![]() There’s the “low-level” waste involving enormous quantities of troublesome irradiated liquids and solid trash that must be dealt with outside the standard civilian waste stream. After more than a half-century of well-funded attempts, we’ve seen no solution for the management of atomic power’s intensely radioactive waste. The mining, milling, and enrichment processes needed to produce the pellets that fill the fuel rods inside the reactor cores all involve major energy expenditures, nearly all of it based on coal, oil, or gas.Īnd of course there’s the problem of nuclear waste. Blocked intake screens have led to temporary shut downs and NRC fines at a number of plants.Īll nuclear reactors emit Carbon 14, a radioactive isotope, invalidating the industry’s claim that reactors are “carbon free.” And the fuel that reactors burn is carbon-intensive. Additionally, suction pipes that are used to intake water can draw plankton, eggs and larvae into the plant’s machinery, while larger organisms can be trapped against the protective screens of the pipes. Warm water holds less oxygen than cold water, thus discharge from once-through cooling systems can create a “temperature squeeze” that elevates the metabolic rate for fish. The temperature increase in the bodies of water can have serious adverse effects on aquatic life. The Union of Concerned Scientists states: In addition, hundreds of thousands of birds die annually by flying into the reactor domes and towers. Those chemicals can then be carried downwind, along with radiation from the reactors. ![]() These emissions are often chemically treated to prevent algae and other growth that could clog the towers. reactors use cooling towers which emit huge quantities of steam and water vapor that also directly warm the atmosphere. In 2008, nuclear power plants withdrew eight times as much freshwater as natural gas plants per unit of energy produced, and up to 11 percent more than the average coal plant.Įvery day, large reactors like the two at Diablo Canyon, California, individually dump about 1.25 billion gallons of water into the ocean at temperatures up to 20 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than the natural environment.ĭiablo’s “once-through cooling system” takes water out of the ocean and dumps it back superheated, irradiated and laden with toxic chemicals. Nuclear fission is the most water intensive method of the principal thermoelectric generation options in terms of the amount of water withdrawn from sources. According to the Union of Concerned Scientists: Another tenth of that is lost in transmission. Only one-third is converted into electricity. Here’s why they are dead wrong.Įvery nuclear generating station spews about two-thirds of the energy it burns inside its reactor core into the environment. Supporters of nuclear power like to argue that nukes are the key to combatting climate change. ![]() Nuclear power protest in Derby, UK, Indymedia ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |