write an essay on nuclear energy its benefits and hazards

Nuclear Energy Benefits Essay

Nuclear energy use has taken priority in many countries today. It is argued that it affects the environment negatively and can pose a great risk to human beings and their existence. However, it is the most cost effective and environmentally friendly way of generating electricity. In addition, the risks associated with the source of energy can be avoided. This essay will argue that nuclear energy is the most effective way of generating electricity.

One of the factors why nuclear energy is an effective source of energy is that it is cost effective. Electricity generated from nuclear energy is economical and saves cost when compared with other forms of electricity from renewable sources like sun, wind, biomass and water.

It is cost effective in the sense that the processes of conducting research and developing it receive government support in terms of finances. As result, research and development costs that are supposed to be incurred in producing nuclear energy are not reflected in electricity. In other renewable sources of electricity, funding is done by private bodies hence increasing the cost of electricity.

The other factor that makes nuclear energy cost effective is that the risks associated with this type of energy are passed on to all the citizens as opposed to a few individuals or companies that own nuclear plants. This is because there is usually legal liability underinsurance for the plants. The cost would have been very high if the companies that operate the plants were required to take insurance covers for dangers that occur at the plants (Time for Change, n.d).

Apart from cost effectiveness, nuclear energy is also environmentally friendly. Studies on energy impacts mostly focus on the impacts on the environment. Some impacts like displacement of people and interruptions caused on the land are not considered very important. Nuclear energy is environmentally friendly in that it does not emit greenhouse gases.

The operations of nuclear energy plants do not produce these gases which are associated with global warming. The emissions associated with nuclear energy cycle are indeed moderate hence nuclear power plants can instead be used to prevent global warming.

In addition, replacing coal with nuclear energy has many environmental benefits. The electricity supplied from nuclear energy throughout the world is only 14.8 percent. On the other hand, the energy supplied by coal is more than 40 percent. The fuel cycle generated when coal is used to produce energy is harmful to the environment.

In fact, it is categorized among energy sources that cause huge destruction to the environment. This leaves nuclear energy an environmentally friendly source of energy when compared with other renewable sources of energy (O’Sullivan, 2009).

During nuclear energy production, uranium nuclei are split without instances of pollution in the process. This is contrary to what happens in other energy production means which burn certain materials. For example, burning of coal to produce energy is associated with air pollution.

The different types of air pollution caused consequently lead to environmental issues which affect the health of human beings. For example, mercury produced during coal burning is harmful to the nervous system.

There are various ways that can be used to reduce the risks associated with nuclear energy. One of its risks is the harm that may arise from disposal of wastes produced during the processes of energy generation. The radioactive wastes produced during the processes are difficult to recycle or dispose using the normal disposal or recycling means.

One way of avoiding the risk associated with such wastes is by storing them in long term facilities which give them enough time to decay without being disturbed. By doing this, harmful isotopes are allowed to safely decay until they pose no risk to human lives (Lindsay, 2004).

The other way of reducing the risks associated with nuclear energy is conducting major improvements in nuclear energy plants. The major improvements include increasing safety levels in uranium mines. In addition, cleaner storage facilities are important in reducing the risks associated with nuclear energy. When these measures are combined with increased accuracy and versatility, nuclear energy turns out to be one of the best energy sources (Hagler, 2011).

Despite the objections that are raised regarding the use of nuclear energy, it is undoubtedly the most effective way of generating energy. When compared with other renewable ways of generating energy such as coal, nuclear energy has many benefits. For example, it is cost effective and environmentally friendly.

Hagler, A. (2011). Health Hazards from Energy Production: A Comparison of Nuclear and Coal Power . Web.

Lindsay, H. (2004). Environmental Policy Issues . Web.

O’Sullivan, L. (2009). The Environmental Effects of Nuclear as an Alternative Energy Source. Web.

Time for Change . (n.d). Cost advantage of nuclear energy . Web.

Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, January 8). Nuclear Energy Benefits. https://ivypanda.com/essays/nuclear-energy/

"Nuclear Energy Benefits." IvyPanda , 8 Jan. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/nuclear-energy/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'Nuclear Energy Benefits'. 8 January.

IvyPanda . 2024. "Nuclear Energy Benefits." January 8, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/nuclear-energy/.

1. IvyPanda . "Nuclear Energy Benefits." January 8, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/nuclear-energy/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Nuclear Energy Benefits." January 8, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/nuclear-energy/.

Uranium Mining and Issues Tied to It
Western Australia Lifts Its Ban on Uranium Mines
Natural Gas, Oil, Coal, and Uranium in Russia
Nuclear Energy Benefits and Demerits
The Environmental Impact of Nuclear Energy
The Effect of Nuclear Energy on the Environment
Remote Sensing in Australia's Uranium Exploration
Nuclear and Coal-Fired Power Generation
Nuclear Power Provides Cheap and Clean Energy
Nuclear Energy in Australia
Urbanization and the Environment
Fossil fuels have no future
Effects of Global Warming: Currently and Future
The Process of the Water Cycle
Water Pollution Origins and Ways of Resolving

write an essay on nuclear energy its benefits and hazards

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Meet top uk universities from the comfort of your home, here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.

Verification Code

An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify

Thanks for your comment !

Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.

School Education /

Essay on Nuclear Energy in 500+ words for School Students

Updated on
Dec 30, 2023

Essay on Nuclear Energy: Nuclear energy has been fascinating and controversial since the beginning. Using atomic power to generate electricity holds the promise of huge energy supplies but we cannot overlook the concerns about safety, environmental impact, and the increase in potential weapon increase.

The blog will help you to explore various aspects of energy seeking its history, advantages, disadvantages, and role in addressing the global energy challenge.

This Blog Includes:

History overview, nuclear technology , advantages of nuclear energy, disadvantages of nuclear energy, safety measures and regulations of nuclear energy, concerns of nuclear proliferation, future prospects and innovations of nuclear energy.

Also Read: Find List of Nuclear Power Plants In India

The roots of nuclear energy have their roots back to the early 20th century when innovative discoveries in physics laid the foundation for understanding atomic structure. In the year 1938, Otto Hahn, a German chemist and Fritz Stassman, a German physical chemist discovered nuclear fission, the splitting of atomic nuclei. This discovery opened the way for utilising the immense energy released during the process of fission.

Also Read: What are the Different Types of Energy?

Nuclear power plants use controlled fission to produce heat. The heat generated is further used to produce steam, by turning the turbines connected to generators that produce electricity. This process takes place in two types of reactors: Pressurized Water Reactors (PWR) and Boiling Water Reactors (BWR). PWRs use pressurised water to transfer heat. Whereas, BWRs allow water to boil, which produces steam directly.

Also Read: Nuclear Engineering Course: Universities and Careers

Let us learn about the positive aspects of nuclear energy in the following:

1. High Energy Density

Nuclear energy possesses an unparalleled energy density which means that a small amount of nuclear fuel can produce a substantial amount of electricity. This high energy density efficiency makes nuclear power reliable and powerful.

2. Low Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Unlike other traditional fossil fuels, nuclear power generation produces minimum greenhouse gas emissions during electricity generation. The low greenhouse gas emissions feature positions nuclear energy as a potential solution to weakening climate change.

3. Base Load Power

Nuclear power plants provide consistent, baseload power, continuously operating at a stable output level. This makes nuclear energy reliable for meeting the constant demand for electricity, complementing intermittent renewable sources of energy like wind and solar.

Also Read: How to Become a Nuclear Engineer in India?

After learning the pros of nuclear energy, now let’s switch to the cons of nuclear energy.

1. Radioactive Waste

One of the most important challenges that is associated with nuclear energy is the management and disposal of radioactive waste. Nuclear power gives rise to spent fuel and other radioactive byproducts that require secure, long-term storage solutions.

2. Nuclear Accidents

The two catastrophic accidents at Chornobyl in 1986 and Fukushima in 2011 underlined the potential risks of nuclear power. These nuclear accidents can lead to severe environmental contamination, human casualties, and long-lasting negative perceptions of the technology.

3. High Initial Costs

The construction of nuclear power plants includes substantial upfront costs. Moreover, stringent safety measures contribute to the overall expenses, which makes nuclear energy economically challenging compared to some renewable alternatives.

Deepika Joshi

Deepika Joshi is an experienced content writer with expertise in creating educational and informative content. She has a year of experience writing content for speeches, essays, NCERT, study abroad and EdTech SaaS. Her strengths lie in conducting thorough research and ananlysis to provide accurate and up-to-date information to readers. She enjoys staying updated on new skills and knowledge, particulary in education domain. In her free time, she loves to read articles, and blogs with related to her field to further expand her expertise. In personal life, she loves creative writing and aspire to connect with innovative people who have fresh ideas to offer.

Connect With Us

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today.

Resend OTP in

Need help with?

Study abroad.

UK, Canada, US & More

IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More

Scholarship, Loans & Forex

Country Preference

New Zealand

Which English test are you planning to take?

Which academic test are you planning to take.

Not Sure yet

When are you planning to take the exam?

Already booked my exam slot

Within 2 Months

Want to learn about the test

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

When do you want to start studying abroad.

January 2024

September 2024

What is your budget to study abroad?

How would you describe this article ?

Please rate this article

We would like to hear more.

Have something on your mind?

Make your study abroad dream a reality in January 2022 with

India's Biggest Virtual University Fair

Essex Direct Admission Day

Why attend .

Don't Miss Out

Nuclear energy protects air quality by producing massive amounts of carbon-free electricity. It powers communities in 28 U.S. states and contributes to many non-electric applications, ranging from the medical field to space exploration .

The Office of Nuclear Energy within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) focuses its research primarily on maintaining the existing fleet of reactors, developing new advanced reactor technologies, and improving the nuclear fuel cycle to increase the sustainability of our energy supply and strengthen the U.S. economy.

Below are some of the main advantages of nuclear energy and the challenges currently facing the industry today.

Advantages of Nuclear Energy

Clean Energy Source

Nuclear is the largest source of clean power in the United States. It generates nearly 800 billion kilowatt hours of electricity each year and produces more than half of the nation’s emissions-free electricity. This avoids more than 470 million metric tons of carbon each year, which is the equivalent of removing 100 million cars off of the road.

Creates Jobs

The nuclear industry supports nearly half a million jobs in the United States and contributes an estimated $60 billion to the U.S. gross domestic product each year. U.S. nuclear plants can employ up to 700 workers with salaries that are 30% higher than the local average. They also contribute billions of dollars annually to local economies through federal and state tax revenues.

Supports National Security

A strong civilian nuclear sector is essential to U.S. national security and energy diplomacy. The United States must maintain its global leadership in this arena to influence the peaceful use of nuclear technologies. The U.S. government works with countries in this capacity to build relationships and develop new opportunities for the nation’s nuclear technologies.

Challenges of Nuclear Energy

Public Awareness

Commercial nuclear power is sometimes viewed by the general public as a dangerous or unstable process. This perception is often based on three global nuclear accidents, its false association with nuclear weapons, and how it is portrayed on popular television shows and films.

DOE and its national labs are working with industry to develop new reactors and fuels that will increase the overall performance of these technologies and reduce the amount of nuclear waste that is produced.

DOE also works to provide accurate, fact-based information about nuclear energy through its social media and STEM outreach efforts to educate the public on the benefits of nuclear energy.

Used Fuel Transportation, Storage and Disposal

Many people view used fuel as a growing problem and are apprehensive about its transportation, storage, and disposal. DOE is responsible for the eventual disposal and associated transport of all commercial used fuel , which is currently securely stored at 76 reactor or storage sites in 34 states. For the foreseeable future, this fuel can safely remain at these facilities until a permanent disposal solution is determined by Congress.

DOE is currently evaluating nuclear power plant sites and nearby transportation infrastructure to support the eventual transport of used fuel away from these sites. It is also developing new, specially designed railcars to support large-scale transport of used fuel in the future.

Constructing New Power Plants

Building a nuclear power plant can be discouraging for stakeholders. Conventional reactor designs are considered multi-billion dollar infrastructure projects. High capital costs, licensing and regulation approvals, coupled with long lead times and construction delays, have also deterred public interest.

Microreactor (left) - Small Modular Reactor (right)

DOE is rebuilding its nuclear workforce by supporting the construction of two new reactors at Plant Vogtle in Waynesboro, Georgia. The units are the first new reactors to begin construction in the United States in more than 30 years. The expansion project will support up to 9,000 workers at peak construction and create 800 permanent jobs at the facility when the new units begin operation in 2023.

DOE is also supporting the development of smaller reactor designs, such as microreactors and small modular reactors , that will offer even more flexibility in size and power capacity to the customer. These factory-built systems are expected to dramatically reduce construction timelines and will make nuclear more affordable to build and operate.

High Operating Costs

Challenging market conditions have left the nuclear industry struggling to compete. DOE’s Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) program is working to overcome these economic challenges by modernizing plant systems to reduce operation and maintenance costs, while improving performance. In addition to its materials research that supports the long-term operation of the nation’s fleet of reactors, the program is also looking to diversify plant products through non-electric applications such as water desalination and hydrogen production .

To further improve operating costs. DOE is also working with industry to develop new fuels and cladding known as accident tolerant fuels . These new fuels could increase plant performance, allowing for longer response times and will produce less waste. Accident tolerant fuels could gain widespread use by 2025.

Essay on Nuclear Energy

Students are often asked to write an essay on Nuclear Energy in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Nuclear Energy

Introduction.

Nuclear energy is a powerful source of energy generated from atomic reactions. It is created from the splitting of atoms, a process known as nuclear fission.

Production of Nuclear Energy

Nuclear energy is produced in nuclear power plants. These plants use uranium, a mineral, as fuel. The heat generated from nuclear fission is used to create steam, which spins a turbine to generate electricity.

Benefits of Nuclear Energy

Nuclear energy is very efficient. It produces a large amount of energy from a small amount of uranium. It also does not emit harmful greenhouse gases, making it environmentally friendly.

Drawbacks of Nuclear Energy

Despite its benefits, nuclear energy has drawbacks. The most significant is the production of radioactive waste, which is dangerous and hard to dispose of. It also poses a risk of nuclear accidents.

Also check:

Advantages and Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy
Paragraph on Nuclear Energy

250 Words Essay on Nuclear Energy

Introduction to nuclear energy.

Nuclear energy, a powerful and complex energy source, is derived from splitting atoms in a process known as nuclear fission. Its significant energy output and low greenhouse gas emissions make it a potential solution to the world’s increasing energy demands.

Production and Efficiency

Nuclear power plants operate by using nuclear fission to generate heat, which then produces steam to turn turbines and generate electricity. The efficiency of nuclear energy is unparalleled, with one kilogram of uranium-235 producing approximately three million times the energy of a kilogram of coal.

Environmental Implications

Nuclear energy is often considered a clean energy source due to its minimal carbon footprint. However, the production of nuclear energy also results in radioactive waste, the disposal of which poses significant environmental challenges.

Security and Ethical Concerns

The utilization of nuclear energy is not without its risks. Accidents like those at Chernobyl and Fukushima have highlighted the potential for catastrophic damage. Furthermore, the proliferation of nuclear technology raises ethical concerns about its potential misuse for military purposes.

Future of Nuclear Energy

The future of nuclear energy hinges on technological advancements and policy decisions. The development of safer, more efficient reactors and sustainable waste disposal methods could mitigate some of the risks associated with nuclear energy. Additionally, international cooperation is crucial to ensure the peaceful and secure use of nuclear technology.

In conclusion, nuclear energy presents a potent solution to the energy crisis, but it also brings significant challenges. Balancing its benefits against the associated risks requires careful consideration and responsible action.

500 Words Essay on Nuclear Energy

Nuclear energy, a powerful and complex form of energy, is derived from splitting atoms in a reactor to heat water into steam, turn a turbine, and generate electricity. Ninety-four nuclear reactors in 28 states, approximately 20% of total electricity production in the United States, are powered by this process. Globally, nuclear energy is a significant source of power, contributing to about 10% of the world’s total electricity supply.

The Mechanics of Nuclear Energy

Nuclear energy is produced through a process called nuclear fission. This process involves the splitting of uranium atoms in a nuclear reactor, which releases an immense amount of energy in the form of heat and radiation. The heat generated is then used to boil water, create steam, and power turbines that generate electricity.

The fuel for nuclear reactors, uranium, is abundant and can be found in many parts of the world, making nuclear energy a viable option for countries without significant fossil fuel resources. Moreover, the energy produced by a single uranium atom split is a million times greater than that from burning a single coal or gas molecule, making nuclear power a highly efficient energy source.

Pros and Cons of Nuclear Energy

One of the main advantages of nuclear energy is its low greenhouse gas emission. It emits a fraction of the carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases compared to fossil fuel-based energy sources, making it a potential solution to combat climate change.

Nuclear energy is also reliable. Unlike renewable energy sources like wind and solar, nuclear power plants can operate continuously and are not dependent on weather conditions. They can provide a steady, uninterrupted supply of electricity, which is crucial for the functioning of modern societies.

However, nuclear energy also has significant drawbacks. The risk of nuclear accidents, while statistically low, can have devastating and long-lasting impacts, as seen in Chernobyl and Fukushima. Additionally, the disposal of nuclear waste poses a serious challenge due to its long-term radioactivity.

The Future of Nuclear Energy

The future of nuclear energy is uncertain. On one hand, the demand for low-carbon energy sources to combat climate change could lead to an increase in the use of nuclear energy. On the other hand, concerns about nuclear safety, waste disposal, and the high costs of building new nuclear power plants could hinder its growth.

Advancements in nuclear technology, such as the development of small modular reactors and fourth-generation reactors, could address some of these concerns. These technologies promise to be safer, more efficient, and produce less nuclear waste, potentially paving the way for a nuclear renaissance.

In conclusion, nuclear energy presents a compelling paradox. It offers a high-energy, low-carbon alternative to fossil fuels, yet it carries significant risks and challenges. As we move towards a more sustainable future, it is crucial to weigh these factors and make informed decisions about the role of nuclear energy in our global energy mix.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

Essay on Negative Effects of Social Media
Essay on Nature
Essay on Nationalism

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

The Advantages and Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy

Since the first nuclear plant started operations in the 1950s, the world has been highly divided on nuclear as a source of energy. While it is a cleaner alternative to fossil fuels, this type of power is also associated with some of the world’s most dangerous and deadliest weapons, not to mention nuclear disasters . The extremely high cost and lengthy process to build nuclear plants are compensated by the fact that producing nuclear energy is not nearly as polluting as oil and coal. In the race to net-zero carbon emissions, should countries still rely on nuclear energy or should they make space for more fossil fuels and renewable energy sources? We take a look at the advantages and disadvantages of nuclear energy.

What Is Nuclear Energy?

Nuclear energy is the energy source found in an atom’s nucleus, or core. Once extracted, this energy can be used to produce electricity by creating nuclear fission in a reactor through two kinds of atomic reaction: nuclear fusion and nuclear fission. During the latter, uranium used as fuel causes atoms to split into two or more nuclei. The energy released from fission generates heat that brings a cooling agent, usually water, to boil. The steam deriving from boiling or pressurised water is then channelled to spin turbines to generate electricity. To produce nuclear fission, reactors make use of uranium as fuel.

For centuries, the industrialisation of economies around the world was made possible by fossil fuels like coal, natural gas, and petroleum and only in recent years countries opened up to alternative, renewable sources like solar and wind energy. In the 1950s, early commercial nuclear power stations started operations, offering to many countries around the world an alternative to oil and gas import dependency and a far less polluting energy source than fossil fuels. Following the 1970s energy crisis and the dramatic increase of oil prices that resulted from it, more and more countries decided to embark on nuclear power programmes. Indeed, most reactors have been built between 1970 and 1985 worldwide. Today, nuclear energy meets around 10% of global energy demand , with 439 currently operational nuclear plants in 32 countries and about 55 new reactors under construction. In 2020, 13 countries produced at least one-quarter of their total electricity from nuclear, with the US, China, and France dominating the market by far.

World nuclear electricity production, 1970-2020 (Image: World Nuclear Association)

Fossil fuels make up 60% of the United States’ electricity while the remaining 40% is equally split between renewables and nuclear power. France embarked on a sweeping expansion of its nuclear power industry in the 1970s with the ultimate goal of breaking its dependence on foreign oil. In doing this, the country was able to build up its economy by simultaneously cutting its emissions at a rate never seen before. Today, France is home to 56 operating reactors and it relies on nuclear power for 70% of its electricity .

You might also like: A ‘Breakthrough’ In Nuclear Fusion: What Does It Mean for the Future of Energy Generation?

Advantages of Nuclear Energy

France’s success in cutting down emissions is a clear example of some of the main advantages of nuclear energy over fossil fuels. First and foremost, nuclear energy is clean and it provides pollution-free power with no greenhouse gas emissions. Contrary to what many believe, cooling towers in nuclear plants only emit water vapour and are thus, not releasing any pollutant or radioactive substance into the atmosphere. Compared to all the energy alternatives we currently have on hand, many experts believe that nuclear energy is indeed one of the cleanest sources. Many nuclear energy supporters also argue that nuclear power is responsible for the fastest decarbonisation effort in history , with big nuclear players like France, Saudi Arabia, Canada, and South Korea being among the countries that recorded the fastest decline in carbon intensity and experienced a clean energy transition by building nuclear reactors and hydroelectric dams.

Earlier this year, the European Commission took a clear stance on nuclear power by labelling it a green source of energy in its classification system establishing a list of environmentally sustainable economic activities. While nuclear energy may be clean and its production emission-free, experts highlight a hidden danger of this power: nuclear waste. The highly radioactive and toxic byproduct from nuclear reactors can remain radioactive for tens of thousands of years. However, this is still considered a much easier environmental problem to solve than climate change. The main reason for this is that as much as 90% of the nuclear waste generated by the production of nuclear energy can be recycled. Indeed, the fuel used in a reactor, typically uranium, can be treated and put into another reactor as only a small amount of energy in their fuel is extracted in the fission process.

A rather important advantage of nuclear energy is that it is much safer than fossil fuels from a public health perspective. The pro-nuclear movement leverages the fact that nuclear waste is not even remotely as dangerous as the toxic chemicals coming from fossil fuels. Indeed, coal and oil act as ‘ invisible killers ’ and are responsible for 1 in 5 deaths worldwide . In 2018 alone, fossil fuels killed 8.7 million people globally. In contrast, in nearly 70 years since the beginning of nuclear power, only three accidents have raised public alarm: the 1979 Three Mile Island accident, the 1986 Chernobyl disaster and the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster. Of these, only the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear plant in Ukraine directly caused any deaths.

Finally, nuclear energy has some advantages compared to some of the most popular renewable energy sources. According to the US Office of Nuclear Energy , nuclear power has by far the highest capacity factor, with plants requiring less maintenance, capable to operate for up to two years before refuelling and able to produce maximum power more than 93% of the time during the year, making them three times more reliable than wind and solar plants.

You might also like: Nuclear Energy: A Silver Bullet For Clean Energy?

Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy

The anti-nuclear movement opposes the use of this type of energy for several reasons. The first and currently most talked about disadvantage of nuclear energy is the nuclear weapon proliferation, a debate triggered by the deadly atomic bombing of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during the Second World War and recently reopened following rising concerns over nuclear escalation in the Ukraine-Russia conflict . After the world saw the highly destructive effect of these bombs, which caused the death of tens of thousands of people, not only in the impact itself but also in the days, weeks, and months after the tragedy as a consequence of radiation sickness, nuclear energy evolved to a pure means of generating electricity. In 1970, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons entered into force. Its objective was to prevent the spread of such weapons to eventually achieve nuclear disarmament as well as promote peaceful uses of nuclear energy. However, opposers of this energy source still see nuclear energy as being deeply intertwined with nuclear weapons technologies and believe that, with nuclear technologies becoming globally available, the risk of them falling into the wrong hands is high, especially in countries with high levels of corruption and instability.

As mentioned in the previous section, nuclear energy is clean. However, radioactive nuclear waste contains highly poisonous chemicals like plutonium and the uranium pellets used as fuel. These materials can be extremely toxic for tens of thousands of years and for this reason, they need to be meticulously and permanently disposed of. Since the 1950s, a stockpile of 250,000 tonnes of highly radioactive nuclear waste has been accumulated and distributed across the world, with 90,000 metric tons stored in the US alone. Knowing the dangers of nuclear waste, many oppose nuclear energy for fears of accidents, despite these being extremely unlikely to happen. Indeed, opposers know that when nuclear does fail, it can fail spectacularly. They were reminded of this in 2011, when the Fukushima disaster, despite not killing anyone directly, led to the displacement of more than 150,000 people, thousands of evacuation/related deaths and billions of dollars in cleanup costs.

Lastly, if compared to other sources of energy, nuclear power is one of the most expensive and time-consuming forms of energy. Nuclear plants cost billions of dollars to build and they take much longer than any other infrastructure for renewable energy, sometimes even more than a decade. However, while nuclear power plants are expensive to build, they are relatively cheap to run , a factor that improves its competitiveness. Still, the long building process is considered a significant obstacle in the run to net-zero emissions that countries around the world have committed to. If they hope to meet their emission reduction targets in time, they cannot afford to rely on new nuclear plants.

You might also like: The Nuclear Waste Disposal Dilemma

Who Wins the Nuclear Debate?

There are a multitude of advantages and disadvantages of nuclear energy and the debate on whether to keep this technology or find other alternatives is destined to continue in the years to come. Nuclear power can be a highly destructive weapon, but the risks of a nuclear catastrophe are relatively low. While historic nuclear disasters can be counted on the fingers of a single hand, they are remembered for their devastating impact and the life-threatening consequences they sparked (or almost sparked). However, it is important to remember that fossil fuels like coal and oil represent a much bigger threat and silently kill millions of people every year worldwide. Another big aspect to take into account, and one that is currently discussed by global leaders, is the dependence of some of the world’s largest economies on countries like Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq for fossil fuels. While the 2011 Fukushima disaster, for example, pushed the then-German Chancellor Angela Merkel to close all of Germany’s nuclear plants, her decision only increased the country’s dependence on much more polluting Russian oil. Nuclear supporters argue that relying on nuclear energy would decrease the energy dependency from third countries. However, raw materials such as the uranium needed to make plants function would still need to be imported from countries like Canada, Kazakhstan, and Australia. The debate thus shifts to another problem: which countries should we rely on for imports and, most importantly, is it worth keeping these dependencies?

This story is funded by readers like you

Our non-profit newsroom provides climate coverage free of charge and advertising. Your one-off or monthly donations play a crucial role in supporting our operations, expanding our reach, and maintaining our editorial independence.

About EO | Mission Statement | Impact & Reach | Write for us

About the Author

Martina Igini

What the Future of Renewable Energy Looks Like

Top 7 Smart Cities in the World in 2024

Explainer: What Are NFTs, And What is Their Environmental Impact?

Hand-picked stories weekly or monthly. We promise, no spam!

Boost this article By donating us $100, $50 or subscribe to Boosting $10/month – we can get this article and others in front of tens of thousands of specially targeted readers. This targeted Boosting – helps us to reach wider audiences – aiming to convince the unconvinced, to inform the uninformed, to enlighten the dogmatic.

Home Essay Examples Environment Nuclear Energy

Nuclear energy: Benefits And Drawbacks

Category Environment , Science
Subcategory Human Impact , Physics
Topic Nuclear Energy , Nuclear Power

Have you ever heard of nuclear energy? Nuclear energy is a commonly used energy source that is produced from atoms splitting in a reactor that is used to heat water into steam, to turn a turbine, and create electricity. Its energy is released during nuclear fission or fusion. Nuclear fusion is when nuclei with low atomic numbers conjoin/fuse to create a heavier nucleus. While on the other hand, nuclear fission is when an already heavy nucleus splits due to interaction with another particle or naturally. Research on nuclear energy started around the time before World War II. It was initially only studied in order to develop weapons of defense. However, years later, scientists started venturing out to new ways that nuclear power could be used. The first nuclear reactor was built in 1942, and gained the name of the Chicago Pile 1. It wasn’t until the 1960s, when the nuclear power industry started growing big in the United States. Nuclear energy has became more and more reliable over the years, and has became more effective due to technological advances. While nuclear energy isn’t renewable, it has been used for many great things over the years, and is expected to last for a long time.

Uranium is a chemical element used to fuel nuclear power plants. Its symbol is ‘U’, while its atomic number is 92. Uranium is a naturally radioactive chemical element, this makes it perfect for nuclear power fuel. Stephanie writes, “The half-life of uranium-238 is 4.5 billion years. It decays into radium-226, which in turn decays into radon-222. Radon-222 becomes polonium-210, which finally decays into a stable nuclide, lead.”(“Facts About Uranium.”, par. 15). Also, not to mention that the power plants do not use carbon emissions, this is all due to the powerful Uranium used instead. Nuclear fuel is also extremely dense.

Our writers can write you a new plagiarism-free essay on any topic

There are many benefits to using nuclear power, including the fact that it is environmentally safe. Nuclear energy prevents greenhouse gases, which are extremely bad for our atmosphere/overall environment. Nuclear energy doesn’t emit pollutants such as nitrogen oxide, particulate matter, mercury, etc. Nuclear energy is also sustainable, it runs 24/7 at a rate of 18-24 months. Christina writes, “Nuclear energy isn’t considered renewable energy, given its dependence on a mined, finite resource, but because operating reactors do not emit any of the greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming, proponents say it should be considered a climate change solution.”(“What is Nuclear Energy and Is It a Viable Resource?”, par. 7). Nuclear energy is considered to last somewhere around 200 more years according to its current consumption rate. Nuclear energy is very powerful and provides lots of energy across the nation. “Nuclear energy provides about 20% of U.S. electricity, and this share has remained stable since around 1990. Nuclear power plants had a capacity factor of 93% in 2018.” (“Nuclear Energy Factsheet”, par. 1).

Nuclear energy also has its disadvantages, much like any other energy source. For initial installment, nuclear power plants can cost billions of dollars. In my opinion, it’s worth the investment due to the fact that it runs at a relatively cheap price, for such a long time. “Although nuclear energy production does not create any emissions, it does produce radioactive waste that must be securely stored so it doesn’t pollute the environment… Storage of radioactive waste is a major challenge facing nuclear power plants”.(“The Pros & Cons of Nuclear Energy: Is It Safe?”, par. 17-18). Accidents can also happen from time to time, for example, look at Chernobyl. There was a power overload, causing the nuclear power plant reactor to explode. With more advanced designs and models to come along, accidents like this are less prone to happening. Accidents, however, may still happen in the future, or maybe even in the present.

Nuclear power is commonly used in the U.S., and can be considered a reliable, safe, and clean source of energy. Though, nuclear energy does have its downsides, it also has many advantages as well. Mike writes, “Nuclear energy provided 55% of America’s carbon-free electricity in 2018, making it by far the largest domestic source of clean energy.”(“5 Fast Facts About Nuclear Energy”, par. 2). So not only is nuclear energy, for the most part, environmentally safe, but it’s also very powerful. A total of 29 states in the U.S. are home to 96 nuclear reactors. The reactors were enough to power at least 20% of the nation’s clean energy. However, I do think that the worst part is the installment fee. Once it’s installed, it is relatively cheap, and is no problem, money-wise, to run but the installment fee is a lot of money that the U.S doesn’t need to be spending.

We have 98 writers available online to start working on your essay just NOW!

Nuclear Energy

Nuclear energy is the energy in the nucleus, or core, of an atom. Nuclear energy can be used to create electricity, but it must first be released from the atom.

Engineering, Physics

Loading ...

Nuclear energy is the energy in the nucleus , or core, of an atom . Atoms are tiny units that make up all matter in the universe , and energy is what holds the nucleus together. There is a huge amount of energy in an atom 's dense nucleus . In fact, the power that holds the nucleus together is officially called the " strong force ." Nuclear energy can be used to create electricity , but it must first be released from the atom . In the process of nuclear fission , atoms are split to release that energy. A nuclear reactor , or power plant , is a series of machines that can control nuclear fission to produce electricity . The fuel that nuclear reactors use to produce nuclear fission is pellets of the element uranium . In a nuclear reactor , atoms of uranium are forced to break apart. As they split, the atoms release tiny particles called fission products. Fission products cause other uranium atoms to split, starting a chain reaction . The energy released from this chain reaction creates heat. The heat created by nuclear fission warms the reactor's cooling agent . A cooling agent is usually water, but some nuclear reactors use liquid metal or molten salt . The cooling agent , heated by nuclear fission , produces steam . The steam turns turbines , or wheels turned by a flowing current . The turbines drive generators , or engines that create electricity . Rods of material called nuclear poison can adjust how much electricity is produced. Nuclear poisons are materials, such as a type of the element xenon , that absorb some of the fission products created by nuclear fission . The more rods of nuclear poison that are present during the chain reaction , the slower and more controlled the reaction will be. Removing the rods will allow a stronger chain reaction and create more electricity . As of 2011, about 15 percent of the world's electricity is generated by nuclear power plants . The United States has more than 100 reactors, although it creates most of its electricity from fossil fuels and hydroelectric energy . Nations such as Lithuania, France, and Slovakia create almost all of their electricity from nuclear power plants . Nuclear Food: Uranium Uranium is the fuel most widely used to produce nuclear energy . That's because uranium atoms split apart relatively easily. Uranium is also a very common element, found in rocks all over the world. However, the specific type of uranium used to produce nuclear energy , called U-235 , is rare. U-235 makes up less than one percent of the uranium in the world.

Although some of the uranium the United States uses is mined in this country, most is imported . The U.S. gets uranium from Australia, Canada, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Uzbekistan. Once uranium is mined, it must be extracted from other minerals . It must also be processed before it can be used. Because nuclear fuel can be used to create nuclear weapons as well as nuclear reactors , only nations that are part of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) are allowed to import uranium or plutonium , another nuclear fuel . The treaty promotes the peaceful use of nuclear fuel , as well as limiting the spread of nuclear weapons . A typical nuclear reactor uses about 200 tons of uranium every year. Complex processes allow some uranium and plutonium to be re-enriched or recycled . This reduces the amount of mining , extracting , and processing that needs to be done. Nuclear Energy and People Nuclear energy produces electricity that can be used to power homes, schools, businesses, and hospitals. The first nuclear reactor to produce electricity was located near Arco, Idaho. The Experimental Breeder Reactor began powering itself in 1951. The first nuclear power plant designed to provide energy to a community was established in Obninsk, Russia, in 1954. Building nuclear reactors requires a high level of technology , and only the countries that have signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty can get the uranium or plutonium that is required. For these reasons, most nuclear power plants are located in the developed world. Nuclear power plants produce renewable, clean energy . They do not pollute the air or release greenhouse gases . They can be built in urban or rural areas , and do not radically alter the environment around them. The steam powering the turbines and generators is ultimately recycled . It is cooled down in a separate structure called a cooling tower . The steam turns back into water and can be used again to produce more electricity . Excess steam is simply recycled into the atmosphere , where it does little harm as clean water vapor . However, the byproduct of nuclear energy is radioactive material. Radioactive material is a collection of unstable atomic nuclei . These nuclei lose their energy and can affect many materials around them, including organisms and the environment. Radioactive material can be extremely toxic , causing burns and increasing the risk for cancers , blood diseases, and bone decay .

Radioactive waste is what is left over from the operation of a nuclear reactor . Radioactive waste is mostly protective clothing worn by workers, tools, and any other material that have been in contact with radioactive dust. Radioactive waste is long-lasting. Materials like clothes and tools can stay radioactive for thousands of years. The government regulates how these materials are disposed of so they don't contaminate anything else. Used fuel and rods of nuclear poison are extremely radioactive . The used uranium pellets must be stored in special containers that look like large swimming pools. Water cools the fuel and insulates the outside from contact with the radioactivity. Some nuclear plants store their used fuel in dry storage tanks above ground. The storage sites for radioactive waste have become very controversial in the United States. For years, the government planned to construct an enormous nuclear waste facility near Yucca Mountain, Nevada, for instance. Environmental groups and local citizens protested the plan. They worried about radioactive waste leaking into the water supply and the Yucca Mountain environment, about 130 kilometers (80 miles) from the large urban area of Las Vegas, Nevada. Although the government began investigating the site in 1978, it stopped planning for a nuclear waste facility in Yucca Mountain in 2009. Chernobyl Critics of nuclear energy worry that the storage facilities for radioactive waste will leak, crack, or erode . Radioactive material could then contaminate the soil and groundwater near the facility . This could lead to serious health problems for the people and organisms in the area. All communities would have to be evacuated . This is what happened in Chernobyl, Ukraine, in 1986. A steam explosion at one of the power plants four nuclear reactors caused a fire, called a plume . This plume was highly radioactive , creating a cloud of radioactive particles that fell to the ground, called fallout . The fallout spread over the Chernobyl facility , as well as the surrounding area. The fallout drifted with the wind, and the particles entered the water cycle as rain. Radioactivity traced to Chernobyl fell as rain over Scotland and Ireland. Most of the radioactive fallout fell in Belarus.

The environmental impact of the Chernobyl disaster was immediate . For kilometers around the facility , the pine forest dried up and died. The red color of the dead pines earned this area the nickname the Red Forest . Fish from the nearby Pripyat River had so much radioactivity that people could no longer eat them. Cattle and horses in the area died. More than 100,000 people were relocated after the disaster , but the number of human victims of Chernobyl is difficult to determine . The effects of radiation poisoning only appear after many years. Cancers and other diseases can be very difficult to trace to a single source. Future of Nuclear Energy Nuclear reactors use fission, or the splitting of atoms , to produce energy. Nuclear energy can also be produced through fusion, or joining (fusing) atoms together. The sun, for instance, is constantly undergoing nuclear fusion as hydrogen atoms fuse to form helium . Because all life on our planet depends on the sun, you could say that nuclear fusion makes life on Earth possible. Nuclear power plants do not have the capability to safely and reliably produce energy from nuclear fusion . It's not clear whether the process will ever be an option for producing electricity . Nuclear engineers are researching nuclear fusion , however, because the process will likely be safe and cost-effective.

Nuclear Tectonics The decay of uranium deep inside the Earth is responsible for most of the planet's geothermal energy, causing plate tectonics and continental drift.

Three Mile Island The worst nuclear accident in the United States happened at the Three Mile Island facility near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, in 1979. The cooling system in one of the two reactors malfunctioned, leading to an emission of radioactive fallout. No deaths or injuries were directly linked to the accident.

Articles & Profiles

Media credits.

The audio, illustrations, photos, and videos are credited beneath the media asset, except for promotional images, which generally link to another page that contains the media credit. The Rights Holder for media is the person or group credited.

Illustrators

Educator reviewer, last updated.

October 19, 2023

User Permissions

For information on user permissions, please read our Terms of Service. If you have questions about how to cite anything on our website in your project or classroom presentation, please contact your teacher. They will best know the preferred format. When you reach out to them, you will need the page title, URL, and the date you accessed the resource.

If a media asset is downloadable, a download button appears in the corner of the media viewer. If no button appears, you cannot download or save the media.

Text on this page is printable and can be used according to our Terms of Service .

Interactives

Any interactives on this page can only be played while you are visiting our website. You cannot download interactives.

Related Resources

ENVIRONMENT

What is nuclear energy and is it a viable resource?

Nuclear energy's future as an electricity source may depend on scientists' ability to make it cheaper and safer.

Nuclear power is generated by splitting atoms to release the energy held at the core, or nucleus, of those atoms. This process, nuclear fission, generates heat that is directed to a cooling agent—usually water. The resulting steam spins a turbine connected to a generator, producing electricity.

About 450 nuclear reactors provide about 11 percent of the world's electricity. The countries generating the most nuclear power are, in order, the United States, France, China, Russia, and South Korea.

The most common fuel for nuclear power is uranium, an abundant metal found throughout the world. Mined uranium is processed into U-235, an enriched version used as fuel in nuclear reactors because its atoms can be split apart easily.

In a nuclear reactor, neutrons—subatomic particles that have no electric charge—collide with atoms, causing them to split. That collision—called nuclear fission—releases more neutrons that react with more atoms, creating a chain reaction. A byproduct of nuclear reactions, plutonium , can also be used as nuclear fuel.

Types of nuclear reactors

In the U.S. most nuclear reactors are either boiling water reactors , in which the water is heated to the boiling point to release steam, or pressurized water reactors , in which the pressurized water does not boil but funnels heat to a secondary water supply for steam generation. Other types of nuclear power reactors include gas-cooled reactors, which use carbon dioxide as the cooling agent and are used in the U.K., and fast neutron reactors, which are cooled by liquid sodium.

Nuclear energy history

The idea of nuclear power began in the 1930s , when physicist Enrico Fermi first showed that neutrons could split atoms. Fermi led a team that in 1942 achieved the first nuclear chain reaction, under a stadium at the University of Chicago. This was followed by a series of milestones in the 1950s: the first electricity produced from atomic energy at Idaho's Experimental Breeder Reactor I in 1951; the first nuclear power plant in the city of Obninsk in the former Soviet Union in 1954; and the first commercial nuclear power plant in Shippingport, Pennsylvania, in 1957. ( Take our quizzes about nuclear power and see how much you've learned: for Part I, go here ; for Part II, go here .)

Nuclear power, climate change, and future designs

Nuclear power isn't considered renewable energy , given its dependence on a mined, finite resource, but because operating reactors do not emit any of the greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming , proponents say it should be considered a climate change solution . National Geographic emerging explorer Leslie Dewan, for example, wants to resurrect the molten salt reactor , which uses liquid uranium dissolved in molten salt as fuel, arguing it could be safer and less costly than reactors in use today.

Others are working on small modular reactors that could be portable and easier to build. Innovations like those are aimed at saving an industry in crisis as current nuclear plants continue to age and new ones fail to compete on price with natural gas and renewable sources such as wind and solar.

The holy grail for the future of nuclear power involves nuclear fusion, which generates energy when two light nuclei smash together to form a single, heavier nucleus. Fusion could deliver more energy more safely and with far less harmful radioactive waste than fission, but just a small number of people— including a 14-year-old from Arkansas —have managed to build working nuclear fusion reactors. Organizations such as ITER in France and Max Planck Institute of Plasma Physics are working on commercially viable versions, which so far remain elusive.

Nuclear power risks

When arguing against nuclear power, opponents point to the problems of long-lived nuclear waste and the specter of rare but devastating nuclear accidents such as those at Chernobyl in 1986 and Fukushima Daiichi in 2011 . The deadly Chernobyl disaster in Ukraine happened when flawed reactor design and human error caused a power surge and explosion at one of the reactors. Large amounts of radioactivity were released into the air, and hundreds of thousands of people were forced from their homes . Today, the area surrounding the plant—known as the Exclusion Zone—is open to tourists but inhabited only by the various wildlife species, such as gray wolves , that have since taken over .

In the case of Japan's Fukushima Daiichi, the aftermath of the Tohoku earthquake and tsunami caused the plant's catastrophic failures. Several years on, the surrounding towns struggle to recover, evacuees remain afraid to return , and public mistrust has dogged the recovery effort, despite government assurances that most areas are safe.

Other accidents, such as the partial meltdown at Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island in 1979, linger as terrifying examples of nuclear power's radioactive risks. The Fukushima disaster in particular raised questions about safety of power plants in seismic zones, such as Armenia's Metsamor power station.

Other issues related to nuclear power include where and how to store the spent fuel, or nuclear waste, which remains dangerously radioactive for thousands of years. Nuclear power plants, many of which are located on or near coasts because of the proximity to water for cooling, also face rising sea levels and the risk of more extreme storms due to climate change.

FREE BONUS ISSUE

This pill could protect us from radiation after a nuclear meltdown

Scientists achieve a breakthrough in nuclear fusion. Here’s what it means.

This young nuclear engineer has a new plan for clean energy

The true history of Einstein's role in developing the atomic bomb

The controversial future of nuclear power in the U.S.

History & Culture
Photography
Environment
Paid Content

History & Culture

Mind, Body, Wonder
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Your US State Privacy Rights
Children's Online Privacy Policy
Interest-Based Ads
About Nielsen Measurement
Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
Nat Geo Home
Attend a Live Event
Book a Trip
Inspire Your Kids
Shop Nat Geo
Visit the D.C. Museum
Learn About Our Impact
Support Our Mission
Advertise With Us
Customer Service
Renew Subscription
Manage Your Subscription
Work at Nat Geo
Sign Up for Our Newsletters
Contribute to Protect the Planet

Press ESC to close

Nuclear Energy Advantages and Disadvantages: An Important IELTS Writing Task 2 Topic

Nuclear energy improves air quality by providing large quantities of carbon-free energy. It empowers people in 28 States in the u.s. and leads to many non-electric projects, ranging from the healthcare profession to space research.

The US Department of Energy’s Nuclear Energy Office or DOE conducts its studies mainly on sustaining the current reactor fleet, creating innovative modern reactor technology, and enhancing the nuclear fuel cycle to improve the reliability of our energy supplies and boost the US economy.

Below are some of the main advantages and disadvantages of nuclear energy in the format of nuclear energy task 2 of the IELTS exam .

IELTS Sample: Nuclear Energy Advantages and Disadvantages

Producing energy from nuclear plants significantly increases the risk but promises great benefits. In action, a relatively small volume of nuclear fuel can reliably create a very large amount of energy and contain very little polluting content. Nevertheless, the financial costs of constructing and decommissioning a nuclear power plant are extremely high and the waste generated will stay radioactive hazardous to people and the environment for hundreds of years.

Also Read: How to Write Agree and Disagree Essays in IELTS? Tips to Write the Perfect Essay

Nuclear Energy Advantages and Disadvantages: Tabular Form

Benefits of nuclear energy, great energy capacity.

Upon full combustion, 1 kg of enriched uranium by up to 4 per cent (which is used in reactor material) discharges equivalent energy to that collected by burning about 100 tonnes of high-quality coal combustion or 60 tonnes of oil.

Reusability

The fission component (Uranium-235) is not totally burned in nuclear fuel and can be recycled after regeneration. A total transition to a closed fuel cycle is possible in the near future which means that no waste will be generated.

Reducing Greenhouse Gases

Intensive production of nuclear technology can be used as a way of countering global warming. Each year, nuclear power stations in Europe emit 700 million tonnes of CO2 and those in Japan cause 270 million tonnes of CO2 to be avoided. Per year, operating Russian nuclear power plants prohibit the release of 210 million tonnes of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Russia ranks 4th in the world

Also Read: IELTS Essay in Writing Task 2: Here’s How to Organize it Well

Economic Development

The construction of nuclear power plants stimulates economic prosperity and new jobs. 1 position in nuclear power plant building generates 10 to 15 positions in associated industries. The creation of nuclear technology leads to the growth of science and to national cognitive capacities.

IELTS Opinion Essay Topic: Nuclear Energy is a Better Choice for Meeting the Increasing Demand

The option of nuclear energy as a resource is questionable. Presently, this energy is recommended as a favoured alternative to satisfy the immense need. Many people believe that nuclear technology is the safest form of electricity generation since it is less fragile than others. They are expected to emit less carbon dioxide than other forms of sources used to create the current.

Break the Paragraph

As there is less development of greenhouse emissions, there is reduced risk to the atmosphere due to the elimination of acid rain, global warming, etc. As an example, before using this source to generate the new, China’s emission rate was unmanageable, but after using it, it decreased by 80 per cent. Previously, China used fossil fuels, which emitted a large number of greenhouse emissions, and in the process, they became very dangerous both to the atmosphere and to humans.

In contrast, it is very clear that the nuclear power plant offers multiple advantages to the public in terms of noise, energy supply and therefore does not conflict with the daily lifestyle of the local region.

In the next five decades, humanity will require more energy than has been used in the whole intervening period. Early forecasts about the rise of energy demand and the advancement of alternative energy technology have not come true: the pace of consumption is increasing even faster, although new energy sources will become readily available at reasonable rates no later than 2050. The shortage of fossil fuels is now more and more important than ever.

Keep your eyes here to keep learning about more such IELTS topics and keep yourself a step ahead of other IELTS aspirants. Best of luck!

Also Read: Importance of Art in Society: IELTS Essay Sample for IELTS Writing Task 2 Explained for Band 8

One Comment

While reading the previous article, I was hoping if I could get information on this topic too. And luckily, this site is always here to have your back and help you to know all the details while you’re preparing for your exams so you can successfully get through your exam. Such great articles like always!

Describe Something Important that has been Kept in Your Family: A Cue Card Sample Topic for IELTS Speaking

How to Use an IELTS Calculator? Calculate Your Overall IELTS Exam Score

What is a Good IELTS Score? Is 7.5 a Good IELTS Score? Here’s All You Need to Know

Other stories, nuclear energy is a better choice for meeting increasing demand: ielts topic, canada permanent resident visa: facts you should not miss about the canada pr visa process.

IELTS Scores
Life Skills Test
Find a Test Centre
Alternatives to IELTS
Find Student Housing
General Training
Academic Word List
Topic Vocabulary
Collocation
Phrasal Verbs
Writing eBooks
Reading eBook
All eBooks & Courses

Nuclear Power Essays

by Edgars (Basel, CH)

Would you prefer to share this page with others by linking to it?

Click on the HTML link code below.
Copy and paste it, adding a note of your own, into your blog, a Web page, forums, a blog comment, your Facebook account, or anywhere that someone would find this page valuable.

Band 7+ eBooks

"I think these eBooks are FANTASTIC!!! I know that's not academic language, but it's the truth!"

Linda, from Italy, Scored Band 7.5

IELTS Modules:

Other resources:.

All Lessons
Band Score Calculator
Writing Feedback
Speaking Feedback
Teacher Resources
Free Downloads
Recent Essay Exam Questions
Books for IELTS Prep
Student Housing
Useful Links

Recent Articles

Alternatives to the IELTS Exam

Mar 22, 24 12:32 PM

Common Questions about the IELTS Speaking Test

Mar 09, 24 05:28 AM

IELTS Computer Delivered Practice Tests Plus Band Score

Mar 01, 24 02:38 AM

Important pages

IELTS Writing IELTS Speaking IELTS Listening IELTS Reading All Lessons Vocabulary Academic Task 1 Academic Task 2 Practice Tests

Connect with us

IELTS is a registered trademark of University of Cambridge, the British Council, and IDP Education Australia. This site and its owners are not affiliated, approved or endorsed by the University of Cambridge ESOL, the British Council, and IDP Education Australia.

Environment
Information Science
Social Issues
Argumentative
Cause and Effect
Classification
Compare and Contrast
Descriptive
Exemplification
Informative
Controversial
Exploratory
What Is an Essay
Length of an Essay
Generate Ideas
Types of Essays
Structuring an Essay
Outline For Essay
Essay Introduction
Thesis Statement
Body of an Essay
Writing a Conclusion
Essay Writing Tips
Drafting an Essay
Revision Process
Fix a Broken Essay
Format of an Essay
Essay Examples
Essay Checklist
Essay Writing Service
Pay for Research Paper
Write My Research Paper
Write My Essay
Custom Essay Writing Service
Admission Essay Writing Service
Pay for Essay
Academic Ghostwriting
Write My Book Report
Case Study Writing Service
Dissertation Writing Service
Coursework Writing Service
Lab Report Writing Service
Do My Assignment
Buy College Papers
Capstone Project Writing Service
Buy Research Paper
Custom Essays for Sale

Can’t find a perfect paper?

Free Essay Samples

Benefits of Using Nuclear Energy

Updated 18 August 2023

Downloads 44

Category Science

Topic Nuclear Energy

The term nuclear energy refers to a protected, clean, accessible as well as energy source that is competitive. Nuclear energy is the only power which can replace a critical section of the fossils fuels such as oil, coal, and gas which are known to widely contaminate the environment as well as contributing to the effect of the greenhouse. It is such importance for a human being to promote the profoundly fair use of power if one needs to be seriously concerning the change of climate to eliminate the fossils fuels. Notably, clean, safe as well as reliable sources such as wind and solar energy should be on far front applied whenever possible; hence this makes people leave a sustainable lifestyle. However, this will not be jointly adequate in lowering the accumulation of atmospheric carbon monoxide, as well as satisfying the wants of industrial, social modernization along with the ambitions of the evolving nations. Therefore, nuclear energy must be organized to substitute the fossil fuels in the industrial countries, and eventually in countries that are evolving.

The only viable way for the future is an original mixture of power conservation, along with renewable energies for community low-intensity presentations, as well as nuclear power for base-load energy manufacturer. The paper explores the benefits and risks of atomic energy to human consumption; it also explains what is required in solving some of the barriers that are encountered from nuclear energy. Within this context, it is noted that if nuclear power is to be the compelling aspect of the country’s future Portfolio energy, obstacles concerning the distribution of the other nuclear plants have to be overwhelmed. Therefore, it is essential to declare the advantages of atomic power can be achieved in the way which limits nuclear security dangers as well as creation.

Benefits of using Nuclear Energy

According to the research by Comby & Bruno (26), most civilized industries use energy in their day to day operations whereby the highest percentage of the energy used worldwide comes from fossil fuel oil, gas and also coal. According to scientists, reserves for both natural gases and oil will soon be depleted therefore leaving only nuclear and coal gases available. Scientifically, fuel is a major pollutant to the environment and also contributes much towards global warming thereby its production brings about much harm than good. Finding a way to how excess carbon dioxide can be eliminated is the dream of every person; however, no one has seen a suitable way to deal with the situation. In this situation nuclear is far much better as it has benefits that coal gas do not have as discussed below.

Compared to other gases, nuclear gas is much safe. Nuclear safety is proven by the commercial operations that took place in the half century records with many years of experience. The retail industry has so far encountered a single accident where there was an explosion of nuclear power. The accident that happened on the Three Mile Island was the worst as compared to the one that took place in Chernobyl in the western power reactor. During the crash, the reactor’s core melted down and most of the molten center in the basement of the reaction vessel (Comby & Bruno 27). The released radioactivity was entirely confined in the containment of concrete structure where the silo of air had been purposely designed. Fewer radio activities that managed to get out was innocuous resulting in no injuries or deaths. Therefore, concerning nuclear success, three Mines Island was a real story for the achievement.

The Chernobyl accident was different in that its reactors lacked structure containment. On an accidental night, the faulty designers of Chernobyl had made it unstable causing Chernobyl to carry on operations on a dangerous basis. Due to the security system being bypassed intentionally, an explosion of steam occurred following power surge that would not be controlled. The moderator for graphite then burned for many weeks after it caught fire and the smoke from it brought a lot of properties of radioactivity fission to the atmosphere which was then spread too far places by winds. The incident took the lives of around forty people in a couple of months and led to injuries of more than two hundred people. Moreover, countless individuals were affected and were forced to relocate to the unknown location.

Comby & Bruno (27) further explores that, nuclear reactors bring forth the power that is the base load which can be available at any needed time. The fueling intervals have been prolonged and the refueling downtime reduced. The positive progress in the United States in years has been equal to one reactor addition to the fleet that was existing. Useful life for the reactor is forty years as designed by scientists; however, most of them attain that age while in right conditions and some even surpass the period with 20 more years.

Nuclear gas as a source of radiation is another advantage added to it. De Groot et al. (307) notes that the antinuclear green is an unknown merchandise that brings forth fear. The radioactivity fear in general is spread around to reach as many people as possible, accidents such as that in Three Mile Island and that of Chernobyl are feared that they might reoccur again. The most significant world’s fear is the fear of weapons formed by the nuclear gas. In dealing with these fears, campaigns on educating about atomic gas have been launched which turned out to be a success since nuclear can be a threat to many individuals. The campaign was a success since not many people had the required knowledge about the presence of radioactivity everywhere in the environment. Nuclear experts and organizations on the other hand have tried their best to clear the fear that exists due to the widespread beliefs of wrong interpretation of health effects of nuclear gas especially to the Hiroshima and also in Nagasaki bomb survivors. It has been noted according to studies that the experts made sure that any traces of radiation becomes delirious to individual’s health and to the related concept of dose collection. Moreover, according to the researchers carried out by scientists, an adequate radiation amount is essential and also natural not mentioning that it is vital to living (De Groot et al., 309).

Moreover, it is historically discussed that the earth, the sun, and all other planets are the giant explosion’s remnants that took place during a supernova. The explosion is approving that radiation is everywhere in the atmosphere. Everything that we are surrounded by is radioactive, and also radioactivity existed years before it was discovered by scholars. However, the amounts of radiations decrease spontaneously with time since the time life appeared on the surface of the earth, the level of natural radiation tended to be double compared to the amount of radiation today (De Groot et al., 310). Furthermore, human beings lack the knowledge that our bodies are radioactive. Eight hundred atom carry out disintegration in every second of a minute. In these hundreds, fifty percent represents potassium which is an essential element in an individual’s life, not forgetting carbon that occupies fourteen percent.

Furthermore, the antinuclear bias that existed among the environmental organizations, an example being the Greenpeace, and the bias contained a lot of ideology and less factual. More environmentalists have begun changing their thoughts on nuclear energy due to their importance, scientifically prove, reliable, and a lot of environmental reasons that positively consider atomic power. Nuclear energy is inexhaustible. Powers such as uranium are found in every part of the earth’s crust and exist in abundance compared to gases such as in that is in scarcity. Countries such as Australia and Canada turn out to be the primary deposits of the uranium gas. According to estimations stated, the market price that increases in a factor of ten enables uranium to come into the market one hundred more times. In sea waters, about four billions tonnes of uranium get dissolved, and shortly, means of recovering the sea uranium will be put in place. The inexhaustible characteristic of uranium makes it available whenever it is required (El-Hinnawi & Essam 33).

According to El-Hinnawi & Essam (33), nuclear energy produces less waste as compared other energies such as coal. For instance, a gram of uranium provides a lot of energy that is to be measured to fuel which is equivalent to one tone of coal energy. On the other hand, the waste from nuclear is about one million times less compared to residues from fossils, and it is confined in totality. Used fuels in countries such as Sweden and the United States has later stored away. However, in other parts, the used fuel is recycled, and the three percent of dangerous products found in them separated, later heavy elements are then verified to convert them into gases for storage that is safe and permanent. Plutonium and uranium that makes up the ninety-seven percent remaining gets recovered and then recycled to new element fuel that facilitates energy production. Nuclear waste volume produces minimal. For instance, in France, a particular family used atomic energy, and after lifetime, the verified waste was almost the golf ball size.

Waste from nuclear energy is required to be deposited in numerous geological sites since it cannot enter the biosphere.

Nuclear has a minimal impact on the environment since its waste decomposes spontaneously over a period unlike mercury and arsenic, which are solid chemical wastes stays forever without disintegrating (Van der Pligt & Joop 60). Wastes from fossils fuel that ascends up to the smokestack, even though they are invisible, have harmful effects to the ecosystem and also pays a significant role in global warming, the formation of acid rain that turns out to be harmful to every living creature that depends on rainwater for survival. These wastes also result in smog formation among other pollutants of the atmosphere. Furthermore, less or no traces of carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide or even nitrogen oxides are produced by nuclear energy an aspect that proves atomic energy of being clean and pure unlike fossil fuel that contributes these dirty gases in large quantities (El-Hinnawi & Essam 33).

. Effects of Nuclear Energy to People and Environment

Uranium mining as associated with impacts of climate can be classified into two groups which are land impacts and water impacts. The classification can be illustrated waste and spoilt waters resulting from drainages of mining of from the water that was used in drilling leading to an occupational health hazard. The production of Radon by the decay of radioactive that are found in ores had been viewed as the primary factor that increases cancer incidents among people who work in the mines of uranium (Hodgson & Peter 47). The exposure of this harmful Radon can be controlled or minimized through the provision of artificial ventilators which are then kept in the permissible radon concentration limit. Dust generation control during the mining process is also essential in the hazardous exposure prevention of silica and radiation levels.

During the process of milling, almost seventy percent of the radioactivity that is found in the ore which the mills fed on in the stable tailings mill remains undissolved. The effects of tailing to the environment include erosion of wind in areas that are not restricted, pollution of rivers that are that are in near river bank location (Hodgson & Peter 48). Leaching of radium that occurs from water percolation and materials through piles into the water in grounds is as a result of water level rising in conditions of floods to piles bases. To avoid such destructions, stabilization of tilling against water and wind erosion for periods that are extra long. Following the emanation of radon occurring from tailing of the mill, such materials are it in backfill materials or in structural elements that connect buildings, where people reside and also individual buildings construction, should be avoided in mill tailing piles proximity.

The primary fuel fabrication potential hazard occurs when toxic hydrogen fluoride together with fluorine that is used during uranium hexafluoride production. However, to safely handle these chemicals, the establishment of industries that deal with fluorochemical is essential (Kasperson & Roger et al., 12). The hexafluoride gas that is usually produced in corrodes enriched pants, but when it is at room temperature and is stable, the chemical can easily be packed into steel cylinders. Following these safeguarding methods, materials of nuclear energy in all operations that are after the cycle must be accounted physically according to high precision. When uranium enrichment increases the accidental agglomeration risks of sufficient measures of the uranium in chain setting also increases. Adequate care is required in situations of critical accidents since such accidents cannot be predicted. Proper care helps in ensuring that such events do not occur (Whicker et al., 56). Furthermore, the residues from uranium that has depleted that comes from enriched plants are stored for future use as fertilizers; however, such materials are highly radioactive thereby producing nuclides that are more hazardous acquiring the security production, storage area access should, by all means, be limited.

When comparing gaseous emission risks that are produced by other energy the potential damages that are discharged from power plant of nuclear following normal operations are undeniably small. Rainwater & James (432) outlines that, pollution of thermal is said to be highly pronounced with plants of nuclear as compared to the fossil fuel plants. Atomic plants produce almost fifty percent more heat waste of the waters that are received by plants as compared to the plant of fossil fuel that provides the same amount of electricity. The concern of the public about operations of reactors has highly put its concentration on the occurrence possibility of an accident which may lead to considerable amount of radioactivity released to the surrounding environment. Even though different kinds of accidents may be possible in the time of operation of the nuclear reactors, a lot of safety measures are put in place and procedures during the process should be implemented that will enable reactor closure in cases where there arises serious malfunction (Samaras et al., 2).

During the reprocessing of fuel, the elements of fuel that are spent on reactors during this process have the most radioactive material intensity in the cycle of fuel. The enormous gamma radiation amount is the primary hazards which are emitted by the products of fossil fuel decay. The element that is used is paced to deep water tanks which are known as cooling ponds which are then left there for quite some time. Storing them in ponds helps in preventing a lot of fossil materials that are present and take part in the formation of critical configuration (Samaras et al., 3).

Even though various countries have reduced their programs that concern nuclear energy abandoning fission nuclear will however not be the best way. Increased efforts are essential at this stage of atomic energy development to different anvil impacts of the environment that are related to every step in the cycle of nuclear fission. By so doing, altered adequate measures will be implemented to ensure human beings and their surrounding environment (Samaras et al., 5). Nuclear is clean as it does not provide a lot of waste of waste materials it is safe since it takes care of the environment unlike other gases that pollute the environment. Furthermore, nuclear energy is a more competitive and a reliable source of energy. The only type of power that can adequately substitute a variety of fossil fuels such as coal, gas, and oil is the nuclear energy since these fossil fuels pollute the atmosphere thereby increasing global warming.

Therefore, to facilitate severe and effective climatic changes and to put an end to the use of oil, there we have an enormous task in promoting the general use of nuclear energy since it is renewable. Wind and water energies are also useful energies concerning renewability and too environmental friendly (Samaras et al., 6). However, even after doing all this, it might not be enough in slowing down the accumulation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and in satisfying the requirements of civilization of our industries and the developing countries’ aspiration. To attain all this, then nuclear energy should, by all means, be used to replace coal in industrial countries and later in those countries that are still developing.

Comby, Bruno. "The benefits of nuclear energy." Association of (2003).

De Groot, Judith IM, and Linda Steg. "Morality and nuclear energy: perceptions of risks and benefits, personal norms, and willingness to take action related to nuclear energy." Risk analysis 30.9 (2010): 1363-1373.

De Groot, Judith IM, Linda Steg, and Wouter Poortinga. "Values, perceived risks and benefits, and acceptability of nuclear energy." Risk Analysis 33.2 (2013): 307-317.

El-Hinnawi, Essam E. "Review of the environmental impact of nuclear energy." IAEA BULLETIN 20.2 (1978): 32-42.

Hodgson, Peter E. Nuclear power, energy and the environment. 1999.

Kasperson, Roger E., et al. "Public opposition to nuclear energy: retrospect and prospect." Science, Technology, & Human Values 5.2 (1980): 11-23.King. "Nuclear energy and the fossil fuel." Drilling and production practice. American Petroleum Institute, 1956.

Rainwater, James. "Nuclear energy level argument for a spheroidal nuclear model." Physical Review 79.3 (1950): 432.

Samaras, Maria, Maximo Victoria, and Wolfgang Hoffelner. "NUCLEAR ENERGY MATERIALS PREDICTION." Nuclear Engineering and Technology 41.1 (2009): 1-10.

Van der Pligt, Joop. Nuclear energy and the public. Blackwell Publishing, 1992.

Whicker, F. Ward, and Vincent Schultz. Radioecology: nuclear energy and the environment. Vol. 2. Boca Raton, FL: CRC press, 1982.

Deadline is approaching?

Wait no more. Let us write you an essay from scratch

Related Essays

Nuclear Power Essay IELTS 2024: Writing Task 2 Latest Samples

Updated On March 10, 2024
Published In IELTS Preparation 💻

The IELTS exam tests how well-versed you are in the English language. It consists of 4 papers: reading, writing, listening, and speaking. Essay writing can be daunting if you’re not conversant in its framework and concept. This blog will assist you in writing Nuclear Power Essay IELTS and guide you on how to crack IELTS writing task 2.

Table of Contents

We’ll focus more on the nuclear power essay during this blog and walk you through the process. For guidance and reference on other topics and any other help regarding the IELTS exam , you can look through our website’s collection of blogs and obtain the assistance you need.

Nuclear Power Essay IELTS Sample Answer

Nuclear power is a very debated topic in every convention and has always been questioned for the bad it does rather than its good. In my opinion, nuclear power needs to be used, and the user should also be controlled and hedged with renewable energy sources as they are the only viable solution. Nuclear plants currently provide 11% of the world’s electricity. With an ever-increasing demand for electricity being seen everywhere and the fossil fuels reducing each day, it is now more important than ever that major decisions should be made. In the upcoming decades, energy consumption will only increase and meet the rising demand; nuclear power plants will be required as they are the best source of traditional energy-producing sources. Although nuclear power plants are required, it is also necessary to gradually push renewable energy sources and promote them to create a sustainable future for future generations. Nuclear power plants’ waste disposal and radioactivity are the concerning factors that have been the hot topic of most debates at conventions and meetings. In addition to that, a single misuse of this tremendous power can result in the disruption of life for all mankind. Striking a balance between the two will be crucial in the coming time as global warming and the energy crisis are on a constant rise. If nothing is done in the near time, countries could get submerged underwater within the coming decades, and the entire world will have to fight for survival.

Writing Task 2

The writing section of the IELTS exam consists of two sections. Writing task 2 is an essay writing task that requires deep thinking and coherence. This task will be our focus for this blog, as the rules and guidelines of the IELTS exam can be confusing for students appearing for the first time. Writing task 2 has the subsequent guidelines:

Crack IELTS Exam in first attempt

Attend Leap’s free masterclass to get tips, tricks and advance strategies to crack IELTS exam in first attempt

Nuclear Power Essay IELTS 2024: Writing Task 2 Latest Samples

The essay should have a minimum of 250 words. An essay written in less than 250 words will be penalised and negatively marked. There is no penalty for writing a longer essay, but it will cause you to stray off-topic and waste time.
40 minutes is a good enough time to complete this task and will leave you with time to recheck your answer.
The essay’s contents should be written with perfect grammar and solely focused on the topic.
You can be penalised if you stray off-topic while writing your essay. All the sentences must be related and formed to provide a clear view and information.
The content must be well structured to fetch the best results and have proper cohesion between the sentences.
The tone of your answer must be academic or semi-formal and should discuss the given topic at length and focus on proper and sophisticated language.
Using bullet points and notes is not allowed in the IELTS exam . The real answer must be written together and broken into paragraphs to better examine your writing style and structure.

Structure of Essay in Writing Task 2

The structure of the essay in writing task 2 is the base of your essay, and a clear idea of the structure will make it much easier for you to finish the essay on time. The structure of the essay can be broken down in the following way:

First Paragraph
Second Paragraph
Third Paragraph
Fourth Paragraph

The first paragraph of your essay should provide a small introduction to the topic and provide an opinion of yours about what side you are on about the topic. The first paragraph should be minimal and to the point. A clear and concise introduction leaves a good impression on the examiner. The second paragraph should begin with your stance on the topic. The first sentence should provide clarity on your stance. The second sentence should build on that idea and delve deeper into the specifics. The next sentences are suitable for providing an example and developing it in detail. You can make up research studies and quote them in your essay to support your point. At the end of the paragraph, end with a statement that sums up the overall idea of the paragraph and supports the idea you started with. The third paragraph is very similar in structure to the second paragraph. The main objective of this paragraph is to provide either the opposite view of the topic or discuss new ideas that touch on a different perspective of the topic but ultimately support your opinion. The structuring is the same as in the second paragraph, with minute changes. The fourth paragraph is the conclusion of your essay and, just like the introduction, should be minimal. Summing up your essay with a statement supporting your opinion and overall idea is best advised.

Score well on IELTS Nuclear Essay by understanding the Writing task 2 structure above. Add Brownie points for writing answers with facts, examples and evidence. For more related content, head on to LeapScholar blogs. Avail of one-on-one guidance from India’s top IELTS educators from the Leap Scholar Premium course .

Frequently Asked Questions

1. what are the pros and cons of nuclear power.

Ans: Nuclear energy is a widely used method of production of electricity. The benefits of nuclear technology and the main advantages of nuclear power are: a. No production of harmful gases that cause air pollution b. Clean source of energy c. Low cost of fuel d. Long-life once constructed e. A massive amount of energy produced f. Unlike most energy production methods, nuclear energy does not contribute to the increase in global warming

Disadvantages: a. Very high cost of construction of the facility. b. Waste produced is very toxic and requires proper and safe disposal, which is costly. c. If any accident happens, it can have a major impact on everyone and can be devastating. d. Mining of uranium 235, which is nuclear fuel, is very expensive.

2. Does Japan have a plan for dealing with its own nuclear waste problem?

Ans: As per the latest news and research, Japan does not have a proper nuclear waste dumping structure even after the Fukushima disaster in 2011. The Fukushima disaster was caused by the Tohoku earthquake and tsunami that hit Japan in 2011 and caused meltdowns and hydrogen explosions at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Reactor. It was the worst recorded nuclear disaster since Chernobyl. Japan is said to have enough nuclear waste to create nuclear arsenals. In April 2021, Japan declared they would be dumping 1.2 million tonnes of nuclear waste into the sea. This is the same Japan that called the 1993 ocean dumping by Russia “extremely regrettable.” The discharges are bound to begin by 2023, and various legal proceedings and protests have been going on inside Japan against this inhuman decision that would destroy marine life.

3. How many countries have nuclear power plants?

Ans : Currently, 32 countries in the world possess nuclear power plants within their boundaries.

4. Why do people oppose nuclear power?

Ans: Opposition to nuclear power has been a long-standing issue. It is backed by a variety of reasons which are as follows:Nuclear waste is hard to dispose of, and improper disposal affects the radioactivity levels and can disrupt the normal life of people as well as animals. Nuclear technology is another concern of people as the usage of nuclear power plants leads to deeper research into the nuclear field. In today’s world, anything can be weaponised, and the threat of nuclear weapons is one of the drawbacks of nuclear power. This brings the threat of nuclear war and disruption of world peace. Any attack on nuclear power plants by terrorist organisations can result in a massive explosion that can disrupt and destroy human life and increase radioactivity to alarming levels around the site of the explosion.

5. What is the best way to dispose of nuclear waste?

Ans: Nuclear waste needs to be disposed of properly to prevent radioactive issues in the environment. The best methods to dispose of nuclear waste are as follows: a. Incineration : Radioactive waste can be incinerated in large scale incinerators with low production of waste. b. Deep burial: Nuclear waste can be buried deep into the ground as the radioactivity of nuclear waste wears off over time. This method is used for waste that is highly radioactive and will take a longer time to lose its radioactivity. c. Storage: Nuclear waste with low radioactivity is stored by some countries in storage. This is because their radioactive decay takes lesser time and can be disposed of safely once the radiation wears off.

6. Is it possible to produce electricity without using fossil fuels?

Ans: At the moment, 11% of the world’s electricity is produced by nuclear power plants alone. Replacing fossil fuel-based energy with renewable needs to be done gradually and properly. Renewable energy sources such as solar, hydro, and wind will have to be promoted and pushed to create a sustainable future. Renewable energy sources provide cheap energy, do not use up natural resources and fossil fuels and are much cheaper to construct than a nuclear power station.

Know more about IELTS

Get free speaking practice samples.

Describe a Skill That you can teach other people
Describe a Place you Visited Where the Air was Polluted
Describe a Famous Person that you are Interested in
Describe a Course That You Want to Learn
Describe a Person who Solved a Problem in Smart Way
Describe a Prize That You Received
Describe a Volunteering Experience You Have Had
Describe a Piece of Good News
Describe Something you Taught to Your Friend
Talk About an Interesting Old Person you Met Recently
Describe a Dinner you Really Enjoyed
Describe a Story or Novel That Was Interesting to You
Describe a Time When you Shared Something with Others
Describe a Toy you Liked in Childhood
Describe an Interesting Neighbour
Describe a Competition You Would Like to Take Part In
Describe an interesting activity that you remember enjoying most in your Primary School
Describe Your Childhood Friend
Describe an Object You Find Particularly Beautiful
Describe a Place Where you are Able to Relax
Describe a person you know who likes to talk a lot
Describe a place where you would like to go to relax
Describe a period when you were busy
Describe a long-term goal you would like to achieve
Describe a situation when you helped someone
Describe a job you would not like to do in the future
Describe a time when you used a map
Describe a skill that you learned in your childhood
Describe an unusual holiday you had
Describe an exciting activity that you experienced with someone else
Describe a person who is good at making people feel welcome in his/her home
Describe A Time You Successfully Did Something Difficult
Describe Something in Your Country That You Are Interested In
Describe a Beautiful City
Describe something you do regularly that helps you work and study better
Describe a photo that you took and are proud of
Describe a party that you enjoyed
Describe a useful object in your home that you can’t live without
Describe a good advertisement that you think is useful
Describe an occasion when someone or something made noise
Describe a sportsperson that you admire
Describe something that you picked up that was thrown by someone else
Describe a time that something changed your life in good ways
Describe a successful person who you once studied or worked with

Get Free Reading Practice Samples

William henry perkin reading answers
Why zoos are good reading answers
Bioluminescence reading answers
Classifying societies reading answers
Artificial artists reading answers
Jargon reading answers
The Origins of Laughter Reading Answers
The Innovation of Grocery Stores Reading Answers
All About the Otter Reading Answers
The Triune Brain Reading Answers
Saving the Soil Reading Answers
Trans Fatty Acids Reading Answers
A Disaster of Titanic Proportions Reading Answers
Why Companies Should Welcome Disorder Reading Answers
Book Review Reading Answers
Tea Times Reading Answers
Why are Finland's Schools Successful Reading Answers
Intelligence and Giftedness Reading Answers
Animal Minds Parrot Alex Reading Answers
Crop Growing Skyscrapers Reading Answers
Secrets of the Swarm Reading Answers
Walking with Dinosaurs Reading Answers
The Development of Travel Under the Ocean Reading Answers
What's so Funny Reading Answers
The Culture of Chimpanzee Reading Answers
Clutter Bugs Beware Reading Answer

Get Free Writing Practice Samples

Advantages and Disadvantages Essay with Sample Answers
Agree and Disagree Essay with Sample Answers
Problem Solution Essay Topic with Sample Answers
Every year several languages die out
Positive or Negative Development Essay with Sample Answers
Honesty is the best policy essay
Online shopping essay
Environment essay topics
Prevention is better than cure essay

Get Free Listening Practice Samples

Family excursions listening answers
Public library listening answers
Hiring a public room listening answers
Notes on social programme listening answers
Accommodation request form listening answers
Transport survey listening answers
Mic house agency repairs listening answers
Holiday rentals listening answer
Job enquiry listening answers
Homestay application listening answers
Library information listening answers
Free activities in the burnham area listening answers

IELTS Important Information

IELTS Exam Date
IELTS Exam Fee
IELTS Modules
IELTS Speaking Practice Test
IELTS Writing Practice Test
IELTS Reading Practice Test
IELTS Listening Practice Test
IELTS Test Centres
IELTS Results
Types of IELTS
IELTS Pattern
IELTS Exam Eligibilty
IELTS Slot Booking
IELTS Band Score
IELTS Registration
IELTS Books
IELTS Preparation
IELTS Practice Test
IELTS Speaking Cue Card
IELTS Speaking Part 1
IELTS Writing Task 1
IELTS Writing Task 2
Task 1 Pie Chart
Task 1 Table Chart
Task 1 Bar Graph
Task 1 Line Graph
Task 1 Diagram
IELTS Computer Based Test
IELTS Paper Based Test
IELTS One Skill Retake
IELTS for UKVI
IELTS Vocabulary

IELTS Test Centre and Dates in India

IELTS Test Centre and Dates in Hyderabad
IELTS Test Centre and Dates in Bangalore
IELTS Test Centre and Dates in Chennai
IELTS Test Centre and Dates in Amritsar
IELTS Centre and Dates in Ludhiana
IELTS Test Centre and Dates in Mumbai
IELTS Test Centres and Dates in Ahmedabad
IELTS Centre and Dates in Delhi
IELTS Test Centres and Dates in Chandigarh
IELTS Center and Dates in Pune

Manisha Angre

Experienced IELTS prep trainer and education management industry veteran. Specializes in public speaking, international education, market research, mentoring, and management.

Top IELTS Tips and Tricks For Best IELTS Scores 2024

60+ IELTS Essay Topics 2024: IELTS Writing Task 2 Samples & Tips

IELTS Academic or General: Which is the Easiest Test?

Trending now.

Nuclear Power: Technical and Institutional Options for the Future (1992)

Chapter: 5 conclusions and recommendations, conclusions and recommendations.

The Committee was requested to analyze the technological and institutional alternatives to retain an option for future U.S. nuclear power deployment.

A premise of the Senate report directing this study is “that nuclear fission remains an important option for meeting our electric energy requirements and maintaining a balanced national energy policy.” The Committee was not asked to examine this premise, and it did not do so. The Committee consisted of members with widely ranging views on the desirability of nuclear power. Nevertheless, all members approached the Committee's charge from the perspective of what would be necessary if we are to retain nuclear power as an option for meeting U.S. electric energy requirements, without attempting to achieve consensus on whether or not it should be retained. The Committee's conclusions and recommendations should be read in this context.

The Committee's review and analyses have been presented in previous chapters. Here the Committee consolidates the conclusions and recommendations found in the previous chapters and adds some additional conclusions and recommendations based upon some of the previous statements. The Committee also includes some conclusions and recommendations that are not explicitly based upon the earlier chapters but stem from the considerable experience of the Committee members.

Most of the following discussion contains conclusions. There also are a few recommendations. Where the recommendations appear they are identified as such by bold italicized type.

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS

In 1989, nuclear plants produced about 19 percent of the United States ' electricity, 77 percent of France's electricity, 26 percent of Japan's electricity, and 33 percent of West Germany's electricity. However, expansion of commercial nuclear energy has virtually halted in the United States. In other countries, too, growth of nuclear generation has slowed or stopped. The reasons in the United States include reduced growth in demand for electricity, high costs, regulatory uncertainty, and public opinion. In the United States, concern for safety, the economics of nuclear power, and waste disposal issues adversely affect the general acceptance of nuclear power.

Electricity Demand

Estimated growth in summer peak demand for electricity in the United States has fallen from the 1974 projection of more than 7 percent per year to a relatively steady level of about 2 percent per year. Plant orders based on the projections resulted in cancellations, extended construction schedules, and excess capacity during much of the 1970s and 1980s. The excess capacity has diminished in the past five years, and ten year projections (at approximately 2 percent per year) suggest a need for new capacity in the 1990s and beyond. To meet near-term anticipated demand, bidding by non-utility generators and energy efficiency providers is establishing a trend for utilities acquiring a substantial portion of this new generating capacity from others. Reliance on non-utility generators does not now favor large scale baseload technologies.

Nuclear power plants emit neither precursors to acid rain nor gases that contribute to global warming, like carbon dioxide. Both of these environmental issues are currently of great concern. New regulations to address these issues will lead to increases in the costs of electricity produced by combustion of coal, one of nuclear power's main competitors. Increased costs for coal-generated electricity will also benefit alternate energy sources that do not emit these pollutants.

Major deterrents for new U.S. nuclear plant orders include high capital carrying charges, driven by high construction costs and extended construction times, as well as the risk of not recovering all construction costs.

Construction Costs

Construction costs are hard to establish, with no central source, and inconsistent data from several sources. Available data show a wide range of costs for U.S. nuclear plants, with the most expensive costing three times more (in dollars per kilowatt electric) than the least expensive in the same year of commercial operation. In the post-Three Mile Island era, the cost increases have been much larger. Considerable design modification and retrofitting to meet new regulations contributed to cost increases. From 1971 to 1980, the most expensive nuclear plant (in constant dollars) increased by 30 percent. The highest cost for a nuclear plant beginning commercial operation in the United States was twice as expensive (in constant dollars) from 1981 to 1984 as it was from 1977 to 1980.

Construction Time

Although plant size also increased, the average time to construct a U.S. nuclear plant went from about 5 years prior to 1975 to about 12 years from 1985 to 1989. U.S. construction times are much longer than those in other major nuclear countries, except for the United Kingdom. Over the period 1978 to 1989, the U.S. average construction time was nearly twice that of France and more than twice that of Japan.

Billions of dollars in disallowances of recovery of costs from utility ratepayers have made utilities and the financial community leery of further investments in nuclear power plants. During the 1980s, rate base disallowances by state regulators totaled about $14 billion for nuclear plants, but only about $0.7 billion for non-nuclear plants.

Operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for U.S. nuclear plants have increased faster than for coal plants. Over the decade of the 1980s, U.S. nuclear O&M-plus-fuel costs grew from nearly half to about the same as those for fossil fueled plants, a significant shift in relative advantage.

Performance

On average, U.S. nuclear plants have poorer capacity factors compared to those of plants in other Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries. On a lifetime basis, the United States is barely above 60 percent capacity factor, while France and Japan are at 68 percent, and West Germany is at 74 percent. Moreover, through 1988 12 U.S. plants were in the bottom 22. However, some U.S. plants do very well: 3 of the top 22 OECD plants through 1988 were U.S. U.S. plants averaged 65 percent in 1988, 63 percent in 1989, and 68 percent in 1990.

Except for capacity factors, the performance indicators of U.S. nuclear plants have improved significantly over the past several years. If the industry is to achieve parity with the operating performance in other countries, it must carefully examine its failure to achieve its own goal in this area and develop improved strategies, including better management practices. Such practices are important if the generators are to develop confidence that the new generation of plants can achieve the higher load factors estimated by the vendors.

Public Attitudes

There has been substantial opposition to new plants. The failure to solve the high-level radioactive waste disposal problem has harmed nuclear power's public image. It is the Committee's opinion, based upon our experience, that, more recently, an inability of states, that are members of regional compact commissions, to site low-level radioactive waste facilities has also harmed nuclear power's public image.

Several factors seem to influence the public to have a less than positive attitude toward new nuclear plants:

no perceived urgency for new capacity;

nuclear power is believed to be more costly than alternatives;

concerns that nuclear power is not safe enough;

little trust in government or industry advocates of nuclear power;

concerns about the health effects of low-level radiation;

concerns that there is no safe way to dispose of high-level waste; and

concerns about proliferation of nuclear weapons.

The Committee concludes that the following would improve public opinion of nuclear power:

a recognized need for a greater electrical supply that can best be met by large plants;

economic sanctions or public policies imposed to reduce fossil fuel burning;

maintaining the safe operation of existing nuclear plants and informing the public;

providing the opportunity for meaningful public participation in nuclear power issues, including generation planning, siting, and oversight;

better communication on the risk of low-level radiation;

resolving the high-level waste disposal issue; and

assurance that a revival of nuclear power would not increase proliferation of nuclear weapons.

As a result of operating experience, improved O&M training programs, safety research, better inspections, and productive use of probabilistic risk analysis, safety is continually improved. The Committee concludes that the risk to the health of the public from the operation of current reactors in the United States is very small. In this fundamental sense, current reactors are safe. However, a significant segment of the public has a different perception and also believes that the level of safety can and should be increased. The

development of advanced reactors is in part an attempt to respond to this public attitude.

Institutional Changes

The Committee believes that large-scale deployment of new nuclear power plants will require significant changes by both industry and government.

One of the most important factors affecting the future of nuclear power in the United States is its cost in relation to alternatives and the recovery of these capital and operating charges through rates that are charged for the electricity produced. Chapter 2 of this report deals with these issues in some detail. As stated there, the industry must develop better methods for managing the design and construction of nuclear plants. Arrangements among the participants that would assure timely, economical, and high-quality construction of new nuclear plants, the Committee believes, will be prerequisites to an adequate degree of assurance of capital cost recovery from state regulatory authorities in advance of construction. The development of state prudency laws also can provide a positive response to this issue.

The Committee and others are well aware of the increases in nuclear plant construction and operating costs over the last 20 years and the extension of plant construction schedules over this same period. 1 The Committee believes there are many reasons for these increases but is unable to disaggregate the cost effect among these reasons with any meaningful precision.

Like others, the Committee believes that the financial community and the generators must both be satisfied that significant improvements can be achieved before new plants can be ordered. In addition, the Committee believes that greater confidence in the control of costs can be realized with plant designs that are more nearly complete before construction begins, plants that are easier to construct, use of better construction and management methods, and business arrangements among the participants that provide stronger incentives for cost-effective, timely completion of projects.

It is the Committee's opinion, based upon our experience, that the principal participants in the nuclear industry--utilities, architect-engineers, and suppliers –should begin now to work out the full range of contractual arrangements for advanced nuclear power plants. Such arrangements would

increase the confidence of state regulatory bodies and others that the principal participants in advanced nuclear power plant projects will be financially accountable for the quality, timeliness, and economy of their products and services.

Inadequate management practices have been identified at some U.S. utilities, large and small public and private. Because of the high visibility of nuclear power and the responsibility for public safety, a consistently higher level of demonstrated utility management practices is essential before the U.S. public's attitude about nuclear power is likely to improve.

Over the past decade, utilities have steadily strengthened their ability to be responsible for the safety of their plants. Their actions include the formation and support of industry institutions, including the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO). Self-assessment and peer oversight through INPO are acknowledged to be strong and effective means of improving the performance of U.S. nuclear power plants. The Committee believes that such industry self-improvement, accountability, and self-regulation efforts improve the ability to retain nuclear power as an option for meeting U.S. electric energy requirements. The Committee encourages industry efforts to reduce reliance on the adversarial approach to issue resolution.

It is the Committee's opinion, based upon our experience, that the nuclear industry should continue to take the initiative to bring the standards of every American nuclear plant up to those of the best plants in the United States and the world. Chronic poor performers should be identified publicly and should face the threat of insurance cancellations. Every U.S. nuclear utility should continue its full-fledged participation in INPO; any new operators should be required to become members through insurance prerequisites or other institutional mechanisms.

Standardization. The Committee views a high degree of standardization as very important for the retention of nuclear power as an option for meeting U.S. electric energy requirements. There is not a uniformly accepted definition of standardization. The industry, under the auspices of the Nuclear Power Oversight Committee, has developed a position paper on standardization that provides definitions of the various phases of standardization and expresses an industry commitment to standardization. The Committee believes that a strong and sustained commitment by the principal participants will be required to realize the potential benefits of standardization (of families of plants) in the diverse U.S. economy. It is the Committee's opinion, based upon our experience, that the following will be necessary:

Families of standardized plants will be important for ensuring the highest levels of safety and for realizing the potential economic benefits of new nuclear plants. Families of standardized plants will allow standardized approaches to plant modification, maintenance, operation, and training.

Customers, whether utilities or other entities, must insist on standardization before an order is placed, during construction, and throughout the life of the plant.

Suppliers must take standardization into account early in planning and marketing. Any supplier of standardized units will need the experience and resources for a long-term commitment.

Antitrust considerations will have to be properly taken into account to develop standardized plants.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

An obstacle to continued nuclear power development has been the uncertainties in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) licensing process. Because the current regulatory framework was mainly intended for light water reactors (LWR) with active safety systems and because regulatory standards were developed piecemeal over many years, without review and consolidation, the regulations should be critically reviewed and modified (or replaced with a more coherent body of regulations) for advanced reactors of other types. The Committee recommends that NRC comprehensively review its regulations to prepare for advance reactors, in particular. LWRs with passive safety features. The review should proceed from first principles to develop a coherent, consistent set of regulations.

The Committee concludes that NRC should improve the quality of its regulation of existing and future nuclear power plants, including tighter management controls over all of its interactions with licensees and consistency of regional activities. Industry has proposed such to NRC.

The Committee encourages efforts by NRC to reduce reliance on the adversarial approach to issue resolution. The Committee recommends that NRC encourage industry self-improvement, accountability, and self-regulation initia tives . While federal regulation plays an important safety role, it must not be allowed to detract from or undermine the accountability of utilities and their line management organizations for the safety of their plants.

It is the Committee's expectation that economic incentive programs instituted by state regulatory bodies will continue for nuclear power plant operators. Properly formulated and administered, these programs should improve the economic performance of nuclear plants, and they may also enhance safety. However, they do have the potential to provide incentives counter to safety. The Committee believes that such programs should focus

on economic incentives and avoid incentives that can directly affect plant safety. On July 18, 1991 NRC issued a Nuclear Regulatory Commission Policy Statement which expressed concern that such incentive programs may adversely affect safety and commits NRC to monitoring such programs. A joint industry/state study of economic incentive programs could help assure that such programs do not interfere with the safe operation of nuclear power plants.

It is the Committee's opinion, based upon our experience, that NRC should continue to exercise its federally mandated preemptive authority over the regulation of commercial nuclear power plant safety if the activities of state government agencies (or other public or private agencies) run counter to nuclear safety. Such activities would include those that individually or in the aggregate interfere with the ability of the organization with direct responsibility for nuclear plant safety (the organization licensed by the Commission to operate the plant) to meet this responsibility. The Committee urges close industry-state cooperation in the safety area.

It is also the Committee's opinion, based upon our experience, that the industry must have confidence in the stability of NRC's licensing process. Suppliers and utilities need assurance that licensing has become and will remain a manageable process that appropriately limits the late introduction of new issues.

It is likely that, if the possibility of a second hearing before a nuclear plant can be authorized to operate is to be reduced or eliminated, legislation will be necessary. The nuclear industry is convinced that such legislation will be required to increase utility and investor confidence to retain nuclear power as an option for meeting U.S. electric energy requirements. The Committee concurs.

It is the Committee's opinion, based upon our experience, that potential nuclear power plant sponsors must not face large unanticipated cost increases as a result of mid-course regulatory changes, such as backfits. NRC 's new licensing rule, 10 CFR Part 52, provides needed incentives for standardized designs.

Industry and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

The U.S. system of nuclear regulation is inherently adversarial, but mitigation of unnecessary tension in the relations between NRC and its nuclear power licensees would, in the Committee's opinion, improve the regulatory environment and enhance public health and safety. Thus, the Committee commends the efforts by both NRC and the industry to work

more cooperatively together and encourages both to continue and strengthen these efforts.

Department of Energy

Lack of resolution of the high-level waste problem jeopardizes future nuclear power development. The Committee believes that the legal status of the Yucca Mountain site for a geologic repository should be resolved soon, and that the Department of Energy's (DOE) program to investigate this site should be continued. In addition, a contingency plan must be developed to store high-level radioactive waste in surface storage facilities pending the availability of the geologic repository.

Environmental Protection Agency

The problems associated with establishing a high-level waste site at Yucca Mountain are exacerbated by the requirement that, before operation of a repository begins, DOE must demonstrate to NRC that the repository will perform to standards established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). NRC's staff has strongly questioned the workability of these quantitative requirements, as have the National Research Council's Radioactive Waste Management Board and others. The Committee concludes that the EPA standard for disposal of high-level waste will have to be reevaluated to ensure that a standard that is both adequate and feasible is applied to the geologic waste repository.

Administration and Congress

The Price-Anderson Act will expire in 2002. The Committee sought to discover whether or not such protection would be required for advanced reactors. The clear impression the Committee received from industry representatives was that some such protection would continue to be needed, although some Committee members believe that this was an expression of desire rather than of need. At the very least, renewal of Price-Anderson in 2002 would be viewed by the industry as a supportive action by Congress and would eliminate the potential disruptive effect of developing alternative liability arrangements with the insurance industry. Failure to renew Price-Anderson in 2002 would raise a new impediment to nuclear power plant orders as well as possibly reduce an assured source of funds to accident victims.

The Committee believes that the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) approach to safety investigations, as a substitute for the present NRC approach, has merit. In view of the infrequent nature of the activities of such a committee, it may be feasible for it to be established on an ad hoc basis and report directly to the NRC chairman. Therefore, the Committee recommends that such a small safety review entity be established. Before the establishment of such an activity, its charter should be carefully defined, along with a clear delineation of the classes of accidents it would investigate. Its location in the government and its reporting channels should also be specified. The function of this group would parallel those of NTSB. Specifically, the group would conduct independent public investigations of serious incidents and accidents at nuclear power plants and would publish reports evaluating the causes of these events. This group would have only a small administrative structure and would bring in independent experts, including those from both industry and government, to conduct its investigations.

It is the Committee's opinion, based upon our experience, that responsible arrangements must be negotiated between sponsors and economic regulators to provide reasonable assurances of complete cost recovery for nuclear power plant sponsors. Without such assurances, private investment capital is not likely to flow to this technology.

In Chapter 2 , the Committee addressed the non-recovery of utility costs in rate proceedings and concluded that better methods of dealing with this issue must be established. The Committee was impressed with proposals for periodic reviews of construction progress and costs--“rolling prudency” determinations--as one method for managing the risks of cost recovery. The Committee believes that enactment of such legislation could remove much of the investor risk and uncertainty currently associated with state regulatory treatment of new power plant construction, and could therefore help retain nuclear power as an option for meeting U.S. electric energy requirements.

On balance, however, unless many states adopt this or similar legislation, it is the Committee's view that substantial assurances probably cannot be given, especially in advance of plant construction, that all costs incurred in building nuclear plants will be allowed into rate bases.

The Committee notes the current trend toward economic deregulation of electric power generation. It is presently unclear whether this trend is compatible with substantial additions of large-scale, utility-owned, baseload generating capacity, and with nuclear power plants in particular.

It is the Committee's opinion, based upon our experience, that regional low-level radioactive waste compact commissions must continue to establish disposal sites.

The institutional challenges are clearly substantial. If they are to be met, the Committee believes that the Federal government must decide, as a matter of national policy, whether a strong and growing nuclear power program is vital to the economic, environmental, and strategic interests of the American people. Only with such a clearly stated policy, enunciated by the President and backed by the Congress through appropriate statutory changes and appropriations, will it be possible to effect the institutional changes necessary to return the flow of capital and human resources required to properly employ this technology.

Alternative Reactor Technologies

Advanced reactors are now in design or development. They are being designed to be simpler, and, if design goals are realized, these plants will be safer than existing reactors. The design requirements for the advanced reactors are more stringent than the NRC safety goal policy. If final safety designs of advanced reactors, and especially those with passive safety features, are as indicated to this Committee, an attractive feature of them should be the significant reduction in system complexity and corresponding improvement in operability. While difficult to quantify, the benefit of improvements in the operator 's ability to monitor the plant and respond to system degradations may well equal or exceed that of other proposed safety improvements.

The reactor concepts assessed by the Committee were the large evolutionary LWRs, the mid-sized LWRs with passive safety features, 2 the Canadian deuterium uranium (CANDU) heavy water reactor, the modular high-temperature gas-cooled reactor (MHTGR), the safe integral reactor (SIR), the process inherent ultimate safety (PIUS) reactor, and the liquid metal reactor (LMR). The Committee developed the following criteria for comparing these reactor concepts:

safety in operation;

economy of construction and operation;

suitability for future deployment in the U.S. market;

fuel cycle and environmental considerations;

safeguards for resistance to diversion and sabotage;

technology risk and development schedule; and

amenability to efficient and predictable licensing.

With regard to advanced designs, the Committee reached the following conclusions.

Large Evolutionary Light Water Reactors

The large evolutionary LWRs offer the most mature technology. The first standardized design to be certified in the United States is likely to be an evolutionary LWR. The Committee sees no need for federal research and development (R&D) funding for these concepts, although federal funding could accelerate the certification process.

Mid-sized Light Water Reactors with Passive Safety Features

The mid-sized LWRs with passive safety features are designed to be simpler, with modular construction to reduce construction times and costs, and to improve operations. They are likely the next to be certified.

Because there is no experience in building such plants, cost projections for the first plant are clearly uncertain. To reduce the economic uncertainties it will be necessary to demonstrate the construction technology and improved operating performance. These reactors differ from current reactors in construction approach, plant configuration, and safety features. These differences do not appear so great as to require that a first plant be built for NRC certification. While a prototype in the traditional sense will not be required, the Committee concludes that no first-plant mid-sized LWR with passive safety features is likely to be certified and built without government incentives, in the form of shared funding or financial guarantees.

CANDU Heavy Water Reactor

The Committee judges that the CANDU ranks below the advanced mid-sized LWRs in market potential. The CANDU-3 reactor is farther along in design than the mid-sized LWRs with passive safety features. However, it has not entered NRC's design certification process. Commission requirements are complex and different from those in Canada so that U.S. certification

could be a lengthy process. However, the CANDU reactor can probably be licensed in this century.

The heavy water reactor is a mature design, and Canadian entry into the U.S. marketplace would give added insurance of adequate nuclear capacity if it is needed in the future. But the CANDU does not offer advantages sufficient to justify U.S. government assistance to initiate and conduct its licensing review.

Modular High-Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor

The MHTGR posed a difficult set of questions for the Committee. U.S. and foreign experience with commercial gas-cooled reactors has not been good. A consortium of industry and utility people continue to promote federal funding and to express interest in the concept, while none has committed to an order.

The reactor, as presently configured, is located below ground level and does not have a conventional containment. The basic rationale of the designers is that a containment is not needed because of the safety features inherent in the properties of the fuel.

However, the Committee was not convinced by the presentations that the core damage frequency for the MHTGR has been demonstrated to be low enough to make a containment structure unnecessary. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory estimates that data to confirm fuel performance will not be available before 1994. The Committee believes that reliance on the defense-in-depth concept must be retained, and accurate evaluation of safety will require evaluation of a detailed design.

A demonstration plant for the MHTGR could be licensed slightly after the turn of the century, with certification following demonstration of successful operation. The MHTGR needs an extensive R&D program to achieve commercial readiness in the early part of the next century. The construction and operation of a first plant would likely be required before design certification. Recognizing the opposite conclusion of the MHTGR proponents, the Committee was not convinced that a foreseeable commercial market exists for MHTGR-produced process heat, which is the unique strategic capability of the MHTGR. Based on the Committee 's view on containment requirements, and the economics and technology issues, the Committee judged the market potential for the MHTGR to be low.

The Committee believes that no funds should be allocated for development of high-temperature gas-cooled reactor technology within the commercial nuclear power development budget of DOE.

Safe Integral Reactor and Process Inherent Ultimate Safety Reactor

The other advanced light water designs the Committee examined were the United Kingdom and U.S. SIR and the Swedish PIUS reactor.

The Committee believes there is no near-term U.S. market for SIR and PIUS. The development risks for SIR and PIUS are greater than for the other LWRs and CANDU-3. The lack of operational and regulatory experience for these two is expected to significantly delay their acceptance by utilities. SIR and PIUS need much R&D, and a first plant will probably be required before design certification is approved.

The Committee concluded that no Federal funds should be allocated for R&D on SIR or PIUS.

Liquid Metal Reactor

LMRs offer advantages because of their potential ability to provide a long-term energy supply through a nearly complete use of uranium resources. Were the nuclear option to be chosen, and large scale deployment follow, at some point uranium supplies at competitive prices might be exhausted. Breeder reactors offer the possibility of extending fissionable fuel supplies well past the next century. In addition, actinides, including those from LWR spent fuel, can undergo fission without significantly affecting performance of an advanced LMR, transmuting the actinides to fission products, most of which, except for technetium, carbon, and some others of little import, have half-lives very much shorter than the actinides. (Actinides are among the materials of greatest concern in nuclear waste disposal beyond about 300 years.) However, substantial further research is required to establish (1) the technical and the economic feasibility of recycling in LMRs actinides recovered from LWR spent fuel, and (2) whether high-recovery recycling of transuranics and their transmutation can, in fact, benefit waste disposal. Assuming success, it would still be necessary to dispose of high-level waste, although the waste would largely consist of significantly shorter-lived fission products. Special attention will be necessary to ensure that the LMR's reprocessing facilities are not vulnerable to sabotage or to theft of plutonium.

The unique property of the LMR, fuel breeding, might lead to a U.S. market, but only in the long term. From the viewpoint of commercial licensing, it is far behind the evolutionary and mid-sized LWRs with passive safety features in having a commercial design available for review. A federally funded program, including one or more first plants, will be required before any LMR concept would be accepted by U.S. utilities.

Net Assessment

The Committee could not make any meaningful quantitative comparison of the relative safety of the various advanced reactor designs. The Committee believes that each of the concepts considered can be designed and operated to meet or closely approach the safety objectives currently proposed for future, advanced LWRs. The different advanced reactor designs employ different mixes of active and passive safety features. The Committee believes that there currently is no single optimal approach to improved safety. Dependence on passive safety features does not, of itself, ensure greater safety. The Committee believes that a prudent design course retains the historical defense-in-depth approach.

The economic projections are highly uncertain, first, because past experience suggests higher costs, longer construction times, and lower availabilities than projected and, second, because of different assumptions and levels of maturity among the designs. The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) data, which the Committee believes to be more reliable than that of the vendors, indicate that the large evolutionary LWRs are likely to be the least costly to build and operate on a cost per kilowatt electric or kilowatt hour basis, while the high-temperature gas-cooled reactors and LMRs are likely to be the most expensive. EPRI puts the mid-sized LWRs with passive safety features between the two extremes.

Although there are definite differences in the fuel cycle characteristics of the advanced reactors, fuel cycle considerations did not offer much in the way of discrimination among reactors, nor did safeguards and security considerations, particularly for deployment in the United States. However, the CANDU (with on-line refueling and heavy water) and the LMR (with reprocessing) will require special attention to safeguards.

SIR, MHTGR, PIUS, and LMR are not likely to be deployed for commercial use in the United States, at least within the next 20 years. The development required for commercialization of any of these concepts is substantial.

It is the Committee's overall assessment that the large evolutionary LWRs and the mid-sized LWRs with passive safety features rank highest relative to the Committee 's evaluation criteria. The evolutionary reactors could be ready for deployment by 2000, and the mid-sized could be ready for initial plant construction soon after 2000. The Committee's evaluations and overall assessment are summarized in Figure 5-1 .

FIGURE 5.1 Assessment of advanced reactor technologies.

This table is an attempt to summarize the Committee's qualitative rankings of selected reactor types against each other , without reference either to an absolute standard or to the performance of any other energy resource options, This evaluation was based on the Committee's professional judgment.

The Committee has concluded the following:

Safety and cost are the most important characteristics for future nuclear power plants.

LWRs of the large evolutionary and the mid-sized advanced designs offer the best potential for competitive costs (in that order).

Safety benefits among all reactor types appear to be about equal at this stage in the design process. Safety must be achieved by attention to all failure modes and levels of design by a multiplicity of safety barriers and features. Consequently, in the absence of detailed engineering design and because of the lack of construction and operating experience with the actual concepts, vendor claims of safety superiority among conceptual designs cannot be substantiated.

LWRs can be deployed to meet electricity production needs for the first quarter of the next century:

The evolutionary LWRs are further developed and, because of international projects, are most complete in design. They are likely to be the first plants certified by NRC. They are expected to be the first of the advanced reactors available for commercial use and could operate in the 2000 to 2005 time frame. Compared to current reactors, significant improvements in safety appear likely. Compared to recently completed high-cost reactors, significant improvements also appear possible in cost if institutional barriers are resolved. While little or no federal funding is deemed necessary to complete the process, such funding could accelerate the process.

Because of the large size and capital investment of evolutionary reactors, utilities that might order nuclear plants may be reluctant to do so. If nuclear power plants are to be available to a broader range of potential U.S. generators, the development of the mid-sized plants with passive safety features is important. These reactors are progressing in their designs, through DOE and industry funding, toward certification in the 1995 to 2000 time frame. The Committee believes such funding will be necessary to complete the process. While a prototype in the traditional sense will not be required, federal funding will likely be required for the first mid-sized LWR with passive safety features to be ordered.

Government incentives, in the form of shared funding or financial guarantees, would likely accelerate the next order for a light water plant. The Committee has not addressed what type of government assistance should be provided nor whether the first advanced light water plant should be a large evolutionary LWR or a mid-sized passive LWR.

The CANDU-3 reactor is relatively advanced in design but represents technology that has not been licensed in the United States. The Committee did not find compelling reasons for federal funding to the vendor to support the licensing.

SIR and PIUS, while offering potentially attractive safety features, are unlikely to be ready for commercial use until after 2010. This alone may limit their market potential. Funding priority for research on these reactor systems is considered by the Committee to be low.

MHTGRs also offer potential safety features and possible process heat applications that could be attractive in the market place. However, based on the extensive experience base with light water technology in the United States, the lack of success with commercial use of gas technology, the likely higher costs of this technology compared with the alternatives, and the substantial development costs that are still required before certification, 3 the Committee concluded that the MHTGR had a low market potential. The Committee considered the possibility that the MHTGR might be selected as the new tritium production reactor for defense purposes and noted the vendor association's estimated reduction in development costs for a commercial version of the MHTGR. However, the Committee concluded, for the reasons summarized above, that the commercial MHTGR should be given low priority for federal funding.

LMR technology also provides enhanced safety features, but its uniqueness lies in the potential for extending fuel resources through breeding. While the market potential is low in the near term (before the second quarter of the next century), it could be an important long-term technology, especially if it can be demonstrated to be economic. The Committee believes that the LMR should have the highest priority for long-term nuclear technology development.

The problems of proliferation and physical security posed by the various technologies are different and require continued attention. Special attention will need to be paid to the LMR.

Alternative Research and Development Programs

The Committee developed three alternative R&D programs, each of which contains three common research elements: (1) reactor research using federal facilities. The experimental breeder reactor-II, hot fuel examination facility/south, and fuel manufacturing facility are retained for the LMR; (2) university research programs; and (3) improved performance and life extension programs for existing U.S. nuclear power plants.

The Committee concluded that federal support for development of a commercial version of the MHTGR should be a low priority. However, the fundamental design strategy of the MHTGR is based upon the integrity of the fuel (=1600°C) under operation and accident conditions. There are other potentially significant uses for such fuel, in particular, space propulsion. Consequently, the Committee believes that DOE should consider maintaining a coated fuel particle research program within that part of DOE focused on space reactors.

Alternative 1 adds funding to assist development of the mid-sized LWRs with passive safety features. Alternative 2 adds a LMR development program and associated facilities--the transient reactor test facility, the zero power physics reactor, the Energy Technology Engineering Center, and either the hot fuel examination facility/north in Idaho or the Hanford hot fuel examination facility. This alternative would also include limited research to examine the feasibility of recycling actinides from LWR spent fuel, utilizing the LMR. Finally, Alternative 3 adds the fast flux test facility and increases LMR funding to accelerate reactor and integral fast reactor fuel cycle development and examination of actinide recycle of LWR spent fuel.

None of the three alternatives contain funding for development of the MHTGR, SIR, PIUS, or CANDU-3.

Significant analysis and research is required to assess both the technical and economic feasibility of recycling actinides from LWR spent fuel. The Committee notes that a study of separations technology and transmutation systems was initiated in 1991 by DOE through the National Research Council's Board on Radioactive Waste Management.

It is the Committee's judgment that Alternative 2 should be followed because it:

provides adequate support for the most promising near-term reactor technologies;

provides sufficient support for LMR development to maintain the technical capabilities of the LMR R&D community;

would support deployment of LMRs to breed fuel by the second quarter of the next century should that be needed; and

would maintain a research program in support of both existing and advanced reactors.

The construction of nuclear power plants in the United States is stopping, as regulators, reactor manufacturers, and operators sort out a host of technical and institutional problems.

This volume summarizes the status of nuclear power, analyzes the obstacles to resumption of construction of nuclear plants, and describes and evaluates the technological alternatives for safer, more economical reactors. Topics covered include:

Institutional issues—including regulatory practices at the federal and state levels, the growing trends toward greater competition in the generation of electricity, and nuclear and nonnuclear generation options.
Critical evaluation of advanced reactors—covering attributes such as cost, construction time, safety, development status, and fuel cycles.

Finally, three alternative federal research and development programs are presented.

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

About the MPSC About the MPSC collapsed link
Commission Activities Commission Activities collapsed link
Consumer Information Consumer Information collapsed link
Regulatory Information Regulatory Information collapsed link
MPSC News Releases
Renewable Energy and Electrification Infrastructure Enhancement and Development Grant

MPSC Upcoming Events

Renewable Energy and Energy Storage Siting Implementation Workshop
2023 Energy Legislation
MI Power Grid
Inquiries & Complaints
Utility Program Portal
Electricity
Natural Gas & Pipelines
Propane & Petroleum
Telecommunications
Business Consumers
Consumers Energy Savings Programs
DTE Energy Savings Programs
Indiana Michigan Power Savings Programs
SEMCO ENERGY Gas Company Savings Programs
UPPCO Energy Savings Programs
Administrative Rules / Laws
Medical Certification Form
Reports & Forms
Gas Safety & Operations Division Contact
About the MPSC
Commission Activities
Consumer Information
Regulatory Information

Search is currently unavailable. Please try again later.

Popular on michigan.gov

Agriculture and Rural Development
Civil Rights
Environment
Health and Human Services
Natural Resources
Secretary of State

How Do I...

Register to Vote
Renew My License Plate
View assistance programs

The web Browser you are currently using is unsupported, and some features of this site may not work as intended. Please update to a modern browser such as Chrome, Firefox or Edge to experience all features Michigan.gov has to offer.

Google Chrome
Microsoft Edge

Study finds nuclear energy could benefit environment, economy, but not without concerns about costs and public reception

March 20, 2024

News media contact: Matt Helms 517-284-8300

Customer Assistance: 800-292-9555

Carbon-free electricity generated at nuclear power plants could aid Michigan’s goal of having 100% of its electrical generation from clean sources by 2040, but not without consideration of issues such as the significant expense of new nuclear power, unresolved questions about nuclear waste disposal, and siting challenges, according to a Nuclear Feasibility Study presented to the Michigan Public Service Commission and conducted at the behest of the Michigan Legislature.

The MPSC was directed by lawmakers and Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in Public Acts 166 and 218 of 2022 to engage an outside consulting firm to study the feasibility of nuclear power generation in Michigan to provide carbon-free electricity as the state transitions from fossil fuels to cleaner energy sources.

The study was required to consider the advantages and disadvantages of nuclear energy and include evaluations, conclusions and recommendations on design characteristics, environmental and ecological impacts, land and siting criteria, safety criteria, engineering and cost-related criteria, and small cell nuclear reactor capability. The study also was required to include a socioeconomic assessment and impact analysis on workforce education, training, and development; local and state tax base; supply chains; and permanent and temporary job creation.

After issuing a request for proposals , the Commission selected Enercon Services East PC to conduct the study ( Case No. U-21358 ), which included opportunities for input from energy utilities, community groups and other interested people and organizations. Veritas Economics prepared the report’s workforce and economic impact assessment.

The report notes the emissions-free nature of nuclear power and the relatively small amounts of land needed for nuclear plants, which can produce significant amounts of reliable energy at high capacity factors. The report also notes the disadvantages, including high upfront capital costs, lengthy project development timelines, concerns from the community and no national resolution to the issue of permanent disposal of spent nuclear waste.

Among highlights of the report:

A hypothetical new nuclear plant built in Ottawa County or Monroe County would create an estimated $3.6 billion to $3.7 billion in economic benefit and 719 to 777 long term jobs for the duration of the plant’s operation.
A hypothetical new nuclear plant in DTE Electric Co.’s territory in southeast Michigan could result in an estimated annual reduction of 365,000 tons of carbon dioxide, 62 tons of sulfur dioxide and 140 tons of nitric oxide. A hypothetical plant in Consumers Energy’s territory could reduce annual emissions by 1.2 million tons of carbon dioxide, 6.2 tons of sulfur dioxide and 197 tons of nitric oxide.
Continuing existing nuclear power generation will be necessary for the state to meet its carbon-free energy goals cost-effectively. And for new nuclear, while costs for building nuclear capacity in Michigan may be high, some of the costs may be recouped through long-term economic impacts in local economies and increased tax payments.

There are three operational units located at two power plants in Michigan: one unit at DTE Energy’s Fermi 2 Power Plant near Monroe and two units at Indiana Michigan Power’s Cook Nuclear Plant in Bridgman. Holtec International, the owner of a third plant, Palisades Nuclear Plant in Covert Township, seeks to gain regulatory approval to reinstate the plant’s operating license and procure federal funding to restart it.

Additional information about the MPSC’s work on this matter can be found at the Commission’s Nuclear Feasibility Study webpage .

For information about the MPSC, visit www.michigan.gov/mpsc , sign up for its monthly newsletter or other listservs . Follow the Commission on Facebook , X/Twitter or LinkedIn .

Related News

Mpsc rejects early termination of two consumers energy contracts for output biomass plants, work to reduce power outages, improve grid reliability is top highlight of mpsc's 2023 annual report, mpsc approves dte electric co. power supply cost recovery reconciliation; disallows more than $2.7m in costs, mpsc approves $92m rate increase for consumers energy electric customers, mpsc invites public review of applications for $21.3m in renewable energy and electrification grants, mpsc to hold public hearing march 4 in detroit on implementation of state's 2023 energy laws, mpsc sets dates for first meetings on implementation of renewable energy siting authority law, mpsc kicks off implementation of changes made to michigan's energy laws in 2023, michigan's electric choice program holds steady in 2023.

IMAGES

Advantages And Disadvantages Of Nuclear Energy
Dangers and Hazards of Nuclear Power (300 Words)
Nuclear Pollution Essay
Advantage of nuclear energy essay in 2021
Argumentative Essay
Nuclear Power Advantages And Disadvantages Essay Ielts

VIDEO

Essay on Atomic energy in English || Essay on Nuclear Energy
Is nuclear energy worth it?
important Essay energy Crisis। +2 2nd year arts, science,commerce। chse Odisha। class 12 #essay
5 Simple Reasons Nuclear is a Bad Idea
The Better Geiger: Radiation, Fallout, Prepping and Survival
The risks of nuclear energy

COMMENTS

Nuclear Energy Benefits
We will write a custom essay on your topic. One of the factors why nuclear energy is an effective source of energy is that it is cost effective. Electricity generated from nuclear energy is economical and saves cost when compared with other forms of electricity from renewable sources like sun, wind, biomass and water.
Essay on Nuclear Energy in 500+ words for School Students
Ans. Nuclear energy is the energy released during nuclear reactions. Its importance lies in generating electricity, medical applications, and powering spacecraft. 2. Write a short note on nuclear energy. Ans. Nuclear energy is exploited from the nucleus of atoms through processes like fission or fusion.
Advantages and Challenges of Nuclear Energy
Nuclear energy protects air quality by producing massive amounts of carbon-free electricity. It powers communities in 28 U.S. states and contributes to many non-electric applications, ranging from the medical field to space exploration. The Office of Nuclear Energy within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) focuses its research primarily on maintaining the existing fleet of reactors ...
Essay on Nuclear Energy
Students are often asked to write an essay on Nuclear Energy in their schools and colleges. And if you're also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic. ... Balancing its benefits against the associated risks requires careful consideration and responsible action. 500 Words Essay on Nuclear ...
The Advantages and Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy
A rather important advantage of nuclear energy is that it is much safer than fossil fuels from a public health perspective. The pro-nuclear movement leverages the fact that nuclear waste is not even remotely as dangerous as the toxic chemicals coming from fossil fuels. Indeed, coal and oil act as 'invisible killers' and are responsible for ...
Nuclear energy: Benefits And Drawbacks: Essay Example, 778 words
"Nuclear energy provides about 20% of U.S. electricity, and this share has remained stable since around 1990. Nuclear power plants had a capacity factor of 93% in 2018." ("Nuclear Energy Factsheet", par. 1). Nuclear energy also has its disadvantages, much like any other energy source.
Nuclear Energy
Nuclear energy is the energy in the nucleus, or core, of an atom. Atoms are tiny units that make up all matter in the universe, and energy is what holds the nucleus together. There is a huge amount of energy in an atom's dense nucleus.In fact, the power that holds the nucleus together is officially called the "strong force." Nuclear energy can be used to create electricity, but it must first ...
Nuclear energy facts and information
Nuclear energy's future as an electricity source may depend on scientists' ability to make it cheaper and safer. Nuclear power is generated by splitting atoms to release the energy held at the ...
PDF Risks and Benefits of Nuclear Energy
NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY The OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) was established on 1st February 1958 under the name of the OEEC European Nuclear Energy Agency. It received its present designation on 20th April 1972, when Japan became its first non-European full member. NEA membership today consists of 28 OECD member countries: Australia, Austria ...
What is Nuclear Energy? The Science of Nuclear Power
The Science of Nuclear Power. Nuclear energy is a form of energy released from the nucleus, the core of atoms, made up of protons and neutrons. This source of energy can be produced in two ways: fission - when nuclei of atoms split into several parts - or fusion - when nuclei fuse together. The nuclear energy harnessed around the world ...
PDF Nuclear Energy: Balancing Benefits and Risks
Nuclear Energy: Balancing Benefits and Risks is a sobering and authoritative look at nuclear power. Dr. Ferguson argues that nuclear energy, despite its attributes, is unlikely to play a major role in the coming decades in strengthening energy security or in countering the harmful effects of climate change.
Nuclear Energy Advantages and Disadvantages An Important IELTS Writing
Nuclear Energy Advantages and Disadvantages: Tabular Form. Advantages. Disadvantages. No production of polluting gases. Waste is toxic and proper disposal is very costly and difficult. Does not rise global warming. Local thermal contamination impacts aquatic life. The fuel cost is low. Large-scale incidents can be devastating.
Nuclear Hazards: Effects And Ways of Controlling Them Effectively
The effects of nuclear hazards usually depend on the rate of diffusion, rate of contaminant deposition, half-life, and energy-releasing capacity. Climatic conditions like rainfall, wind, and temperature also determine the effects of nuclear hazards. Nuclear hazards are very deadly and may be genetic (effects on future generations) or somatic ...
Reconsidering the Risks of Nuclear Power
The Problems with Nuclear Energy . Nuclear energy isn't all good news, though. The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster is the latest testament to that. This disaster was a consequence of the combination of a tsunami and a powerful earthquake in March 2011. Although the chain fissile reactions were shut down automatically in response to the earthquake ...
Nuclear Power Essays
Nuclear Power Essays. by Edgars. (Basel, CH) The threat of nuclear weapons maintains world peace but nuclear power provides cheap and clean energy. The benefits of nuclear technology far outweigh the disadvantages. To what extent do you agree or disagree? Advances in nuclear processing have gave us a low cost energy source, but at the same time ...
Benefits of Using Nuclear Energy
Nuclear energy is the only power which can replace a critical section of the fossils fuels such as oil, coal, and gas which are known to widely contaminate the environment as well as contributing to the effect of the greenhouse. It is such importance for a human being to promote the profoundly fair use of power if one needs to be seriously ...
Nuclear Energy: Advantages and Drawbacks
However, it is crucial to weigh nuclear energy benefits against its harms to ascertain its viability as an energy resource. This paper analyzes nuclear energy as a potential source of energy and its advantages and drawbacks. Nuclear energy is the ultimate solution to the current energy crisis. Fossil Fuels and Their Environmental Impacts
Nuclear Power Essay IELTS 2024: IELTS Writing Task 2 Samples
The writing section of the IELTS exam consists of two sections. Writing task 2 is an essay writing task that requires deep thinking and coherence. This task will be our focus for this blog, as the rules and guidelines of the IELTS exam can be confusing for students appearing for the first time. Writing task 2 has the subsequent guidelines:
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
The U.S. system of nuclear regulation is inherently adversarial, but mitigation of unnecessary tension in the relations between NRC and its nuclear power licensees would, in the Committee's opinion, improve the regulatory environment and enhance public health and safety. Thus, the Committee commends the efforts by both NRC and the industry to work
Study finds nuclear energy could benefit environment
A hypothetical plant in Consumers Energy's territory could reduce annual emissions by 1.2 million tons of carbon dioxide, 6.2 tons of sulfur dioxide and 197 tons of nitric oxide. Continuing existing nuclear power generation will be necessary for the state to meet its carbon-free energy goals cost-effectively.

Nuclear Energy Benefits Essay

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Essay on Nuclear Energy in 500+ words for School Students

This Blog Includes:

Deepika Joshi

Connect With Us

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today.

Need help with?

Country Preference

Which English test are you planning to take?

When are you planning to take the exam?

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

What is your budget to study abroad?

Make your study abroad dream a reality in January 2022 with

Essex Direct Admission Day

Advantages of Nuclear Energy

Clean Energy Source

Creates Jobs

Supports National Security

Challenges of Nuclear Energy

Public Awareness

Used Fuel Transportation, Storage and Disposal

Constructing New Power Plants

High Operating Costs

Essay on Nuclear Energy

100 Words Essay on Nuclear Energy

Production of Nuclear Energy

Benefits of Nuclear Energy

Drawbacks of Nuclear Energy

250 Words Essay on Nuclear Energy

Production and Efficiency

Environmental Implications

Security and Ethical Concerns

Future of Nuclear Energy

500 Words Essay on Nuclear Energy

The Mechanics of Nuclear Energy

Pros and Cons of Nuclear Energy

The Future of Nuclear Energy

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

The Advantages and Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy

What Is Nuclear Energy?

Advantages of Nuclear Energy

Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy

Who Wins the Nuclear Debate?

This story is funded by readers like you

About the Author

Martina Igini

What the Future of Renewable Energy Looks Like

Top 7 Smart Cities in the World in 2024

Explainer: What Are NFTs, And What is Their Environmental Impact?

Nuclear energy: Benefits And Drawbacks

Related Topics

Nuclear Energy

Loading ...

Articles & Profiles

Illustrators

User Permissions

Interactives

Related Resources

What is nuclear energy and is it a viable resource?

Types of nuclear reactors

Nuclear energy history

Nuclear power, climate change, and future designs

Nuclear power risks

FREE BONUS ISSUE

You May Also Like

This pill could protect us from radiation after a nuclear meltdown

Scientists achieve a breakthrough in nuclear fusion. Here’s what it means.

This young nuclear engineer has a new plan for clean energy

The true history of Einstein's role in developing the atomic bomb

The controversial future of nuclear power in the U.S.

History & Culture

Press ESC to close

Nuclear Energy Advantages and Disadvantages: An Important IELTS Writing Task 2 Topic

IELTS Sample: Nuclear Energy Advantages and Disadvantages

Nuclear Energy Advantages and Disadvantages: Tabular Form

Reusability

Reducing Greenhouse Gases

Economic Development

IELTS Opinion Essay Topic: Nuclear Energy is a Better Choice for Meeting the Increasing Demand