Category: Nuclear Power

Nuclear Technology Evolution

The search for renewable energy form brought with it nuclear energy, which has remained the most controversial technological issue for a long period. Nuclear debates started during its discovery. These debates involved anti-nuclear activists, pro-nuclear activists and the scientists. In spite of these debates, nuclear technology grew fast.

This was supported by scientific innovation. After the World War I, Scientist doubled their efforts in nuclear research. In 1950s, there was an eminent tension between the pro-nuclear programs and anti-nuclear groups. This was fuelled by scientific discoveries over radioactive elements in the oceans and wells.

Increase in literacy brought the general public into the nuclear debate too. However, people were divided over choices of rejection and adoption of nuclear technology. Many people thought the radioactive materials can be contained. Scientific discoveries brought more tension, as well. While some discoveries showed that nuclear materials can safely be handled, others such as the discovery of radioactive elements scared people. Safety concerns grew among people, a reflection of Japanese citizens’ response after the Fukushima Dai-ichi plant meltdown.

After the World War II, the world began debates over nuclear weapons. Conflicts have sprung between the anti and pro-nuclear weapon. Currently, South Korea is under tension due to its nuclear plants. The country is perceived as a threat to international peace. Consequently, debates are waging over nuclear power plants. The Fukushima Dai-ichi plant meltdown has rekindled these debates attracting strong opposing forces between the government and the public (Alistair 2012).

Nuclear Energy Controversies

Use of nuclear power has raised a lot of controversies across the globe. Citizens, environmental bodies and government officials all seem to have different positions regarding nuclear energy. Since the Fukushima Dai-ichi plant meltdown, tension has been created by these bodies against the government. In Japan, the government is supported by the economists, while Japanese citizens are backed up by environmentalists.

Currently, Japanese citizens are against any reactivation of nuclear power plant in their country. As Jackie says, “Thousands of Japanese — young, old, in wheelchairs and on skateboards — shout anti- nuclear slogans from behind police barricades that snake around the office of Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda” (Jackie 2012, p.1). Japanese citizens are concerned with their safety and strongly believes that nuclear decisions should consider safety measures.

Contrary, Japanese government believes that the economic impact outweighs dangers associated with nuclear power. As a result, the government has reactivated two new nuclear stations. The nuclear stations have been reactivated despite Japanese public outcry.

Contrary to the public, government consideration in making such a decision was mainly driven by economic status. An official, Saruhashi, did say, “”If another nuclear accident happens now, like the one at Fukushima Dai-ichi, everyone in Japan will blame us, But many people will be consuming the electricity that we provide”(Jackie 2012, p.1).

The melt down of Fukushima Dai-ichi plant has cost Japan a lot in energy importation. The plant provided averagely 30 per cent of energy consumed in Japan. As a result, the government foresaw economic down turn without reactivating two new plants.

Business community spokesman, Satoshi Mukuta, say “”If Japan decides to stop all nuclear power, we will not have a stable and inexpensive source of electricity. The cost of everything will go up by at least 20 per cent, our economy will suffer,” (Jackie 2012, p.1). Apart from Japan, nuclear power usage has raised a lot of controversial debates across the world.

Nuclear Technology Diverse Views

Technological advancement is not an individual country’s decision. For example, nuclear issues are global concerns. This is because of massive damages nuclear pose to the environment and also their long term implications on people. As a result, citizens, national and international bodies, and regulatory machinery come together in making their views.

Today, many nations have entered treaties to aid in handling nuclear problems. Treaties have been applied to guide nations through joint conferences since the end of the Cold War. Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), for example, is working towards world peace by ensuring nuclear weapons’ disarmament. It is this treaty that nations have come together to fight against nuclear weapons. The United Kingdom foreign affair minister, Alistair Burt said,

“All States Parties agreed to support the Treaty to meet new and existing threats. A five year action plan was agreed by consensus, spanning the three so-called “pillars” of the NPT – progress toward disarmament by existing nuclear weapon states, measures to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons to others and, a crucial part of the bargain struck in 1968, supporting the peaceful use of nuclear energy for those that want It” (Alistair 2012, p.1).

However, treaties have not achieved maximum acceptance across the world. The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) has not been accepted by some countries. Alistair says, “The three non- signatories India, Israel, and Pakistan, are the only additional states believed to have gained possession of nuclear weapons since the Treaty’s inception in 1968”. It is important for other means of policy making to be sought to bring these non- signatories together to ensure nuclear fire heads are eliminated.

Nations have set regulatory measures through government legislations to meet every government view. The legal system expresses and enforces the government wishes. Consequently, there are international bodies such as UN and UNEP who are concerned with the safety of our environment and national security. Finally, the public and local authorities are also vital bodies whose view must be sought before adoption of nuclear usage (Alistair 2012).

The Role of Engineers and Technology Experts

The Fukushima nuclear plant meltdown is partly considered to be a natural disaster and partly an engineers’ failure. Sensitivity of expertise effectiveness in managing nuclear plants has increased since the Fukushima Dai-ichi plant meltdown. Any technological set up should have expert guidance and knowledge to minimise related technological dangers The Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the United States vote against licensing new nuclear plants brought several concerns in the Court of Appeal, for example.

The United States Court of Appeal for Columbia District consequently argued “the agency had failed to conduct an environmental impact statement or a finding of no significant environmental impact before deeming the storage of waste in wet pools and dry casks safe”(Hannah 2012, p.1). This was highly welcomed by environmentalists and the public.

Nuclear technology expertise does not only revolve around building the plants but also the capacity to manage their waste. This is under environmental sustainability development. Experts need to conduct environmental impact assessment and report risks and their mitigation measures.

Poor environmental risk analysis only increases chances of risks associated with plants. In countering the agency, for example, the Natural Resources Defense Council, claims “the agency violated the National Environmental Policy Act by not adequately considering the environmental implications of storing spent fuel at nuclear plants, sometimes for years after operations have ceased” (Hannah 2012, p.1).

In any technological sector, experts’ knowledge in running the processes, structures and outcomes is vital. Since there are regulations governing operations of industries, poor applications of expertise knowledge might lead to court involvement or public pressure that stops industrial operations.

I need to have knowledge about expertise requirements for both external and internal organisation management. These will ensure that the technological sector serves the interest of the public as well as the government. Consequently, poor adoption of technology can create serious environmental problems. As a result, a person in the industrial world needs to have a wide knowledge of its environment (Hannah 20120).

Reasons for the Diverse Nuclear Technology Views

Before a nation embraces any form of technology, several factors need to be considered. Across the world, incorporation of nuclear technology must be in line with political, economic and public demands. Public controversy towards incorporation of nuclear energy solely relies on safety measures.

People believe that safety should be given priority over all impacts technology can create in a society. Contrary economist considers cost effectiveness as the chief priory for technological adoption. As a result, economic partners consider nuclear energy as the best alternative, for example, in Japan.

Before incorporation of any technological development, consideration is made to ensure international peace and understanding is maintained. Evidently, any technological development influences international relations. This is because nations share a lot in communication, trade and environment. Hence a country cannot acquire a technology such as nuclear usage without mutual understanding.

Technological impacts are felt beyond boundaries. Nuclear weapons and reactors have brought immeasurable damages across the world. As a result, there is need for technological development to be controlled by nations as one community. Eradication of harmfully technology, such as nuclear weapons constantly is delayed by world’s disunity. As a result, conflicts have risen across nations due to technological mismanagements. The current case is witnessed in Southern Korea.

Public interest is also a vital measure before a nation embraces any form of technology. The public must accept that a given technology is safe, beneficial and reliable for its use. For example, technological adaptation is tied to interest of the public and the government.

Both the governmental regulators and non-governmental policy makers need assurance that any technological developed in a country meets expertise standards and are friendly to the environment. Before adopting any technology, there is a need to have knowledge of running its processes, structures and outcome. Industries, which have failed.to develop these core areas, have faced a lot of pressure in their operation (Hannah 20120).

Apart from knowledge gained from the selected articles, self-directed learning has exposed me to several challenges. I have to plan to get the best materials of my interest and that I feel will satisfy my knowledge quest. I have been responsible for my work through developing my own learning schedules.

I have gained in time management skills. I have to be my own time manager in carrying out my work. The system has enhanced my research skills. I constantly develop my research skills, unlike when an instructor provides me with everything. Self-directed learning has opened my eyes in the learning area. I have realised that there are several things that are not covered in classroom learning or teacher driven environment.

References

Alistair, B. 2012, The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty – At the Heart of the Global Nuclear Debate. Web.

Hannah, N. 2012, Nuclear Waste: NRC halts licensing decisions amid storage debate. Web.

Jackie, N. 2012, Japan’s Nuclear Debate Weighs Safety, Economics. Web.

Introduction

As the human civilization has advanced, so have the energy demands of humankind. The modern world requires huge amounts of energy resources to sustain its need. For over a century, these energy demands have been satisfied by fossil fuels.

However, the energy demands have increased significantly and it has been recognized that the un-renewable fossil fuel reserves will not be able to satisfy the global energy demands for long. This together with the observed negative environmental impacts of the sources has necessitated the search for alternative energy sources.

Nuclear energy has emerged as a potential alternative energy source to fossil fuel. Loyn (2011) declares that while there are other alternative sources of energy, nuclear power is the most reliable and sustainable one.

The technology to exploit nuclear power has already been well developed and as of 2011, nuclear power stations were supplying 6% of the world’s energy needs. This suggests that nuclear power is a feasible replacement to fossil fuels as a primary source of energy for the world.

Nuclear Power: An Overview

Nuclear power refers to the process of creating heat through a nuclear reaction and then harnessing this heat to produce electricity. It was an offshoot of the nuclear weapons industry. After scientists successfully learned how to build the atomic bomb, government funded research and development was committed to civilian application and nuclear development.

Researchers hoped to be able to harness the enormous energy produced by nuclear reactions for peaceful use. Governments have continued to play a crucial role in the nuclear industry and Western governments have expended significant financial resources to the development of nuclear power.

The US government spent $70 billion between 1948 and 1998 while the OECD governments had spent $318 billion by 1992 on nuclear energy research and development (Caldicott, 2006).

Nuclear energy encompasses two varying but related forms of reactions fission and fusion. In nuclear fission, nuclear power is produced by splitting a radioactive isotope of a heavy element into two or more smaller nuclei (Benedict, 1971). The newly formed nuclei are positively charged and they repel each other thereby traveling at high speeds in opposite directions.

If there are other fissionable atoms nearby, they may be induced to fission by colliding with the high speed traveling nuclei from the first fission atom and this creates a chain reaction (McKinney & Schoch, 2012). The chain reaction taking place due to nuclear fission has to be controlled. If it is allowed to go on in an uncontrolled manner, it will lead to a nuclear meltdown.

Control rods are the devices used to regulate the nuclear fission process. These rods are made of material that readily absorbs neutrons, such as cadmium and boron. The nuclear chain reaction can be completely stopped by inserting the control rods fully into the nuclear reactor.

In the fusion process, the nuclei of light elements fuse together to form heavier elements. An enormous amount of energy is released in this process thereby creating nuclear power. The first artificial fusion reaction was attained when the US detonated a hydrogen bomb in 1954. However, controlled and sustained fusion reactions are not yet feasible as a commercial energy source.

The lack of success in harnessing energy from the fusion process for commercial energy production is due to the extremely high temperatures needed to initiate the fusion reaction. McKinney and Schoch (2012) reveal that researchers are working to come up with a practical means of producing the extremely high temperatures needed for fusion and to contain the fusion reaction after it gets started.

How Nuclear Power Works

All modern nuclear power plants make use of the fission process to produce energy. A great amount of energy is required to split an atom and to accomplish this a nuclear reactor, which is a machine that shoots electricity-charged neutrons at atoms at great speeds, is used.

The reactor consists of a core, which has the nuclear fuel (usually uranium), a moderator to slow neurons down, and control rods to regulate the rate of the fission process (Sivanagaraju, 2010). When the nuclear power plant is in operation, vast amounts of heat energy are generated in the reactor core. Water is used as the main coolant for the core.

The water in the nuclear power plant is contained in a primary and a secondary loop. The primary loop circulates around the core and its water directly cool the core. During the cooling process, the water in the loop absorbs the core’s heat energy. Lilley (2010) states that the water in the primary loop is push under high pressure to retain it liquid form.

The primary loop is exposed to the core and the water in it potentially becomes radioactive. The water is therefore recycled and not exposed to the environment. The secondary loop contains water that is heated by the primary loop through a heat exchanger.

This heat turns the secondary loop water into steam. Since the water in the secondary loop does not come into direct contact with the primary loop water, it is not radioactive. The steam is therefore used directly to turn turbines in generators and produce electricity.

Advantages of Nuclear Power

Nuclear power reduces the negative environmental impact that electricity generation activities cause. Without nuclear power, industrialized countries such as the US would have to rely overwhelmingly on coal burning to generate electricity. McKinney and Schoch (2012) assert that coal causes severe environmental degradation as harmful greenhouse gases are produced and harmful particles are introduced into the environment.

The other major source of electricity generation is hydro power plants and these facilities result in significant pollution to the environment. Hydroelectric power plants lead to flooding in the upstream areas and encourage the proliferation of disease-bearing organisms due to the disruption caused to natural water flow.

Nuclear energy provides the only feasible solution to provide for the growing electricity demands in the world. The global electricity demand is expected to double in the next 2 decades (Hore-Lacy, 2011). Nuclear energy is able to provide continuous reliable supply to meet the global energy demands. To reduce the reliance on the non-renewable fossil fuels, renewable alternatives such as wind and solar energy have been proposed.

Many nations have established power plants that harness these resources to produce electricity. However, these alternatives suffer from a lack of reliability. Wind power relies on the presence of substantial amounts of wind while solar energy requires the continuous radiation from the sun. For these two alternatives to be exploited, the power station has to be fitted with substantial back-up capacity in order to provide continuous energy.

The prices for the fuel for nuclear reactors is low and relatively stable making the unit cost of electricity from nuclear power stations fairly predictable (Sivanagaraju, 2010). The Fossil fuel prices are unstable and most times, they are escalating. This makes reliance on fossil fuels for electricity generation unreliable and expensive.

The price fluctuation has a negative economic impact on the countries that rely on fossil fuels for electricity generation. The price for uranium, which is the primary fuel for nuclear reactors, is stable which makes the cost of electricity from nuclear power stations steady over extended periods of time. Nuclear power stations are capable of providing cheap electricity especially when the power generated is large (Sivanagaraju, 2010).

After the initial capital expenses have been incurred, the running costs of the power station are low. The amount of energy obtained from a small amount of nuclear fuel also contributes to the reduction in the cost per unit.

Nuclear power plants have established themselves as the safest means of large-scale commercial power generation. Since the start of commercial nuclear energy production, nearly 6 decades ago, nuclear power generation has shown an impressive safety record (Benedict, 1971).

McKinney and Schoch (2012) reveal that the wide publicizing of the few nuclear accidents has caused the perception that nuclear power plants are unsafe. In reality, other sources of electricity generation have had many accidents and caused more deaths than nuclear power plants.

The use of nuclear power to produce electricity increases the energy dependence of a country. Most nations rely on the fossil resources to satisfy their energy production. Overdependence on fossil fuels leads to energy dependency on the nations that have huge fossil fuel reserves. The non-oil producing nations of the world are forced to spend a lot of foreign currency importing these products.

Nuclear power plants reduce the demands for coal, gas, and oil therefore promoting energy reliance in countries that lack fossil fuel resources. This increases the freedom of the country and also saves it millions of dollars that would have been used importing fossil fuels.

Nuclear power plants have less space requirements compared to other electricity production methods such as hydroelectric. This is a major advantage since land is becoming a scarce resource as the human population increases and more land is required for industrial activity.

The limited space requirements of nuclear power stations mean that they can be constructed relatively nearer to the load center in order to reduce transmission losses.

Disadvantages of Nuclear Power

Nuclear power makes use of nonrenewable resources, which means that this source of energy cannot provide for humanity’s energy needs indefinitely.

Loyn (2011) documents that uranium, which is the main fissile fuel use in nuclear reactors, is a finite resource and the available uranium deposits are expected to run out in about 100 years. The widespread availability of uranium is already diminishing as more nations set up nuclear power stations. Nuclear power can therefore not be relied upon to provide energy for generations to come.

Nuclear power plants produce toxic waste that can be harmful to the environment. Nuclear plants make use of uranium and plutonium to produce the heat energy through the nuclear reaction. Once these raw materials have been used for the production of nuclear energy, they are radioactive in nature and must be stored safely.

Meisen and Hunter (2007) document that these toxic byproducts have a very long half-life and they must be stored safely for thousands of years. A nation that wishes to use nuclear power to generate electricity has to invest in a sophisticated waste disposal program.

Nuclear power plants require large quantities of water during routine operations. This water is used for cooling purposes and for turning the turbines to generate electricity. While most of the water is reused in the operation, significant water is released into the atmosphere therefore making the water requirements for the power plant great (Caldicott, 2006).

The huge water requirements make it expensive for nuclear power plants to be constructed at locations where there is no large water supply. In addition to this, nuclear power plants lead to the contamination of water since the water in the primary loop becomes radioactive due to contact with the core.

The mining and processing of the uranium resources necessary to fuel nuclear power plants has a major impact on the environment. Uranium is found in small concentration and a significant amount of uranium ore has to be mined in order to extract uranium from the earth.

McKinney and Schoch (2012) state that more than 140,000 metric tons of uranium ore has to be mined to supply the uranium fuel consumed by a 1,000-megawatt capacity nuclear power plant annually.

Caldicott (2006) reveals that as more nuclear power plants are commissioned, the demand for uranium will increase and this will deplete the high-grade deposits of uranium ore making it necessary for more land to be mined in order to extract the uranium.

The level of damage in case of a major disaster in a nuclear power plant would be catastrophic. McKinney and Schoch (2012) chillingly warn that the typical modern nuclear power plant contains within its walls “radiation equivalent to that of a thousand Hiroshima bombs” (p.223).

In a worst-case nuclear accident scenario, up to 100,000 immediate deaths would occur and tens of thousands of subsequent deaths would follow due to radiation poisoning.

The Chernobyl disaster of 1986 demonstrated the huge environmental implications that a nuclear power station accident can cause. Chudley (2012) documents that this accident led to the severe contamination of over 10,000 square kilometers of territory in former USSR

Is Nuclear Power Friendly to the Environment?

Nuclear power presents an additional danger to the environment since an accidental spillage has adverse effects on the surrounding environment. Caldicott (2006) warns that there is danger of the huge quantities of radioactive waste accumulating from nuclear power leaking and contaminating drinking water and food chains in many parts of the world.

In addition to the risk of accidental spillage, nuclear power plants are making the environment unsafe. Nuclear power plants emit routine radiation that may be dangerous to the environment. Caldicott (2006) states that the radioactive elements released from the nuclear fuel cycle cause damage to living cells.

The environment is in constant danger from the harmful byproducts of nuclear power stations. Nuclear power plants produce toxic radioactive waste that must be safely stored to avoid environmental contamination.

Caldicott (2006) states that a regular 1,000 megawatt nuclear power plant generates 30 tons of extremely dangerous radioactive waste annually. So far, a safe means of disposing of the deadly radioactive waste is yet to be developed.

However, it should be noted that the dangers to the environment all require catastrophic failures in the nuclear power plants. While nuclear power plants pose significant threats to the environment, the US Environmental Protection Agency (2012) asserts that these power plants are built with safety considerations as a priority. The reactor plants are shielded to ensure that the radiation is contained and does not escape into the environment.

The impressive safety record of nuclear power stations all over the world suggests that nuclear energy is actually friendly to the environment. In addition to this, nuclear power plants reduce the environmental effects caused by traditional energy production methods since they do not release any harmful gases into the environment.

The Future of Nuclear Power

Nuclear power plants promise to reduce carbon emissions while at the same time guaranteeing energy security for decades to come. However, this energy production method can still be improved upon. At the present, the nuclear power generation plants make use of nuclear fission. Loyn (2011) states that nuclear fusion is yet to be developed for use in civilian power stations.

Hore-Lacy (2011) reveals that it is hoped that by the time the uranium supplies in the world are exhausted, nuclear fusion will be an option. If this technology is perfected, the society will be able to benefit from the enormous amount of energy produced from this process. In addition to this, the resources needed for nuclear fusion are in abundant supply.

Loyn (2011) reveals that Deuterium, the isotope of hydrogen used in nuclear fusion, can be extracted from ordinary water. Since ordinary water is available in abundance, nuclear fusion can provide enough energy to last humanity for millions of years.

The major disadvantages attributed to nuclear power plants are associated with the use of fission reactors. If major developments are made in fusion technology, these demerits of nuclear power will be eliminated.

Scientists agree that fusion would be an ideal energy source since it would provide enormous amounts of energy from an infinite resource (ordinary water) and without the radioactive waste products that fission produces (Loyn, 2011).

Conclusion

This paper set out to discuss nuclear power station with focus on the advantages and disadvantages of these stations. The paper begun by defining nuclear power and elaborating on how nuclear power can be used to produce electricity. It has demonstrated that nuclear power is capable of producing enough electricity to satisfy the growing global energy demands.

The paper has also highlighted some of the most important advantages of nuclear power, including its low environmental impact, reliability, reduced unit price, and limited space requirements. In addition to this, the paper has recognized that there are major risks associated with using nuclear power to generate electricity.

However, measures can be taken to mitigate these risks and ensure that the society is able to harness the enormous energy held in nuclear power at minimal risk. A discussion on the future of nuclear energy has been made.

The paper has demonstrated that for nuclear power to serve as an alternative to fossil fuel, major developments have to be made in nuclear fusion since the currently preferred method, nuclear fusion, is unsustainable. However, the current fission power plants are a relevant alternative to fossil fuels. These nuclear power plants will continue to play a crucial role in providing for the growing global energy demands for decades to come.

References

Benedict, M. (1971). Electric Power From Nuclear Fission. PNAS, 68(8), 8-16.

Caldicott, H. (2006). Nuclear Power Is Not the Answer to Global Warming Or Anything Else. Melbourne: Melbourne Univ. Publishing.

Chudley, A. (2012). Genetic implications and health consequences following the Chernobyl nuclear accident. Clin Genet, 77(1), 221–226.

Hore-Lacy, I. (2011). Nuclear Power and Energy Sustainability. S & CB, 23(1), 159-176.

Lilley, S. (2010). System Failure Case Studies: Island Fever, NASA Safety Center, 4 (3), 23-34.

Loyn, C. (2011). Can Nuclear Power Save the Climate? Young Scientists Journal, 9(1), 16-19.

McKinney, M.L. & Schoch, R.M. (2012). Environmental Science: Systems and Solutions. NY: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.

US Environmental Protection Agency (2012). Nuclear Power Plants. Web.

Sivanagaraju, S. (2010). Generation and Utilization of Electrical Energy. New Delhi: Pearson Education India.

Introduction

In the current days, there are increasing concerns about such environmental issues as global warming all over the world. These concerns have resulted in the renewal of interest in nuclear energy, which was at some point in time ignored. When the Cold War came to a halt, the building up of nuclear energy was overlooked for several years up to the time there was renewed interest among those countries that are developed to have “alternative energy sources” and at this point, once again consideration was made about nuclear energy being a reliable alternative source of energy.

According to Gorton, in the coming twenty years, there are expectations of realizing growth in the nuclear market to a remarkable level. Taking the case in the US in the “Department of Energy”, there are expectations that the electricity demand will rise by half by the year 2030, and the demand worldwide is expected to more than double. Following this increase in demand for electricity that is expected, it is implied that there will be an increased nuclear power demand. The increased demand corresponds with the quantity of supply that is not strong (Preeg 167). According to Gorton “as emerging economies develop over the next 20 years, there will be an enormous spike of demand for low-cost, environmentally-friendly alternative energy sources, and nuclear power is expected to satisfy this demand” (Gorton Para 10). In this paper, there is going to be a discussion of nuclear power in India. The demand for electricity in India is increasing and there is a need to increase the level of supply to meet the demand and the best option is to invest more in nuclear power, considering that there is a shortage in fossil fuel supply and there are also environmental concerns.

Nuclear Power in India

After India become independent in the year 1947, there was the establishment of the “Atomic Energy Commission” in the year that followed (1948). This commission was set up to formulate policies regarding building up atomic energy. In the year 1954, there was establishing of the “Department of Atomic Energy” and the responsibility of this department was to ensure implementation of the policies that were set up by the “Atomic Energy Commission”

In this country, the development of nuclear energy started with two main goals. One of the goals was to have peaceful atomic energy utilization to bring improvement in the people’s quality of life and the other objective was to realize self-reliance in having the energy needs to be met. According to Jain and Nigam “the Commercial Nuclear Power Program……currently shares 3% country’s installed capacity, thus playing a complementary role in meeting the country’s demand. However, in long term, it is expected to play a significant role in meeting the huge electricity demand” (Page 2).

India is not a country that is “very energy resource-rich”. In the present day, the state of the resource base for this country “suggests the optimal mix of all the available energy resources to meet its growing demand of electricity which is projected to be about 800GWe by 2030 and 1300GWe by 2050” (Jain and Nigam 2).

According to World Nuclear Association, currently, there is a rapid increase in the demand for electricity in India. In the year 2007, there was the production of seven hundred and ninety-two KW hours and this output was three times the output produced in the year 1990, but still, this stood for just about seven hundred kilowatt-hours per capita for that particular year. Having large losses resulting in the course of transmission, this yielded just five hundred and forty-four-kilowatt hours consumption. According to the “World Nuclear Association”, in India “coal provides 68% of electricity at the present, but reserves are limited. Gas provides 8%, and hydro 15 percent. The per capita consumption figure is expected to double by 2020, with 6.3% annual growth, and reach 5000 – 6000 kwh by 2050” (Para 2).

In the year 2007, nuclear power accounted for 2.5 percent of the electricity supply in India (15.8 billion kilowatt-hours). This quantity is projected to increase with time and the projected increase is attributed to the availability of imported uranium as well as setting up new plants in the region. The projection was carried out this year (2010) in March of having twenty-two billion kilowatt-hours and in the coming year (2011), there is the projection of having twenty-four billion kilowatt-hours (“World Nuclear Association”).

Considering that there is an increasing demand for electricity in India, and also considering that there is a deficiency of fossil fuels, these have driven the Indian government to invest more in nuclear for electricity supply (Kapila and Kapila 76). According to “World Nuclear Association” “25% nuclear contribution is foreseen by the year 2050, when 1094 GWe of base-load capacity is expected to be required. Almost as much investment in the grid system as in power plants is necessary” (Para 4).

From the early 1990s, the main supplier of nuclear fuel to India has been Russia. In the course of the period that started from the year 2006 up to the year 2008, there was a decline in India’s local uranium resources and this led to a decrease in the amount of electricity produced from nuclear energy by about 12 percent. According to “Nuclear Power Plants in India” (Para 2) “India has signed contracts regarding nuclear power with countries like France, US, UK, Namibia, Canada, Kazakhstan and Argentina after the Nuclear Suppliers Group declared a waiver in September 2008 to allow India to commence on worldwide nuclear trade”. In February 2009, India even engaged in signing an agreement for approximately two thousand tons of nuclear fuel supply for seven hundred million US dollars.

Conclusion

The demand for electricity in India is increasing with each coming day. This increase in demand calls for appropriate measures to be taken to increase the supply so that the demand can be met. However, following the worldwide concerns regarding having environmentally friendly energy sources, and also following a decline in fossil fuels resources, makes nuclear power to be the best option as an alternative source of energy. Regarding this, India is taking appropriate measures to ensure having an increase in the electricity supply that comes from nuclear energy in the coming years. The level of electricity supply that is expected to come from nuclear power in the coming 20 or more years is expected to rise substantially.

Works Cited

Gorton, Jennifer. What about investing in power? 2010. Web.

Jain, Khan and Nigam Bharatiya. Nuclear Power – an alternative, n.d. Web.

Kapila, Raj and Kapila Uma. Economic developments in India: Monthly Update, Volume – 102 Analysis, Reports, Policy Documents. New York: Academic Foundation, 2006.

“Nuclear Power Plants in India.” MapsofIndia, 2010. Web.

Preeg, Earnest H. India and China: an advanced technology race and how the United States should respond. Washington: CSIS, 2008.

World Nuclear Association. Nuclear power in India, 2010. Web.

Introduction

Human life is full of uncertainties that occur as a result of their interference with the ecosystem. However, sometimes these happenings occur due to forces beyond human intervention. In this case, human beings have little or no control over calamities that tend to make human life unbearable. These calamities include earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, floods, lightning, and tsunamis. This research paper will focus on tsunamis and their effects on human beings.

Purpose of the Study

This research paper will explore four key areas that are associated with tsunamis. The first aspect outlines the characteristics of tsunamis including how they are formed, travel, move, and their sizes. The second point involves a study on the tsunami that hit Japan in 2011 and its impacts on the victims. The third aspect involves how a nuclear plant ought to prepare to handle tsunamis as soon as they occur. Lastly, this paper will explore the necessary training that nuclear plant employees should undergo in order to handle tsunamis and their impacts.

Problem Statement

This research paper aims at answering the following questions. Why do tsunamis continue to occur despite efforts to try to control them? Are responsible parties doing enough to fight against the effects of tsunamis? Are nuclear plant personnel trained to handle tsunamis?

Significance of the Study

This study will enable the audience to know how tsunamis are formed and their characteristics. The paper will give an insight into the tsunami that occurred in Japan in 2011 and the resultant effects it had on the environment. In addition, this paper will identify the necessary safety equipment for emergencies at a nuclear power plant located near costs. Lastly, this paper will address the necessary training and awareness programs that will enable nuclear power plant staff to handle tsunamis and their effects.

Methodology and Literature Review

The information presented by this research paper is obtained from online sources that include the national geographic website and other online environmental-related organizations. Other information is obtained from Geography books used by various learning institutions.

Scope and Limitations

This research is based on the findings recorded in various forms ranging from websites, books, and video recordings of the occurrence of tsunamis. It focuses on all aspects that relate to tsunamis and to some smaller extent the ocean tides and earth movements that have a link with tsunamis. However, the paper is limited to nuclear power plants as emergency response units to tsunamis even though there are other units that take part in the fight against tsunamis and their effects.

Procedure and Time Frame

The results presented in this paper are collected from literature presented in various forms since 426 BC from the Greek’s understanding of tsunamis to the recent discussions on the findings of meteorologists. However, for purposes of understanding the tsunami, this information is not presented in a chronological manner.

Analysis, Reliability, and Validity

The information presented in this research paper has been analyzed and proved to be the actual content obtained by various parties that participate in the study of tsunamis. These parties undertook these steps as a way of either educating the public (including learning institutions) or for purposes of trying to find out ways of fighting tsunamis through understanding more about them.

Findings and Observations

Characteristics of tsunamis

Tsunamis refer to a collection of large water waves in a large water mass like a lake or ocean. Research has shown that tsunamis are triggered by a number of factors that contribute individually or collectively to the occurrence of tsunamis. It is necessary to note that tsunamis occur as a result of the disturbance of large water bodies by forces that force the normal water waves to exceed their normal length and strength. The most common known causes of tsunamis include internal and external land forming processes (Boyce 2007). These include volcanic activities, landslides, glaciations, and earthquakes. Sometimes underground explosions in water bodies may trigger tsunamis.

However, it is necessary to note that tsunamis occur as a result of powerful forces originating from either below or above large water bodies. Sometimes these forces act on the water directly or on land far away from these water bodies (Sergeant 2012). Tsunamis resemble ocean tides but with major differences in sizes, length and strength. A typical tsunami is usually a rising tide that does not seem to break and consists of waves that last for considerable periods of time. The wavelengths of tsunamis are higher ranging from tens to hundreds of meters. This means that whenever tsunamis leave devastating effects when they break on coastal lines. Large tsunamis are more prone to cause damages since their force propels them much further inland than ordinary waves and tides.

Contrary to popular beliefs, tides do not have anything to do with the occurrence of tsunamis. As discussed earlier the presence of tsunamis is triggered by displacement of large volumes of water in a large water body like ocean, sea, or lake by one or a combination of the factors mentioned. However, the force of gravity helps in maintaining the displacement of water and thus giving the tsunami more momentum as it moves towards the land.

There are three common ways through which tsunamis are generated. The most common way involves seismicity. The sea bed usually consists of horizontally lying plates of the earth above which water is held. Whenever these plates are displaced by earthquakes or volcanic eruptions, one side of the plate breaks away and moves vertically in an opposing direction (Senauth 2011). Consequently, the level of water above these plates is displaced by massive energy from the eruptions. This, in turn, pushes water above these plates at a very high speed causing the effects to be felt as huge volumes of water rise high above sea level.

The second way through which tsunamis are generated is through landslides. This case usually originates from islands as internal and external land forming processes take place. Huge volumes of sand and debris are deposited in water bodies at a rate that is much faster than the water body can handle. This causes an upward displacement of water as the debris plunge into the water at high speed. However, most tsunamis of this nature rarely cross the ocean unless it involves very huge landslides that occur as a result of collapsing volcanic islands. Tsunamis that are generated through these means are commonly known as megatsunamis.

The third way through which tsunamis ate generated is through the falling of meteors that leave huge depressions on the earth’s surface. The force of these meteors as they hit water bodies results in tropical cyclones that are capable of generating storm surges (Kajikawa 2009). These surges cause meteo tsunamis as tides are forced to rise above the normal levels of ordinary waves by several meters.

Generally, tsunamis have devastating effects on the environment in two ways. The first form of destruction occurs when the water surges forward at high speed and smashes against the coastline hitting everything it comes in contact with. This is usually very destructive since the water is pushed by massive pressure from the waves originating from the sea.

The second way through which tsunamis cause destructions is through the sweeping action of the water and debris deposited on land. This water usually recedes at high speed especially in areas where the coastal strip is open, inclined, and submerged by water (Parker 2012). Water sweeps everything along its path as it finds its way back into the adjacent water body.

It is not easy to predict the occurrence or presence of tsunamis especially when the ocean is deep in the area adjacent to the mainland. This is due to the presence of the huge volume area that hides the tides and their magnitude. In these areas, there are usually no visible signs to differentiate tsunamis and normal tides. Therefore, when tsunamis occur, they find people unprepared, and this accounts for their devastating effects. In addition, such tsunamis usually break at high speed forcing water to move very fast deeper into the mainland.

The 2011 Japan tsunami is among the world’s deadliest disasters to ever occur. On Friday11th March 2011 one of the greatest earthquakes on earth occurred at Tohoku. This earthquake originated east of the peninsula approximately 70 kilometers from the scene of the tragedy. This earthquake led to extremely powerful tsunamis that reached about 40.5 meters above sea level and traveled to about 10 kilometers inland. This earthquake moved the earth’s axis by about 10-25 centimeters.

The Fukushima Daiichi Power Plant complex experienced one of the worst disasters to ever hit its three reactors. This earthquake caused power shortages that resulted in system failures; afterward, there was the massive build-up of hydrogen gas in the containment buildings. This caused any people to be evacuated as buildings collapsed. It is estimated that people who resided within a twenty-kilometer mile radius of this power plant were evacuated while those residing within a ten-kilometer radius of the Fukushima Daini Nuclear Power Plant were evacuated too.

The National Police Agency of Japan confirmed grieving statistics of the aftermath of the earthquake and the tsunami (McNeill 2012). It was confirmed that fifteen thousand eight hundred and sixty-seven people died while six thousand one hundred and nine were injured while two thousand nine hundred and nine people went missing. The statistics showed that about one hundred and twenty-nine thousand two hundred and twenty-nine buildings collapsed beyond repair while two hundred and fifty-four thousand two hundred and four buildings were partially destroyed.

In addition, most roads and railways in the northeastern parts of Japan were adversely affected. There were also various cases of fire outbreaks as a result of destruction in the power cables and the short-circuiting effects caused by the disaster. In addition, a dam also collapsed due to the impacts of the earthquake.

Moreover, about four and a half million people in the northeastern part of Japan were left in the dark after their electricity supply was cut short by falling poles or collapsed buildings that hampered the supply of electricity (Kingston 2012). The statistics also showed that about one and a half million residents were left with no water as the earthquake broke the water supply pipes.

The losses incurred were tentatively placed at between fourteen to thirty-four billion United States dollars (Amidon 2011). On the other hand, the World Bank put the cost incurred at about two hundred and thirty-five billion United States dollars. This has gone down the annals of history as the most expensive disaster to have occurred.

This 9.0 magnitude earthquake that lasted for about six minutes left the Japanese government in a state of mourning for several days. However, the early warning signs that were transmitted to the seismometers helped the Japan Meteorological Agency to broadcast an impending disaster. This helped many people to relocate to safer grounds and in turn, saved many lives.

There are several emergency safety equipment and measures that must be put in place to enable the staff working at these nuclear reactors’ power plants to do their work effectively. There must be a reliable power backup system to provide an alternative source of energy should there be a shortage of power not only due to the destructive effects of tsunamis or earthquakes but also cushion the plant against instances of power blackouts. In addition, these alternative energy sources will play vital roles in running the nuclear reactors to avoid overproduction and build up of hydrogen gas in the buildings that house these containers. There is a need for the power plants to develop an effective communication system to ensure emergencies are communicated to the staff and the neighborhood to avoid or reduce the number of causalities. As seen in the above discussion, the timely communication of issuing alarm signals for an impending tsunami ensured many lives were saved as people had time to relocate to safer grounds (Hiroshe 2012). In addition, these power plants need to have effective evacuation plans that will ensure people are evacuated within the shortest time possible to save lives. These plants should have aircraft and well-connected road and rail networks to ensure many people are evacuated in case such disasters happen.

Employees at a nuclear power plant should be given general knowledge regarding tsunamis and earthquakes. They should be informed on the causes, effects, and solutions to problems associated with tsunamis. This will equip them with adequate knowledge regarding safety measures that have to be taken to combat the effects of tsunamis. Secondly, there is a need to educate them on their own safety. This will ensure they not only save the lives of other people but also their lives. It is not wise for these employees to save the lives of other people and lose their own. In fact, the first safety measure they should be educated about is how to keep themselves safe from tsunamis.

Lastly, they should be educated about the nature of all sectors of the plant. They should be aware of the side effects of each component in the nuclear plant should it come into contact with human or plant life (Luke 2012). In addition, they should be aware of the necessary steps to be taken in order to avoid further disasters like explosions in the nuclear reactor plants when earthquakes or tsunamis occur.

Conclusion

It is extremely impossible to stop the occurrence of natural disasters. Even though some of them are partially triggered by human activities, when their effects begin to take a toll on human beings it is impossible to stop them. However, people can take some steps to avoid or limit the effects of disasters like tsunamis. This will be possible if there is proper equipment to predict the occurrence of earthquakes or tsunamis and advise people accordingly. States should have efficient response units to ensure there are no or few causalities should these disasters strike.

References

Amidon, M. (2011). The 2011 Japan Disasters (Essential Events). New York: Essential Library.

Boyce, N. (2007). Magic Tree House Fact Tracker #15: Tsunamis and other Natural Disasters. New York: Random House Books.

Hiroshe. (2012). Fukushima Meltdown: The World’s First Earthquake-Tsunami-Nuclear Disaster. Charleston: CreateSpace.

Kajikawa, K. (2009). Tsunami! New York: Philomel.

Kingston, J. (2012). Natural Disaster and Nuclear Crisis in Japan: Response and Recovery after Japan’s 3/11. New York: Routledge.

Luke, E. (2012). March was Made of Yarn: Reflections on the Japanese Earthquake, Tsunami and Nuclear Meltdown. New York: Vintage.

McNeill, D. (2012). Strong in the Rain: Surviving Japan’s Earthquake, Tsunami and Fukushima Nuclear Disaster. New York: Palgrave McMillan.

Parker, B. (2012). The Power of the Sea: Tsunamis, Storm Surges, Rogue Waves, and Our Quest to Predict Disasters. New York: Palgrave McMillan.

Senauth, F. (2011). Earthquake – Tsunami – Disaster in Japan 2011. Bloomington: AuthorHouse.

Sergeant, W. (2012). Fukushima: Nuclear Disaster on the Ring of Fire. Charleston: CreateSpace.