it is like fearing the warmth of a fireplace just because fire can also burn down the house. Yet people are still paralyzed with fright because few in this country understand anything about the measurement of radiation or its effects. Until we do we are defenseless against the posturing of radical environmentalists and destined to eventually lose the most incredible source of clean, safe, and reliable energy that man has ever been fortunate enough to enjoy.
Nuclear Waste: Not a Problem | The New American
No comments:
Post a Comment