There are many proposed solutions to the issue of pollution, all sorts of types of alternate energy but there is a catch to all of them. Wind power is not consistent, solar power is inconsistent and expensive to build the necessary resources, geothermic can be a pollutant if not done right and is not long term, hydroelectric is expensive and needs a powerful flow of water, biofuels require a lot of natural resources and then hydrogen takes more to produce than it is currently worth. Then we come to the question of why not use nuclear energy? Nuclear energy has many advantages with two major disadvantages being the waste and health issues that come from producing the powerful energy.
With the current nuclear issues in Japan there is a focus on the advantages and disadvantages of nuclear power plants. Nuclear energy is created through the fission or fusion of atoms and the reaction developed from this action is used as energy. Nuclear energy is one of the most powerful and so not as many plants would be necessary for the desired amount of energy needed. Environmentally this energy is clean. After a plant closes, however, there still is the concern for waste. For years after a nuclear plant is shut down there needs to be guards surrounding the waste so none gets out. The waste cannot be transported to one location without fears of it being released on the way there, or the people in that location protesting against nuclear waste being stored there.
For some time now a Germany-wide project sponsored by the Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (BMWi) has been developing to find a geological repository for the waste. Recently there has been a breakthrough with using clay stone. This natural clay holds a great potential for hopes of permanently disposing of nuclear waste. Opalinus clay found in Switzerland was made into cylinders and in these was pore water with radioactive neptunium or plutonium. Chemists found, “The batch experiments show that radioactive plutonium in the oxidation state IV is nearly totally absorbed on Opalinus Clay, leaving almost no plutonium in the aqueous solution. In the case of neptunium (V), the corresponding ratio is 60:40. However, if neptunium is reduced to neptunium (IV) by iron minerals present in the clay, a near 100 percent sorption of neptunium on the clay is observed.” (Science Daily)
What this means is the clay is potentially a source of containment for the nuclear waste getting rid of that specific issue. With getting rid of the issue of waste leaves only the issue of a meltdown. Meltdowns leading to high or long term radiation can lead to certain cancers and respiratory issues. Health issues are an issue especially concerning the potential meltdown of a plant now seen in Japan and that can be seen in history as well. The area around Chernobyl, the site of a major 1986 nuclear meltdown, has just started being resettled in the last year. With this kind of consequence to a meltdown means major expenses. Another issue is the health dangers. Depending on the level of radiation released effects could be cancer and other dangerous issues. With these issues there is a controversy on using nuclear power. It is the most effective but can have some of the most dangerous long term consequences. So do we continue to use it or abandon the idea and focus on other means of energy?
Sources:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110308075849.htm
