Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Project Threatens Native Lands

A Brief Note On The Mountains And Nuclear Waste
Yucca Mountains and Nuclear waste Native people have been around the Americas since before the
Europeans came. Then the natives land began to shrink. Now in today's society they have the lowest
population amongst groups. Most native people use the land for growing goods like fruits and
vegetables to tobacco. With the possibility of nuclear waste site in Yucca Mountains, it could
threaten the fertility of their land. Environmental racism is the inequality in the form of racism
linked with environmental factors and practices that cause disproportionate distress on minority
communities (Knowledge Encyclopedia). The Yucca mountain project is environmental racism to
the surrounding natives. To get across my point, the following paragraphs will talk about the history
of the project, what the article was about, which tribes it would affect, why it is environmental
racism and why the previous paragraphs prove my opinion.
In 1982, Congress passed the nuclear waste policy act that said the Department of Energy (DOE)
was to build and operate a repository for used nuclear fuel and other highly radioactive waste (NEI).
The DOE had until 1998 to find a location and build a site. In 1987, the nuclear waste policy act was
amended and the DOE was told to study the Yucca Mountains only because it was a remote desert
location (NEI). Even thought it is a desert location it still affects the nearby civilizations. The federal
government in 2008 filed a construction license application to
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Waste Management : The Problem With Nuclear Waste
Nuclear waste The problem with nuclear waste is getting worse everyday while we try and find a
solution to dispose of the waste properly, however there are some people who think that the nuclear
waste project for waste disposal is not that serious and it does not have an affect on the environment,
but they are wrong because our lack of care for proper disposal of nuclear waste is having a tole on
the environment where the waste is buried and the life forms around these waste sites. Nuclear
waste needs a proper and safe place to be put in, because if you don't, you could put others lives in
danger and contaminate certain things, such as the water supplies or the plants that the wildlife
would have to eat for example, storing nuclear waste in the Yucca Mountain would be a bad idea
because the containers that they store nuclear waste in are known for corroding and leaking and
eventually getting into the water supply in the ground. The Yucca Mountain would not be a safe
place to store high level nuclear waste because the Yucca Mountain is an active volcano right now
and if an earthquake should happen, the toxins from the nuclear waste would contaminate the water
line in the ground. Nuclear waste is also bad because of the cost to keep it in safe and contained
areas. The nuclear business let's waste cool for a considerable length of time before blending it with
glass and putting away it in enormous cooled, solid structures. This waste must be kept up, observed
and

Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste
The existing policy for American nuclear waste disposal was set fourth in 1982 with the passing of
the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA). What followed was an unpredictable series of management
and policy design failures that led to the closing of Yucca Mountain as America's federal nuclear
waste repository, costing taxpayers billions and leaving the nation without long term option to deal
with nuclear waste. The Act tasked the federal Department of Energy (DOE) with finding and
investigating a location for two federal geologic depositories for nuclear waste, one in the West and
one in the East, and construction of the facilities. It also named the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC), a government organization that regulates the construction ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
In response to the potential scientific perjury, the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and
Public Works Majority Staff issued a report in 2006 concluding that the Yucca Mountain depository
site has consistently been proven in scientific studies to be an appropriate location for the disposal of
nuclear waste (Yucca Mountain: The Most Studied Real Estate on the Planet, 2006). Later that same
year, the DOE announced contracts with multiple private laboratories and scientific associations for
the purpose of conducting expert scientific review of the Yucca Mountain project (DOE, 2006).
Despite the efforts made by the DOE to legitimize the science behind their project, the planned
repository still faced questions regarding the quality of science behind it by the State of Nevada and
other Congressional members. The Yucca Mountain project remained the nation's answer to nuclear
waste until the Obama Administration took over the Executive branch in 2008, and in 2009, had
announced the discontinuation of the Yucca Mountain project amid scientific uncertainty and
growing political and public pressure (Government Accountability Office). Making this
announcement a reality, in 2010 the DOE filed a motion with the NRC to withdraw the Yucca
Mountain project licensing application, of which the NRC had almost

The Problem Of Nuclear Waste
For many years, the government has been faced with the mounting dilemma that is being caused by
nuclear waste. This radioactive material is a byproduct of nuclear reactors, hospital, processing
plants, and research facilities. Since the use of nuclear power began, the wastes have been
transported and kept from the public successfully but there are a large percentage of people that
believe this industry needs to come to a halt until a solution has been devised for its disposal. There
is a major concern that the long term containment plants and current burial grounds are not adequate
solutions; this is due to the risk of potential environmental disturbances. When these substances are
not disposed of properly, they can cause a multiplicity of dangers such as cancer and destruction of
the ecosystem. The most effective methods for the elimination of nuclear waste are building more
reliable burial sites, turning the byproduct into electricity, transmuting these toxins into glass that
can be handled normally and constructing launchers to send the most noxious substances into outer
space. It is mandatory that measures are taken to eliminate nuclear waste because of the detrimental
effect that these radioactive substances have. Radiation emits waves of harmful energy in waves or
sub atomic particles that have the ability to pas through various materials such as cells, skin, or
metal. "The mix of materials in nuclear waste means it could possibly need to be isolated for
thousands of

Fear Of The Known : True Dangers Of Nuclear Waste
Fear of the Known: True Dangers of Nuclear Waste The 9/11 attacks were among the deadliest
attacks ever committed against the United States, whereby nearly 3,000 people where killed
instantly. Yet what's more shocking is that these atrocities were committed without the use of
nuclear material. Fear of biochemical nuclear waste attack and its potential to cause unimaginable
harm are among the biggest concerns in the nation. As a professor of physics at the University of
California, Berkeley Richard Muller, in his article entitled "Nuclear Waste" addresses the topic of
nuclear waste and its storage at Yucca Mountain. Muller argues that society should question the
validity of information being presented as it pertains to the safety of nuclear waste. He supports this
notion by highlighting the rigorous process involved in safely transporting nuclear waste, while
noting that demanding100% safety in life is impossible. Muller presents his arguments in a
cohesively well construct tone, supported with statistics and a touch of sarcasm thus lending to
credibly to the information. Ultimately, Muller's purpose is to inform the average reader of the true
dangers associated with nuclear waste, while highlighting human's exposure to natural occurring
nuclear waste as well as exploring logical ways of safely securing these byproducts. Consequently,
Muller challenges his readers to not let the fears of the unknown get in the way of being able to
make sound judgment as it would lead to

Argumentative Essay On Nuclear Waste
A world filled with uncertainty is already a scary place to live. Murphy's law only makes that
uncertainty destined for disaster where anything can go wrong, will undoubtedly go wrong. The
United States has placed itself under the mercy of Murphy's law, not because of Trump's threats of
war with North Korea, but because it has no safe way of disposing of its nuclear waste. Radiation is
a silent killer; if exposed into the environment it could lead to genetic mutations, cancer, and if long
enough, premature death. Furthermore, radioactive material can work its way up from the
environment to animals, to humans up the food chain nowhere near the site of exposure. We have
been complacent in finding a permanent solution to nuclear waste ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
That one percent of waste can be devastating to any ecosystem it is exposed to. Radiation is
invisible, it has no scent, it cannot be cleaned by soap, and it should be of concern as much as any
disease or virus. The scientific community unanimously agrees that exposure to high levels of
radiation is a health hazard. Many people feel unconcerned because they feel it's not a relevant
problem in their lives. However, there are over 71,000 tons of nuclear waste simple in temporary
storage at the U.S.'s 104 nuclear reactors (Oliver). Nearly one out of three Americans live within a
50–mile radius of a reactor filled with waste (Oliver). Still many are skeptical remaining ignorant of
the potential dangers of radiation exposure. The severity of the damage to a person's heath due to
radiation is based on how much radiation and how long they were exposed to the amounts of
radiation. The amount of radiation a person receives is measured in "rem" and depending on that the
health effects could range from no observable health effects, to cancer, to even death (Effects of
Radiation). Even a fraction of the amount of radiation to kill a person could cause nausea, fatigue,
vomiting, loss of appetite, loss of hair and abnormalities in blood cells (Effects of Radiation).
Nuclear waste from a typical fuel rod will still have 2,000 times more rem than the required dosage
to kill a person even after 10 years (USNRC). Clear examples of why people should be worried
about exposure to

Pros And Cons Of Recycling Of Nuclear Waste
Today, a considerable amount of energy is provided by nuclear energy. The technology is well
organized and developing every passing day and as a result the cost of operation is falling. Using
radioactive resources to produce energy generates waste. Waste that contains radioactive materials is
called nuclear waste. The secure and environmentally–friendly disposal of nuclear waste is a crucial
aspect of nuclear power programs. [1]
There are two major categories of nuclear waste. High–level waste (HLW) and low–level waste
(LLW). HLW has high amounts of radioactive materials in a small volume, and it also contains
radionuclides with long half–lives .HLW is mainly composed of spent fuel and waste generated by
military applications; on the other hand, LLW is generated from mining and excavation activities.
[2]. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Studies have been performed on activities like disposing in the oceans, as well as on more exotic
proposals such as deep geological disposal and launching into space. Some of these methods have
been found wanting in terms of feasibility, costs and legal restrictions [1]. The management
community in charge of nuclear waste disposal had come to the agreement that the only practical
route for ensuring sufficient long–term isolation of HLW from the environment is deep geologic
disposal[3].For example, Canada has focused on the concept of Deep Geological Disposal for long
term management of nuclear wastes generated from nuclear activities. The Nuclear Waste
Management Organization (NWMO) is in charge of disposing radioactive wastes in the country.
Canada's long term management plan for used nuclear fuel is called "Adaptive Phased
Management" [3] ,The plan is to confine and isolate the used fuel in a suitable host–rock with the
help of a multiple barrier system. Selection of the site is based on screening of potential sites
followed by a preliminary assessment of

Geological Disposal Of Nuclear Waste Disposal
If properly executed, nuclear waste disposal need not result in any negative effects on humankind or
our environment. The goal is to build a storage site that is capable of safely storing spent fuel until
the fuel is no longer radioactive. Current radioactive waste is stored at above–ground facilities in
vulnerable cooling pools. The long–term storage of radioactive waste ought to be in deep
underground engineered facilities. This is known as geological disposal. Geological disposal is the
world's preeminent option when approaching the rapid growth rate of nuclear waste. While
numerous countries have found this to be agreeable, it has become extremely hard to sell local
communities on a site. It is widely believed that if the general public accessed the same information
that researchers have, the community would not fear discussing nuclear waste. Researchers know
that geological disposal's many barriers keep the waste safe from leakage. The scientific community,
after decades of research, has decidedly agreed that geological disposal is the safest option for long–
term storage of high level waste and Sweden, a country known for its strict environmental laws, is in
the process of building its disposal sites thanks to their hard work helping its citizens understand
where their fears of nuclear waste stem from and slowly dismissing them.
The general population seems to believe that radioactive waste remains a liquid essentially
establishing fears of leaks after the casks are

The Debate Over Nuclear Waste
It is established that energy cannot be created nor destroyed and it could not be made out of nothing
according the law of conservation of energy. The way that science explains the phenomenon of
energy conservation is by portraying the conservation of energy as a physical transfer of energy
between mediums through various forms such as heat, sound, and light. Since the discovery of fire
in the early days of humanity, it can be understood that heat is the most versatile form of energy. On
the expense of sacrificial physical matter, heat is produced particularly natural resource such as
fossil fuels. While time progresses, the anticipated rate of decrease in fossil fuels has lead to the
exploration of prospectively innovative long–term energy supplies. Nevertheless, like fossil fuels,
injurious resources have professed many questions regarding the discarding of nuclear waste. This
controversy paper will be mainly focusing on the question of whether nuclear waste can be disposed
of safely.
Contrasting on the issues with fossil fuels, the depletion of nuclear resources cannot tangibly be
consumed. Relatively when creating heat by utilizing fossil fuels, nuclear resources do not
breakdown into individual byproducts for example, carbon dioxide and water. In contrast, electrical
power plants use nuclear resources such as uranium and plutonium pellets. When these nuclear
resources are used, they remain undamaged and become considered as consumed fuel once it
reaches an industrial

Why Is Nuclear Waste Bad For The Environment
"Lately it seems as if if the Earth has been deteriorating. It is quite common to hear of the impact of
the overuse of energy sources. Because our population has abused the wonderful powers of energy,
the Earth is suffering from the aftermath. Environmental damage being one of its biggest
consequences. The use of energy can have positive effects if society learns how to manage it well.
While nuclear energy can generate plenty of electricity, it can easily be abused. Nuclear energy
plants can unfortunately be preferred targets for terrorists, also producing nuclear waste. Nuclear
waste is bad for the environment because it requires a dumping ground due to the fact that it cannot
be processed. If this continues, there will eventually be no more

High Level Nuclear Waste ( Hlw )
High Level Nuclear Waste (HLW) refers to byproducts from nuclear reactors. The byproducts come
in the two forms of spent nuclear fuel, and waste from reprocessing operations. Nuclear fuel is
considered spent when the fission rate has slowed to the point where the creation of electricity is no
longer an efficient process. While reprocessing operations remove uranium or plutonium from the
spent nuclear fuel, the wastes created in the process are still radioactive enough to require the same
sort of storage as spent nuclear fuel. Used nuclear fuel and reprocessing wastes can be harmful to
life and the environment because they are thermally and radioactively hot, so their storage form
must be able to withstand both the heat and ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Currently, the United States has no such repository, so casks of immobilized HLW are stored at the
plants that process them. Even without the existence of a repository, any form of ceramic storage for
HLW must be designed with long term effects in mind. Selecting the proper form for HLW depends
on three parameters. The first parameter is the composition of the waste. Actinides or fission
products in HLW will require a complex mixture of elements to be effectively immobilized in any
waste form. The second parameter is the properties of the waste form. The selection criteria for the
waste form properties includes the waste loading maximum, chemical durability and long term
storage ability, and radiation resistance. The waste form must be capable of containing a required
weight percentage of HLW in such a manner that the form is not degraded over time due to
radiation, since HLW products may have very large half–lives. These parameters form the selection
criteria that any ceramic candidate for HLW storage must adhere to in order to be considered. The
first waste form to be discussed is borosilicate glass. Glass is amorphous, so the principle of using
this glass as the immobilization form is that the radionuclides are dissolved and randomly embedded
in the structure, and stored interstitially. The basis for glass as a storage form is based on

The Public's Argument Against Nuclear Waste
The necessity for a new type of energy increases with every year. Energy consumption rates are
increasing continuously, and with them, pollution and wastes directly harming the Earth and her
atmosphere. While other energy competitors constantly fell short of impacting fossil fuels enough to
significantly lower their usage rates, nuclear energy can not only compete against the highly
efficient yet harmful fossil fuels but can reign as king as a more efficient and cleaner source of
energy. There are two pivotal arguments against nuclear energy: the public's perception and nuclear
waste. In arguments pertaining to this topic, it is commonly asked as the waste continues to build up,
what can be done with it? However, Bennie Olsen stated, "All ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Casks are double–walled containers, created from high–grade steel, which protect the waste and
prevent radioactivity from escaping. These casks can then store the waste for over a century and can
withstand harsh treatment such as surviving over 30 minutes in a fire at 1,470 degrees Fahrenheit or
being struck by a locomotive traveling at 90 miles per hour. In both of these tests, the casks
protected their load and prevented exposure. There have been approximately 24,000 casks used
worldwide, and not a single time has a cask failed to contain the nuclear waste within (Transporting
Nuclear Waste, 2018). Unfortunately, the nuclear answer isn't to all forms of energy. It wouldn't be
practical to power cars with nuclear energy, nor would it be efficient to use nuclear energy in a
location dominated by flowing rivers where hydroelectric power would prove more effective.
Additionally, locating a nuclear reactor on a fault line would be an accident waiting to happen,
almost setting up the site to fail. In 2012, when a tsunami struck Japan, the Fukushima Daiichi
nuclear plant lost power and could no longer cool its turbines, which caused a meltdown of the
facility, and the exposure of radiation to the nearby

Nuclear Waste Essay
Nuclear Waste by Richard A. Muller
Nuclear waste is a radioactive waste that is dangerous, and a fair percentage of people would agree
on this topic. However, is it really dangerous or is it just harmful to an extent? In society, many
debates are held over trying to prove to the world that this substance is harmful. In the essay,
"Nuclear Waste," Muller states clearly that he sides with the anti–nuke of the debate and how he
pinpoints the facts of nuclear waste with great persuasion. Yet, it is uncertain whether Muller clearly
has a good argument and/or answers the questions that many people linger to know.
In Richard A. Muller's article "Nuclear Waste," the author states clearly about how he is against the
issues on nuclear waste and ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
However, near the end of the essay, it seems that Muller changes his position and points out that the
possibility of "if all the nuclear waste was to be leaked and managed to get in lakes and rivers, and
oceans; the risks imposed would be 20 times less than other wastes such as uranium that could
impose a threat." (Muller 212) From what I believe, I think that the author knows that his position
does not exactly put out a good argument. By Muller addressing that nuclear waste leakage is 20
times less than uranium leakage, he is saying that nuclear waste is safe. This may cause people to be
confused by the fact that Muller states that is anti–nuke about nuclear waste.
Throughout the essay, I felt that Muller's argument in his essay was weak after his my confession
paragraph. It was a bit odd because Muller doesn't seem like he holds his case as strongly as before.
He seemed like he was strongly against nuclear waste but he doesn't state how we should address
this problem. I think it was interesting that the author did not have a very clear position at all. It is
clear that he dislikes nuclear waste, especially when he presents his case and pinpoints the facts with
great persuasion. However, he didn't really mention what he feels that we should do about the case.
Muller doesn't address all of society's unanswered questions such as how society should go about
doing with nuclear waste. He only tells the readers what he thinks of politicians and scientists' point
of

Nuclear Waste Management Essay
The disposal of nuclear waste is quickly becoming the most important issue facing the
environmental community today. Nearly twenty percent of our nation's electricity is being supplied
by approximately 100 nuclear power plants that are operating in the United States. Currently, most
of the nuclear waste created by these power plants is being housed temporarily in storage facilities
and although the total amount of nuclear waste produced in one year is small, the need to find a
permanent method of disposing this waste is rapidly growing. The problem is everyone wants to live
the lifestyle nuclear power provides, but no one wants to pay the price. Where do we put the waste
and who should have to suffer so the majority of the population ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The three selected sites were Hanford, Washington; Deaf Smith County, Texas; and Yucca
Mountain, Nevada. The Yucca Mountain Project is now being put through the necessary steps for
completion. Yucca Mountain is located on government owned land in a remote area of Nevada. The
proposed plan is the first national permanent waste facility and will cost an estimated 6.3 billion
dollars. The project will include borrowing massive tunnels through the mountain's inner rock and
then placing the storage tanks inside. Obviously, there is much public concern over the project. One
of the largest concerns is the possibility of seismic activity rupturing the tunnel and/or canisters. At
present, the 104th US Congress, house Resolution 1924 proposed to make Hanford, Washington, the
western US site for temporary storage, and it would be by default the permanent disposal place of
spent nuclear fuel from US reactors. This resolution stemmed from a growing recognition that Yucca
Mountains, in Nevada, is a less than brilliant location for this purpose. The US government has no
fallback position should the project at Yucca Mountain fail. Yucca Mountain is not a sound solution
for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel. The decision to site Yucca Mountain as a waste repository was
based on politics, not science. There continues to be much controversy over the issue and many
questions regarding the collected

Richard A Muller Nuclear Waste Summary
While reading Richard A. Muller Nuclear Waste a professor of physics from the University of
California. I really enjoyed the reading and learning how nuclear waste "is one of the biggest
technical issues that any president is likely to face". In this chapter he also spoke of Plutonium
which is a transuranic radioactive chemical element with symbol Pu and atomic number 94. Richard
also went on to say that there is a "safe" nuclear waste disposal located in Yucca Mountain, Nevada.
In order to keep the waste disposal safe, it is buried in a storage room in which is 1000 feet below
the surface. He choose to write a section within this chapter entitled My Confessions and he did this
because he" finds it hard to stand aside and present the physics

Nuclear Waste Research Paper
Nuclear fuel has been providing energy to the world for around sixty years, and it is the second most
used energy source, first being fossil fuels. Nuclear energy is closely chained to the invention of the
atomic bomb and is in fact, nuclear fission and/or fusion. The problem with nuclear energy is that
while it can provide energy without air pollutants, there is nowhere to put the radioactive nuclear
waste. With the spent nuclear fuel, we currently dump it in places relatively far from people or we
reprocess it. However there is more to that than meets the eye. "Dumping" is not the best method for
dealing with nuclear waste, the best way is to reprocess the nuclear waste because it recovers a
portion of reusable energy that can be recycled back into the plant, recovers fuel that can be reused
for other purposes and also helps reduce the effects on the environment.
The reusable energy that is recovered may not feel like much, however once you reprocess tons and
tons of nuclear waste it adds up to an enormous amount of saved waste. When reprocessing the
nuclear waste, they add a variety of different substances at different times such as acids and
oxidants, this is necessary to separate the different levels of reactivity in the nuclear waste. Most of
the energy from the reprocessed plutonium is put back into the ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
This is a good way to save on natural resources and also output more energy from less materials.
The uranium can be re–used as fuel, which is a great use, however this is only economical when
uranium prices are high. A breeder reactor, which is a type of nuclear reactor does not only have to
use recycled plutonium and uranium. It can employ all the actinides (elements from periodic
numbers 89 to 103), potentially multiplying the energy obtained from natural uranium by many

Arguments Against Nuclear Waste
Individually, they're no larger than your pinkie, but the energy–packed pellets that are the
radioactive remains of nuclear power generation pose an enormous problem for nuclear energy
plants that weren't originally designed to store them. So far the 103 operating nuclear reactors in the
United States have generated an estimated 45,000 tons of waste that is expected to remain
radioactive for more than 200,000 years (Onion, 2016). And right now, the waste, which emits
radioactive particles that can eat away at human tissue and organs, is being stored in tanks or
concrete and steel bunkers at sites that were only meant to contain the waste for perhaps decades,
not centuries. "Spent fuel is now stored in pools and dry casks," says Rodney Ewing, a professor in
nuclear engineering at the University of Michigan. "Today it's safe. But it's certainly not a long–term
solution (Ewing, 2015)." ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Some argue the lack of a permanent, safe storage site for nuclear waste is reason enough to oppose
proposals in President Bush's energy plan to speed licensing of new nuclear power plants and extend
the operating licenses of existing plants. As Allison Macfarlane, a geologist and senior researcher at
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology says, "Until we can figure out what to do with the waste,
we shouldn't make any more of it (Macfarlane, 2015)." But those who tout the economic and
environmental benefits of nuclear energy argue a safe, permanent storage site has already been
found and only politics has prevented its opening. Others point to changing methods of nuclear
power generation that could ultimately reduce waste

Essay about Nuclear Waste Disposal
Nuclear Waste and the Effects on Human Life
Statement of the issue:
Nuclear waste is a growing concern in the Untied States and throughout the world today. Even right
now as I type this paper Congress is debating as to allow nuclear waste to be stored in Yucca
Mountain in Nevada. This debate in Congress will help decide the way that the Untied States deals
with nuclear waste issues in the future. Nuclear waste is hazardous to human life. It contains many
harmful chemicals that could hurt life. Nuclear waste could even disrupt or genetics and cause
mutations in human life forms. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has
identified four ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Pro side:
Nuclear waste does not always necessarily cause harmful pollution into rivers or water. "...at
Meentinny West, Rockchapel, was raided last Thursday by gardai after a two–week surveillance
operation. Water samples were taken for analysis, but the council said it was confident there had
been no pollution of the nearby River Feale (Council,1)." This one example of where waste does not
cause harm to the environment in all situations.
Right now in Boise, Idaho the Energy Department is being sued by environmentalists. The Energy
Department has over 800,000 gallons of nuclear waste stored at the Idaho National Engineering and
Environmental Laboratory. The Energy Department plans and moving all but 100,000 gallons of the
waste. They say that only the small amounts of waste will not cause any harm to anybody, but the
environmentalist disagree with them. The Energy Department has assured the residents of Idaho not
to be worried about the nuclear waste (Associated, 1&2).
Con side:
Waste can cause many problems that people are not really aware of. For instance, "..A waste system
in North Cowichan has created poor air quality in a nearby residential neighborhood. Dr. Fred
Rockwell, medial health officer with the Vancouver Island Health Authority, said the poor air quality
may cause throat and eye irritation in healthy people (Waste, 1)." If poor air

Nuclear Power Plants and Nuclear Waste
The purpose of a nuclear power plant is to produce electricity for supporting increases in
consumption. Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation (ENEC) defines nuclear energy as "the energy
released by a nuclear reaction, especially by fission or fusion. In general terms, nuclear energy uses
fuel made from mined and processed uranium to make steam and generate electricity" (ENEC
2011). Nuclear power plant currently producing electricity in the U.S include the Pressurized Water
Reactor and the Boiling Water Reactor. To illustrate the importance of nuclear energy to the United
States, 20% of our nation's electricity production comes from the 104 commercially operating
reactors (Funk and Socacool 2012). However, security issues surrounding nuclear power lead to the
U.S nuclear regulatory agencies imposing strict regulations on the production of nuclear energy.
As a result, development and construction time of a nuclear power plant is a complex process.
Before an applicant can start building a nuclear power plant, it must receive approval from the U.S
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Previous regulations required that a nuclear power plant was
licensed under a two–step licensing process (NRC 2004). This former process required both a
construction permit and an operating license (NRC 2004). In 1989, the NRC established an
alternative licensing process which formed a joint license between the construction permit and an
operating license (NRC 2004). Following approval from the U.S NRC

Nuclear Power And Nuclear Waste
Nuclear power, the type of energy that sits on the edge of humanity's greatest hopes, and its darkest
fears. With a country such as the United States continuing to expand its industry, housing,
agriculture and commercial buildings there is a need for more and more energy each year. Nuclear
power is one of the many ways the United States gets its energy. Nevertheless, it is one of the most
controversial means of energy production. The main concern with nuclear energy is the nuclear
waste that is produced along with it. The potential health and environmental risks posed by nuclear
waste is what truly scares some of the American public. Therefore, is the amount of energy output
by nuclear power plants outweigh the potential risks that nuclear waste can have on human health
and the environment? Nuclear power plants should be kept as a means of generating energy for the
United States, however, transportation and storage of nuclear waste needs to continuously be
checked for safer alternatives. Nuclear waste is generally defined as a variety of solids, liquids and
gases which are produced during the generation of nuclear energy through the process of fission,
mining of Uranium, nuclear research and weapons production (Shah, Abhishek). Nuclear waste
created by a nuclear power plant is not as complicated as one might think. First water is heated in
the reactor when uranium atoms split and cause fission, then the heated water is transferred to the
primary

Nuclear Waste Muller Summary
Nuclear Waste
The essay "Nuclear Waste" by Ricard A. Muller talks about the controversial matter of the disposure
of radioactive waste. Despite the overwhelming concerns of citizens, Richard Muller believes the
dangers associated with the transportation and deposit of nuclear waste is not as paramount as the
issue may seem. The concepts that seems most alarming to the public are the number of year it takes
for the radioactivity of the waste to subside and where it will be stored in the mean time that will not
affect their safety. As Muller explains, "Even after 100,000 years the radiation will still be above
10% of the level it had when it left the reactor."(Muller 254) As a solution, the US government has
created a prototype of a nuclear waste ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In addition to that, it cost hundreds of billions of dollars to build and operate this facility. Scientists
have even tried to develop new alternative such as sending the waste to the sun or sinking it to the
bottom of the ocean. Although this is a problem that needs to be addressed, are the effect as
considerably high as one might think? According to Richard Muller the risk of not depositing the
waste is higher the not doing so. He explains "When I work out the numbers, I find the dangers of
storing waste at Yucca Mountain to be smaller compared to the dangers of not doing so, and
significantly smaller than the dangers we ignore."(Muller 254) Regardless of the ideas from the
politicians and scientists that more research is need, Richard Muller argues that will be of no use.
Just the fusion fragments will take about 10,000 years to become as radioactive as the uranium
mined from the grounds. There in no amount of research that can predict were our society and planet
will be like in 10,000 years. Muller emphasizes how "Ten thousand years ago humans had just
discovered agriculture. Writing wouldn't be invented for another 5,000 years."(Muller 256) Many
people do not study the number or the actually effect of radioactivity already found on our earth
before making

Is Nuclear Power Worth Nuclear Waste?
Nuclear Power Nuclear power is a widely debated topic about whether or not it is worth the energy
produced. Nuclear generators most commonly use a form of uranium to super heat water and
produce electricity. However when the fuel rods containing the uranium are spent they leave behind
large amounts of spent nuclear waste. This is one of the most serious issues concerning nuclear
power production. As of now most of the waste we produce is stored underground but it can take
over a thousand years for the radiation levels in this waste to lower enough to be safe. The question
we are now facing is how do we deal with all of this waste we keep building up? Nuclear waste
though, is not the only danger faced with this type of power production. Over

Nuclear Waste Is The Substance That Nuclear Fuel
Nuclear waste is the substance that nuclear fuel becomes after it has been used in a reactor. Although
the metal rods appear unchanged after their use, the material inside has changed greatly. Before it
was used to produce power, the fuel mainly consisted of uranium. In order to create heat energy in
the reactor, U235 undergoes fission. Fission is a nuclear reaction in which the nucleus of an atom
splits into smaller parts. As a result of this, there is a chain reaction which creates heat. The control
rods control the fission rate and the temperature. In the steam generator, the heat and cooling water
create pressured steam which moves the turbine. The turbine creates energy that goes into a
generator which gives off electricity. The water from the turbine is able to become usable since it
gets cooled. Once a reactor reaches its lifetime, it becomes spent fuel and is treated as waste. Most
countries bury the spent fuel or reuse it. In the U.S., we haven't decided what to do with the spent
fuel so most of the spent fuel rods are stored in temporary storage pools. In the future, the United
States plans to bury the waste in the Yucca Mountains which are located in Nevada. This would be a
suitable place since it is not close to humans or the environment. For the first part of the lab we had
to go on Blackboard and open the "Spent Fuel" document. We had to go to Appendix III which had
some text and a chart about how much spent fuel has been accumulated by each state. The years

The Is A Nuclear Waste Site
The ancient Greek culture and the Egyptians only survived for about two thousand years. The
United States has been a country for only about two hundred and thirty nine years. In ten thousand
years the United States may or may not be around. This is significant because a nuclear waste site
will be dangerous for a span of ten thousand years. The WIPP, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, is a
nuclear waste site that is the result of testing nuclear weapons from the United States government.
The United States citizens must be protected from the radioactive wastes being regulated by the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. (1)The primary goal of the WIPP is to create a sustainable marker
or message to warn the citizens of America, and to any future generations, about the harmful site.
The markers and messages must be able to last for ten thousand years so future humans will be
aware of the dangers the area contains. Due to the nuclear testing, the WIPP will mark the hazardous
nuclear waste that remains in New Mexico for a period of ten thousand years.
(2)The cultures have greatly changed over the last two thousand years. Languages, food, clothing,
religion, and other aspects of culture have been created, used, and disregarded. It is difficult to know
if the future generations will be able to comprehend our English language, that has been around for
thousands of years. Also a good amount of infrastructure has been damaged or completely renewed
over the years. For example, natural disasters

Nuclear Waste
After 30 years ever since Chernobyl, the U.S has been using nuclear energy has a type of fuel. To
start, Chernobyl was one of the world's worst nuclear disaster. A fire caused an explosion to occur at
the Chernobyl plant in Ukraine and forced more than 300,000 people to flee and caused radiation
levels that are still harmful today. After this incident, the U.S continues to use nuclear energy as a
type of fuel for buildings and more, but a meltdown or an explosion in the U.S is unlikely to happen
because of how safe facilities are in the U.S. A meltdown will rarely happen, but what is worse is the
accumulation of radioactive waste and the U.S have been ignoring the fact that this is a problem.
The discovery of radioactive waste is important ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
To start, this is why the discovery is important because if nuclear waste is left alone then it could kill
or harm people. With the amount of nuclear waste the U.S keeps stored, it has enough to harm the
whole entire country. The U.S holds about 70,000 metric tons of nuclear waste at 70 sites in 39
different states. In the article," Stop Dithering on Nuclear Waste," by the Editors, the author states,"
Some 70,000 metric tons of it are not stored at 70 sites scattered across 39 states"(Editors,3). 39
states may not seem a lot, but 70,000 metrics tons of nuclear waste is not something to keep around;
it is something extremely dangerous to keep around. What makes everything even worse is that this
waste is being held underground in deep pools of water in dry casks made of steel and concrete and
sits on reinforced pads. The author states," The waste, hot from radioactive decay, is held in deep
pools of water or in "dry casks" of concrete and steel that sit on reinforced pads"(Editors, 3). With
the world experiencing terrorist attacks or earthquakes, these casks are bound to get damaged by
bombs or earthquakes, which will crack the casks and force the nuclear waste to spill out. As a
result, the nuclear waste will hurt the public as it spreads life threatening radiation out into the
infected area. Not to mention that the waste can also cause fires and fires can spread for a while.
This discovery is the reason why the U.S needs to find a different way of storing all of this nuclear
waste. To end, the U.S needs to find a different way of storing all of this nuclear waste or else it will
affect the

Nuclear Waste In The Yucca Mountain
There are many different opinions on whether we should continue to create nuclear energy or we
should stop it. Some of the positive aspects are there has been no fatalities at nuclear power plants.
Another one is nuclear power plants generate 20% of today power. Also nuclear energy is a clean
power source with no pollution. Some negative aspects are creating these plants cost a lot of money.
Another problem is we are running out of places to store waste. The waste puts off nuclear radiation
We are in much need for places to store this nuclear waste. One of the places researches believe may
be the perfect place but also the worst place is Yucca Mountain. I believe they should store nuclear
waste inside the Yucca Mountain. It is far away

A Brief Note On The Mountains And Nuclear Waste
Yucca Mountains and Nuclear waste Native people have been around the Americas since before the
Europeans came. Then the natives land began to shrink. Now in today's society, they have the lowest
population amongst groups. Most native people use the land for growing goods like fruits and
vegetables to tobacco. With the possibility of a nuclear waste site in Yucca Mountains, it could
threaten the fertility of their land. Environmental racism is the inequality in the form of racism
linked with environmental factors and practices that cause disproportionate distress on minority
communities (Knowledge Encyclopedia). The Yucca mountain project is environmental racism to
the surrounding natives. To get across my point, the following ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The proposed plan was to make tunnels through the Yucca Mountains. In 2010, President Barack
Obama stopped the Yucca Mountains license review. He wanted a study commission to recommend
a new policy for the long–term management of nuclear and radioactive waste (NEI). The president
is looking out for the natives in some sense, but as you will see later in my paper, that is not true.
Since 2010, the site has been abandoned because of the legal battles going on and no waste has been
put there (ICTMN Staff). With the site for now not operational, there is still a chance that it could
have waste in it soon. In "'Environmental Racism' Behind Plan to Store Nuke Waste Under Yucca
Mountain: Tribes," it talks about how there was a proposal to store nuclear waste in the Yucca
Mountains was shut down by Obama in 2010 has now been revived. The Western Shoshone and
Timbisha Shoshone people were not happy about it. They called it "environmental racism". It goes
on and talks about how the Nuclear Regulator commission (NRC) released a report on how the
proposal would impact the environment. The article continues to talk about how some of the waste
could leak into the groundwater, which would affect the purity of spring's natives and surrounding
people use (ICTMN Staff). The idea that it could be revived is a high–risk situation to them. The
Western Shoshone and Timbisha Shoshone tribes are just a few of the tribes that would be affected

Radioactive Waste : Nuclear Power
Radioactive waste
Nuclear Power is one of the only energy producing technology that is held accountable for all
wastes produced; note that, the cost of the waste is accounted for in capital cost. Nuclear power
accumulates relatively minimal amounts of nuclear waste in volume as compared to fossil fuel
generation that produces a large amount of waste and greenhouse gas emissions. The nuclear fuel
waste produced is in part used as an energy source for a fast breeder reactor while the burners' waste
is fully disposed through waste management processes.
Mining and Milling
As part of the process of mining uranium; fine sandy tailings are produced; such materials
encompass all the natural radioactive materials in the uranium ore. The tailings are placed in
engineered tailings dams where they are enclosed with a coat of clay and rock to prevent escape of
radon gas and guarantee durability. The tailings material will be enclosed with water and eventually
the tailings holds approximately 75% of the radioactivity of the original ore. This process described
above is not designated as radioactive waste as stated by the world nuclear association.
Conversion, enrichment, fuel fabrication
The conversion, enrichment and fuel fabrication process includes Uranium Oxide from mining
minerals known as "yellowcake' (U3O8). The yellowcake is stated as being minimally radioactive.
Once the uranium Oxide is refined, it is converted into Uranium Hexafluoride gas (UF6). As
Uranium Hexafluoride

Nuclear Waste : A Chemical Reaction
Name
Professor's name
Subject
Date
Nuclear Waste
The explosion that occurred on February where gallon drums, if the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
nuclear waste were buried deep in the salt shaft, led to the closure of the facility for months. In
addition, the incidence raised questions on the Department of Energy's ability to keep tabs on the
content of nuclear container that were buried at the site. Experts asserted that the risk of an
additional eruption is real and had several effects on 21 workers who were exposed to low–level
doses of radiation (Lopez 85). Currently, investigators for the energy department have not
determined the reason behind the explosion and why radioactive waste products buried more than
feet below the ground has a chemical reaction that led to radioactivity. In addition, there are no
experts to assert that the accident occur with other drums that were containing the same kind of
waste products from nuclear plants. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant is located in an ancient salt bed dug
out as a conventional salt mine. Apparently, it was designed that once it is filled up and plugged, the
salt could gradually breakdown around the waste and seal it for the period of 10,000 years (Rechard
and Voegele 61). Thus, the dump is designed to ensure that waste and radioactivity do not escape.
During the explosion, the radioactivity was released and traveled up the vent shaft and gave 21
workers who were on the surface a small dose of radiation that was detected in

Arguments Against Nuclear Waste
While the opposition cites waste disposable methods as a primary argument against nuclear power,
the U.S. government has recently begun to reevaluate plans to store waste safely in a permanent site.
Early in 2017, a congressional committee passed a bill to reopen the possibility of using Yucca
mountain in Nevada as a waste repository (Nikolewski). The government and large companies have
already invested fifteen billion dollars into the site slated to hold seventy thousand metric tons of
waste (Nikolewski). Currently, companies house spent fuel along the expanse of the west coast,
however this increases a risk of a Fukushima–like event if a tsunami or major earthquake were to
strike (Nikolewski). Rick Perry cited that the country has a "moral ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Moving waste away from the coast should be a main concern, since there is no security risk
associated with domestic storage of waste (Nikolewski). Two plans to jumpstart domestic storage
are already making strides in the government and have the potential to solve the country's nuclear
waste management woes. The public commonly counters nuclear because of the threat of a
meltdown; however, meltdowns are rare and extreme circumstances that the nuclear power field is
prepared to handle. Chernobyl has become one of the most frequently used arguments against the
safety factor of nuclear energy, however there are critical pieces of the puzzle that the public
overlooks. The first piece being that the design of the reactor was one–hundred percent of the design
was of Soviet origin, which differed greatly from European and American designs ("Chernobyl
Accident 1986"). Along with the design, improper training of Soviet personnel and Soviet approved
testing directly contributed to the reactor's failure ("Chernobyl Accident 1986"). One flawed aspect
of the testing was that plant personnel where instructed to disable the automatic shutdown features
that were in

The Nuclear Waste Is A Prime Target For Terrorists
The nuclear waste is a prime target for terrorists, as it has been weaponized in the past by the United
States as an atom bomb, which was dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The storage of radioactive
waste is one the most controversial issues in the production of nuclear power. The by–products of
the production of the radioactive material, stays radioactive for thousands of years. This is not an
empty concern. Critics believe that storage facilities have the ability to leak due to erosion, or
cracks. The leaked radioactive material would result in contamination of groundwater and the soil
around the plant, which would result in the potential threat of health risks and evacuation of
communities in the vicinity of the leak. Negative public ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The plume resulting from the explosion was highly reactive and created a cloud of radioactive
particles. These particles then fell to the ground, otherwise known as a fallout. The fallout was
spread by the wind, and resulted in a major portion falling in the water. The water was cycled and
spread the fallout even further. The radioactive rain presented itself to Scotland and Ireland,
however Belarus was the most affected. Forests, cattle and horses around the plant had died very
quickly, the fish were inedible due to its radioactivity. Communities that included more than 100,000
people were evacuated, but this was not without casualties. The casualties occurred further in time,
as radiation poisoning sometimes shows symptoms in the future. Nuclear radiation causes an impact
on all life, and results in problematic health issues for a long period of time. More recently, in 2011,
an earthquake caused three of the reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan to
incur a meltdown, resulting in an explosion. It was dubbed as the second disaster that received a
level 7 on the International Nuclear Event Scale (INES).
In addition to accidents that may occur, nuclear power is not very sustainable as the fuel is non–
renewable. Nuclear power production uses uranium, which is a scarce resource. It is still fairly
abundant in Canada, however, when no more uranium is available, there will be no more nuclear
energy. A uranium ore emits radon

Nuclear Waste Disposal Essay example
Nuclear Waste Disposal
As the millenium approaches, we are faced with the problems created by our technological
advances. Everyday we are forced to see the results, from acid rain to polluted beaches. But there is
one problem in particular that will probably out–live our generation and the generation which has
created it. If properly contained and monitored, it has little affect on us and our environment.
However, once it is free of it's containment, it is a destructive and deadly force. This problem is
nuclear waste.
Thirty thousand metric tons of spent fuel rods from power reactors and another 380,000 cubic
meters of high level radioactive waste, have been produced in the United States since the beginning
of the nuclear age. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In a nuclear reactor of a nuclear power plant, the fission process is contained within the zirconium or
magnesium cladding that surrounds the fuel rods. The fuel rods are "spent" after the fission takes
place. They are highly radioactive and give off dangerous gamma radiation, which is similar to X–
ray and can therefore penetrate through a human body. It is necessary to shield the spent fuel rods
with water and thick lead walls (Bertell, 1985). These fuel rods and their contents, are essentially
what comprises nuclear waste and is what needs to be kept secure for hundreds of thousands of
years.
Two types of radiation
There are two types of radiation; particle and penetrating. Penetrating radiation or gamma radiation,
can pass through human tissue and damages cell functions. After about 500 years, gamma radiation
in nuclear fuel waste drops to low enough levels that it poses no real threat to humans (AECB,
1992). Particle radiation includes alphan and beta radiation. This type of radiation is given off by the
longer lived radioactive substances. This means that the substances remain hazardous for many
thousands of years. Neither these types can penetrate human tissue. However, they can affect cell
function and therefore cause cancer if the radioactive substance has been ingested or inhaled

Nuclear Waste Policy Analysis
In 1987, the U.S. Congress passed the Amendments to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act that designated
Yucca Mountain 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas as the top site to store nuclear waste from across
the country.
For the last 30 years, the project has faced a strong opposition from Nevada officials and many
residents of the state, while nuclear power interests, utility companies, and some Congress members
have been supportive of it. In 2002, Congress and President George W. Bush approved Yucca
Mountain as the first geologic repository for storage of spent fuel and high–level waste, and the
licensing began in 2008. After the Obama administration at the urging of then–U.S. Sen. Harry Reid,
D–Nevada, mothballed the proposed plan to entomb the nation's nuclear waste in a remote Nevada
desert in 2010, the proposed repository was presumed dead. ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
In 2013, a federal appeals court has ordered the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to restart the
licensing proceeding for Yucca Mountain.
While proponents of Yucca Mountain say that the project could boost the economy of the state of
Nevada, many scientific, safety, regulatory and political challenges to the project remain to this day.
The state of Nevada filed over 200 technical and legal challenges including environmental, safety
and transportation concerns to the project.
The future of the project now rests on the Trump administration. In January, it allocated $120
million for restart of the licensing of Yucca Mountain in the budget blueprint. However, the final
action on the budget is yet to be

Persuasive Essay On How To Stop Nuclear Waste
How to stop Nuclear Waste Nuclear waste is one of the reasons why many people have cancer and
babies have health defects. Even though There isn't that much nuclear waste to cause any harm and
nuclear power plants are built away from highly populated areas, nuclear waste is a big problem that
will later on cause more problems because everyday items like cellphones, computers, or computers
can cause humans to be exposed to radiation and nuclear power plants and nuclear tests cause 4% of
the exposure of radiation that humans experience. Preventing the development of nuclear waste can
end the harmful effects that it just causes like putting highly populated areas of people or animals in
danger. The government is only procrastinating on this ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The government has "dithered over this clear and present danger for decades, irresponsibly kicking
the can down the road into the indefinite future" (Stop). Most nuclear power plants will store their
nuclear waste in pools and let is set and cool for several years. Space in these pools are starting to
become scarce so another solution is to store some of this waste into concrete and steel cylinders.
The big problem is that nuclear power plants are closing but what remains is their waste that they
leave behind for others to worry about. Some companies let their waste sit for long periods of time
until the waste is thought to be no longer hazardous. The government is now acting on this matter by
having nuclear power plants remove or eliminate the nuclear waste that is left behind in the reactor
sites. This will also reduce liability on taxpayers (Chapman). This liability "could reach up to $500
million per year after 2020 if the spent fuel remains where it is" (Chapman). Some nuclear power
plants "convert a wide variety of radioactive waste materials into forms that are suitable for their
subsequent management, including transportation, storage and final disposal" (Treatment). Some
companies have found other solutions to disposing of their waste like minimising the volume of the
waste or "reduce the potential hazard of the waste by conditioning it into a stable solid form

Nuclear Waste In Australia Essay
The overarching question of, 'Should Nuclear Waste be Disposed of in South Australia?' will be
answered in this outcome. Nuclear waste is material that has been used in a nuclear reactor. It looks
exactly the same on the outside, as it did when it went into the reactor (see Figure 1). Once nuclear
fission has taken place inside the reactor to make electricity, the Uranium breaks into many unstable
isotopes. These isotopes will remain radioactive for thousands of years. Hence, the need for more
nuclear waste storage facilities. A storage facility in South Australia would be geographically perfect
and hold low level (plastic), intermediate (see Figure 2) and high level waste, like spent uranium
fuel cells. The answer will be supported and derived from multiple sources, including; my survey
data, expert reports, statistics, graphs and tables.
Overall Question – 'Should Nuclear Waste be Disposed of in South Australia?'
According to public voting records, two thirds of South Australian citizens, are against the proposal
of a nuclear waste plant. This was similar to the results gained from the survey, since 82% of the
respondents were against. Despite these statistics, the positives of a nuclear waste plant in South
Australia, far outweigh ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
However, even if the South Australian Government could convince the voting public, the plan
would require federal approval and changes to the law. This decision will affect numerous
generations to come, since the waste will stay radioactive for thousands of years. Therefore, it is
essential that the right decision is made. Humanity is stuck with nuclear waste, so let's make the best
of a bad

Recycling Nuclear Waste Essay
One major unresolved issue arises as the result of using nuclear power: what happens to waste
generated in this process. As of right now, the waste is stored on site or in deep geological
repositories. However, with what was to be the country's end all storage site (the Yucca Mountain
repository) no longer an option due to recent legislation, long–term storage seems unfeasible. In
addition, as more nations move towards reprocessing, there are experts and lawmakers in this
country who have been looking into reprocessing the country's nuclear waste as well. While many
experts say that reprocessing is the best solution for freeing the country of the nuclear waste issue,
there are others who say that reprocessing is simply too dangerous and ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
After the fueling process, nuclear rods are made of 95 percent non–fissionable uranium found in
everything from granite tabletops to the coal burned for electricity in coal plants. The rest of the
spent rod consists of two–fifths of useable nuclear fuel (one–fifth being uranium and the other being
plutonium) and the three–fifths that remain are valuable in both industrial and medical processes
(Tucker, 2009). With the knowledge that nuclear waste is not actually waste many are lead to the
conclusion that reprocessing is a good, if not great idea, however there are an equal number of
opponents that say that regardless of the possible benefits that come from reprocessing it simply is
not the way to go.
Before discussing the arguments for and against nuclear waste reprocessing, there needs to be an
understanding of what reprocessing actually is. Reprocessing is a very delicate and complex
process. Katherine Ling briefly describes the process in her article "Is the solution to the U.S.
nuclear waste problem in France?" She describes the process as a "ballet of industrial–strength
robots." She goes on to explain that spent fuel rods are stored for a few years in demineralized water
to cool. Once cool, machines will lift them out, chop them up, and drop them into vats of acid. The
dissolving of the rods allows for the harvesting of any fissionable uranium and plutonium (Ling,
2009). With the knowledge of

Disposing of Nuclear Waste
The primary concern when disposing of nuclear waste and cleaning the facilities that produce it is
the duration of half–lives of the elements that make up nuclear waste. One example is Uranium–
235, which is used widely by nations that have a nuclear weapons program. U–235 has a half–life of
703,800,000 years. This means that U–235 will take over 700 million years for it to decompose by
half. It is estimated that these elements will still be hazardous for ten times their half–lives. At this
rate, U–235 will take around 7 billion years for it to become non–threatening to humans. It should
be noted that seasons, temperature, or any known solvents will not affect the rate of decay. During
the Cold War, very little attention was paid to the high volume of radioactive waste generated and
even less to its effects on the environment. U–235 is an extreme example, we still have to contend
with low level radioactive waste produced daily by Industry and Medical facilities. Some of the
effects on the environment are; groundwater contamination, soil contamination, buried soil and
water containing waste, and underground disposal facilities storing large volumes of hazardous,
radioactive waste. One such facility was the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository, which was
designated in 1987 by the NWPAAmendments, and located on federal land adjacent to the Nevada
Test Site (NTS) in Nye County, Nevada some 80 miles Northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. Congress
approved the site in 2002,

The Problem Of Nuclear Waste
For many years, the United States government has been faced with the mounting dilemma being
caused by nuclear waste. This radioactive material is a byproduct of nuclear reactors, hospital,
processing plants, and research facilities. Since the use of nuclear power began, the wastes have
been transported and kept from the public successfully, but there are a large percentage of people
that believe this industry needs to come to a halt until a solution has been devised for its disposal.
There is a major concern that the long term containment plants and current burial grounds are not
adequate solutions; this is due to the risk of potential environmental disturbances. When these
substances are not disposed of properly, they can cause a multiplicity of dangers such as cancer and
the destruction of the ecosystem. The most effective methods for the elimination of nuclear waste
are building more reliable burial sites, turning the byproduct into electricity, transmuting these
toxins into glass that can be handled normally and constructing launchers to send the most noxious
substances into outer space. It is mandatory that measures are taken to eliminate nuclear waste
because of the detrimental effect that these radioactive substances have. Radiation emits waves of
harmful energy in waves or subatomic particles that have the ability to pass through various
materials such as cells, skin, or metal. "The mix of materials in nuclear waste means it could
possibly need to be isolated for

Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Project Threatens Native Lands

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Mehr von Kristin Oliver

Mehr von Kristin Oliver (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Project Threatens Native Lands