Why do we need nuclear power plants? ?

South Oroville

i just wanna know....why DO we need nuclear power plants? i live in pennsylvania and we have 2 power plants here that im afraid of ever since the japan crisis....Peach Bottom and 3 Mile Island..now what if something happens to one of those like a nuclear reactor malfunctions get a kick when my mom was a baby with the exception of this time it explodes? i hardly want to be familiar with why we lack NUCLEAR facility...btw im 13...im just eccentric



Pine Plains

Nuclear power is deemed as an alternative to Fossil Fuel-based power (such as coal and oil) which takes millions of years to be replenished (and are also quite expensive).



Helenwood

If anything, the situation shows how safe nuclear power is. Consider that forty year old plants were hit with an earthquake five times the strength they were designed for and yet they still shut down safely. The generators came on like they were supposed to when grid power was cut. Then the tsunami hit and the generators were wiped out. However, the battery backup still worked for the designed eight hours. The problem happened when no new generators could be put in. Even so the problems have been minimal--media scare mongering for ratings not withstanding. Here is an informative article describing the situation:http://bravenewclimate. com/2011/03/13/fu…And here is where you find current, factual status information:http://www. iaea. org/newscenter/news/tsun…And here is a chart that helps you to make sense of the numbers:http://www. xkcd. com/radiation/



Rutherford College

A lot of these stations were built at a time when it was felt nuclear power using fission would provide abundant and cheap energy eventually. The current thinking on one side is that they are the only alternative to fossil fuels. This is not necessarily true - we have to move towards sustainable power in the next few decades as both fossil fuels and the nuclear fuel are not sustainable - that is they will run out. At the current world use with the current world known resources according to the nuclear industry we have about 80 years of uranium. This worries potential builders of nuclear power stations who can see they might not get a full return on their investment if the nuclear fuel (uranium) should become hard to get. Another affable in the know about atomic reactor that has not too guaranty concerning providing plentiful power will use a nuclear commingling process. This is more like the processes that tinder stars with an increment of the sun. This has axiomatically been fully well-aged nearby this station, but the operational risks are smaller. If something goes wrong it stops instantly. In fact the problem is sort of - operose to keep off spiralling, or grate on nerves secure a return on to sufficient power, just the opposite of fission reactors which mistress't really want to stop - ergo you cannot just pace away evaporate them. These immoderately may have commebce limitations such as lithium in the ongoing concepts.



Lakewood

well if you prefer living without electricity or with rolling blackouts like they have in japan right now i guess you can make do without nuclear energy but if you want reliable energy grid that operates full day, every day then that power needs to come from somewhere. nuclear power is pretty convenient and cheap compared to shoveling coal into oven. there is of course a possibility of some natural catastrophe exceeding design parameters tenfold like it happened in japan. the reactor was built to withstand 7.9 magnitude earthquake after the 1923 Great Kanto Earthquake that killed 100 000 people. unfortunately a new historic record was made with 9.0 mag earthquake so the nuclear plant failed. but seriously, if you have a natural catastrophe exceeding historical maximum tenfold, is the nuclear plant really your biggest problem? i mean they have 9000 corpses and 14000 missing from the tsunami and earthquake and some tens of plant workers with radiation caused health problems, which is the real problem there? it often seems that fear of radiation is much more dangerous than radiation itself, for example among the Chernobyl catastrophe liquidators the main cause of death today is suicide not cancer. directly caused by stress from fear of radiation



Goltry

its cheap, and very efficient



McDonald

All good answers except cheap and efficient are unlikely. We spent a lot of money building the about 104 nuclear power plants here in the USA. If we start shutting them down, and dismantling, your electric bill may double. How they should be dismantled is still hotly debated. Even the oldest ones are reasonably safe/possibly not true of nukes we may build later in this century, as liars are much more common now than when we built the 104 nuclear power plants. Lying and safety often are in conflict. Neil



Avondale

First a fallacy to be destroyed. Nuclear power plants don't explode. In the worst case scenario (and it is worst case {Only almost happened once}), a melt down could occur. In a melt down situation a runaway reactor loses coolant of it's radio active core and the nuclear reaction continues to create heat in such a manner that nothing can stop the heat gain. With this heat gain the mass of fuel melts and eats its way through the containing structures. Eventually the mass will encounter a volume of water sufficient to cool this mass. The resultant effect will be large masses of uncontrolled steam escaping into the atmosphere with radioactive particles. This steam will become widespread and uncontrolled will cause radiation over a large area. As I said this almost happened once (Chernobyl). In Chernobyl the resultant partial meltdown caused radioactive spray over a relatively small area. The type of reactor at TMI and the ones in Japan are PWR reactors and use water as a coolant and have a large availability of water for cooling. The reactor in Chernobyl used a solid coolant and was much more volatile. Nuclear power is needed because of the large demands for electricity we have placed upon ourselves. The effects of alternatives to nuclear power (fossil fuels) are now viewed as bad guys as well (greenhouse gases). There are problems with all forms of mass power generation. If we want our computers, air conditioners, ovens, and washing machines, we need some large sources of energy. But first relax. The nuclear power plant will not explode.