Joshua Thompstone Does the U.K. need new nuclear power stations?

The old coal power stations are losing efficiency and will be replaced with new nuclear power stations. Some people say this is a good thing, some say that it is bad. There are all more disadvantages than advantages in nuclear Power.
• •

“advantages No greenhouse gas emissions (during normal operation) - greenhouse gases are emitted only when the Emergency Diesel Generators are tested (the processes of uranium mining and of building and decommissioning power stations produce relatively small amounts) does not pollute the air - zero production of dangerous and polluting gases such as carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, aerosols, mercury, nitrogen oxides, particulates or photochemical smog Small solid waste generation (during normal operation) Low fuel costs - because so little fuel is needed Large fuel reserves - (e.g., in Canada and Australia) again, because so little fuel is needed Nuclear Batteries Risk of accidents - the most well-known example of such an event is the explosion and fire in the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, the worst nuclear accident in history. Nuclearwaste - high-level radioactive waste (mostly spent nuclear fuel) can remain dangerous for tens of thousands of years. Plutonium produced from nuclear reactions can be used to make nuclear bombs, aiding nuclear proliferation High initial costs High energy inputs during construction (equivalent to ~7 years power output) High maintenance costs Security concerns High cost of decommissioning plants and the entrance last Thermal pollution - Like fossil-fueled power plants, nuclear reactors emit thermal pollution (3)”

• • • •

Disadvantages include:
• • • • • • • • • •

Finite fuel source - Nuclear fuels depend on mined uranium, a finite resource

Nuclear waste needs to be buried and put in concrete so that radiation can not kill or make people ill. What if the nuclear power station explodes they should not explode if they are maintained properly. “On Saturday April 26, 1986 at 1:23:58 a.m. reactor 4 suffered a catastrophic steam explosion that resulted in a fire, a series of additional explosions, and a nuclear meltdown. The accident may be thought of as an extreme

Joshua Thompstone version of the SL-1 accident in the United States in 1961 where the core of a reactor was destroyed (killing three men), spreading radioactivity through the inside of the building that SL-1 was in. The radiation, however, was not contained during Chernobyl disaster as it was carried by the wind across international borders.” (4) Because of this no one can live on this land. Why not use solar, hydroelectric, wind, tidal, none of them makes greenhouse gases. In some country’s they use solar panels but places where there is little sun like the U.K wind power can be used. Geothermal can be used in places that are below sea level, this is using heat from the ground to heat up water. In France they are using mirrors to reflect sun light to heat water up. In the U.S they heat up salt using mirrors, when the salt is hot it is dropped into the water to heat up. The problems with nuclear fuel are that it is difficult to transport and to prevent terrorists from getting the fuel rods. It needs a police escort to protect the fuel, who pays for this? the taxpayers! U.K does not need new nuclear power stations because there are more ways of making power then nuclear we could use solar, hydroelectric, wind and tidal none of these make greenhouse gases. Nuclear power makes radioactive waste what is dangerous and harmful to living things.