What are the environmental consequences of nuclear energy?

Answer 1

While being touted as carbon free, nuclear is anything but; mining and extraction costs carbon in fossil fuel; transportation costs carbon in fossil fuel; processing costs carbon in fossil fuel; building the nuclear power station costs carbon in fossil fuel. Then there's the question of highly radioactive waste storage for hundreds of thousands of years, leaks into the environment, coastal flooding of nuclear power stations like Sizewell. And the question of the added energy from splitting atoms which is extra to solar radiation and thus adds to the net energy input to the planet [an issue never even addressed]. It takes at least ten years to build a nuclear station so no quick fix, and decommissioning is even longer. It also costs billions, a price no government could hope to get taxpayers to pay, yet private industry won't fork out that sort of money.

It's a pipe dream, something to use against those who argue renewable power is the only way to go.

I agree nuclear energy is not purely carbonless. On that same note, if you look at the production and transportation costs, neither are solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, tidal, or hydroelectric power. One aspect that all of these energy sources, including nuclear, has in common are that once they are functioning they are emitting less CO2 into our atmosphere than coal and oil. I am not saying coal and oil are evil but they are not found on the earth in limitless supply so therefore we as a society need to begin developing more renewable energy.

Obviously there will be environmental impact of mining the uranium (or another element thorium) that will be used to fuel the power plant. Uranium mines are under very strict guidelines that will help to prevent the surrounding mining area from any overly adverse affects ( no more probably than what the uranium was doing naturally). Furthermore, nuclear power plants emit less radiation to the surrounding areas than coal fire power plants because the nuclear power plants are built more durably. The radioactive waste is a concern because right now our federal government will not allow this waste to be refurbished to be used again in a nuclear reactor like France does. Right now each power plant maintains their own waste. Decommissioning nuclear power plants is expensive but this is necessary in order to protect the environment . Overall, nuclear is one of many, not the only, solutions that our country needs to progress towards.

Answer 2

Very little. If the power station is on a lake or river and the water there is used for cooling the turbine condensers, there may be a rise in temperature which may be undesirable, but this needs to be considered when choosing the site, and this would apply to a possible fossil fuelled station as well.

Answer 3

The only social issues I can think of are caused by the anti-nuclear groups. These started to oppose nuclear weapons, but are now opposed to nuclear power plants as well. Any new proposal will be opposed by somebody. In Italy there was a referendum some years ago to stop any nuclear power plants then operating and not build any more, this policy still stands. In Germany there was a government decision to phase out all nuclear power by a certain date, but I think the Government now in power may want to change this policy. Australia and New Zealand decided against nuclear power. In the Philippines a plant was built at Bataan but never operated.

Answer 4

The primary environmental consequence of nuclear energy is unwanted radioactive contamination. This can be in aerial release of steam, or water pollution in the cooling cycle and in affected groundwater. The spent nuclear materials from reactors (nuclear waste) must be stored away for thousands of years before they pose no threat to biological organisms. They have the capacity to pollute large areas unless properly handled.

A secondary and limited consequence may be thermal pollution from the waste heat released into the environment. However, this is only a factor at a minority of reactor sites.

Answer 5

Social impacts of nuclear energy are mainly detrimental. Nuclear energy has been a major cause of the environmental hazards which end up affecting the society.

Answer 6

Very little normally, but things can happen as at Chernobyl. That type of reactor is not built in the US or Western Europe

Answer 7

None, except some thermal pollution into the cooling water

Answer 8

Production of electricity and long lived fission products