Nuclear Impact

8/6/2019 Nuclear Impact

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nuclear-impact 1/8

Nuclear Impact

Diagram showing how a nuclear power plant works

Although many people assert that nuclear power is an environmentally conscious energy source

because no greenhouse gases are emitted, it is in no way shape or form a sustainable or renewable energy source. Mining uranium can have similar problems that arise with coal mining

with the added problem that uranium mill tailings, waste formed by extracting the uranium, areradioactive. Only 0.1% to 0.2% of uranium ore is made up of uranium, and of that only 0.7% of

this uranium is in the correct form to be used in the reactor. Uranium mining because sulfuric isused to extract the uranium causes contamination to ground water from radioactive metals and

other metals. In situ leaching is particularly harmful as diagrammed, because the rock is notremoved from the ground instead sulfuric is merely pushed into a deep aquifer.

A diagram of how in situ leaching mining works.

A nuclear power plant meltdown such as the one that occurred in Chernobyl caused a significantamount of radioactive material to journey through Ukraine and all of Europe. This huge radiation

exposure largely occurred because there was no containment building. In Three Mile Island ameltdown also occurred, but most of the radiation was secured inside the containment building.

Very strict restrictions have made nuclear power plants safer. Nuclear power plants only emit0.009 millirems/year, which is a negligible amount compared to natural background radiation.

Therefore, nuclear power plants themselves are fairly safe.



The radioactivity of various different radioactive metals in HLW over time

However, the waste produced at the end of the process has a huge potential to cause public health

problems. Two levels of waste are created at nuclear power plants: low-level waste (LLW) andhigh-level waste (HLW). LLW consists of cleaning items and other materials that are exposed to

radiation. Typically, LLW is compacted and burned in special facilities and buried in the ground.HLW is defined as used nuclear reactor fuel. The waste takes 10,000 years before the activity

begins to level off. Developing strategies to keep this waste carefully contained for 10,000 yearshas been difficult, and debates over a national repository have been occurring for quite some

time.

The only possible in public health from Nuclear energy is making us all sick:



R adiation is the energy emitted by the unstable (radio-active) elements .When any atom possesshigh energy, it releases the extra energy in the form of radiations to become stable and this

emission is called radio activity. All over the world including in all modern plants the level of radio activity is higher than acceptable levels and nuclear waste management is making the

surrounding environment dangerous to human settlements. This is true from USA, Europe, and

United Kingdom and even to Japan. When the radiation dose of certain element rises in thehuman body, it gives rise to health abnormalities and severe diseases.

R adiations containing energy damage cells in the human tissues. Even these tiny levels of radiation are more harmful than sunlight Also inhalation of radioactive elements like R adon

enhances the risk of lung cancer. Another radioactive element, Iodine, concentrates in leafyvegetables and milk being absorbed from soil .When it enters the human body; it migrates to the

thyroid gland in the neck and become malignant, inducing thyroid cancer. People can¶t livewithout their thyroid glands and thyroid replacement hormones are required daily. Similarly,

Strontium (90) gets absorbed in the cow and goat milk and get accumulated in the human breastduring lactation. Later, it can induce breast cancer, bone cancer and leukaemia.

The primary element in the nuclear elements used earlier was Plutonium. It is the most

dangerous element known to humans. Even its one-millionth gram can cause cancer. It is storedin the liver and cause liver cancer. If it gets absorbed in the bones, it can induce bone cancer and

blood malignancies. Presently it is used as nuclear fuel and around 200 Kg is produced per year in the nuclear reactor. So this clearly indicates that if this much amount is used in any future war,

it can destroy almost complete world in one go.

So considering all the facts and statistics available, it can be concluded that the nuclear weapons

containing radioactive elements and nuclear fuels used in the power plants cause severe healthhazards and does not improve public health in any way.

Thyroid Cancer One of the first major health consequences of the Chernobyl accident was the appearance of ³aggressive thyroid carcinomas´ in children. R adiation in the environment due to any

contamination was taken up by grazing cows and heavily concentrated in their mammaryepithelium. Many people in the contaminated region owned their own cows and thus drank large

amounts of contaminated milk. This was especially true for children, for whom milk was a major part of the diet. The IAEA has also theorized that children¶s thyroid glands were more affected

by radiation than adults even though they drank similar quantities of milk because their glandsare much smaller,

Greenpeace¶s report, like those presented by the WHO and IAEA, spent a considerable portionof text analyzing the presence of thyroid cancers in Chernobyl effected children. It came to the

conclusion that ³in reality, the number of childhood cancers caused by Chernobyl in Belarus,R ussia, and Ukraine is much greater that indicated by the IAEA and/or the WHO.´ They

attribute their higher numbers in part to the fact that radiation doses exceeded permissible dosageamounts for thyroids in ³clean´ regions of Ukraine. Thus, they counted cases in areas that were

not considered by the IAEA and the WHO. (1) Greenpeace projects that there could be anadditional 60,000 thyroid cancers diagnosed in the future, a much higher estimate than is

suggested by any information found in the extensive WHO report.



Leukemia and other Solid Cancers After the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, elevated risk of leukemia for

exposed populations was demonstrated 2-5 years later. According to the WHO populations livingin contaminated areas after Chernobyl have demonstrated no such elevated risk of leukemia.

Although some studies have shown an increased incidence of leukemia, the WHO claims ³most

[of these] studies had methodological limitations and lacked statistical power.´ In support of itsstance, the WHO cites a 1995 study which found higher rates of leukemia in less contaminatedareas. According to the WHO, Japanese survivors of the atomic bombs were on average exposed

to doses of radiation that were much higher in a shorter of period of time, thus causing thedramatically increased rates of leukemia.

Reproductive and Hereditary Effects They also cite increased numbers of genital and sexual development abnormalities in the effectedBelarusian population. Claims are also made that exposed children in Belarus have been shown

to demonstrate lower IQ levels and display a ³tendency towards development of mild mentalretardation.´ Children of liquidators were shown in one study to have an increased number of

genetic mutations compared with siblings conceived before the accident. With regards toinformation from the Ukraine, one study is cited which claimed that 54.1% of women effected

by Chernobyl experienced complications in their pregnancies compared with 10.3% of women inthe control group. Another study claims that between 1986 and 1990, there were three times the

normal rate of deformities and developmental abnormalities in Ukrainian newborns, however itis not made clear in the report how many of these can be attributed to offspring of Chernobyl

affected populations. Strontium presence from Chernobyl has also been indicated for causing arise in infant mortality in Ukraine and Belarus after 1989.

Mental Health The WHO cites mental health concerns, especially issues that appear at the sub-clinical level, asone of the major health consequences of Chernobyl. The exposed population demonstrated

anxiety levels twice as high as the control population in one study and were three to four timesmore likely to report multiple unexplained physical symptoms and subjective poor health than

controls in another study. The common usage of terminology such as ³victims´ and sufferers´ todenote populations affected by Chernobyl rather than ³survivors´ is cited as a major cause of

some of these sub-clinical problems. Other confounding factors, such as the break up of theSoviet Union and resulting political turmoil and social unrest, are also cited. These issues, when

taking into account the upheaval and distress that Chernobyl caused, can be linked not only toanxiety and depression, but also to extreme behaviors such as excessive health concerns and

reckless behavior. The subclinical mental health consequnce of Chernobyl is one area in whichthe WHO and Greenpeace reports have a high degree of correlation.For the full read please visit http://faculty.virginia.edu/metals/cases/kleinfeld3.html

Environmental Effects of Nuclear Power

In considering environmental effects, let¶s look at the effects on air, water, ground, and the

biosphere (people, plants, and animals) ± and let¶s also look at what can and is being done tominimize those effects. In the United States, it is important to realize that the law ± Title 10 Code

of Federal R egulations (CFR ), Part 20 ± governs any radioactive releases from nuclear power



plants. If you want to find any federal regulation by title and part, use the Title 10 CFR Index or National Archives & R ecords Administration (for all sections of the Code of Federal

R egulations). This section addresses commercial nuclear reactors regulated by the NR C (or similar agencies in other countries) and does not address the myriad of effects due to government

activities, e.g. at Hanford, where the Hanford Tanks Initiative is correcting problems stemming

from activities in the 1940¶s to 1970¶s timeframe.

Air- Gaseous Releases

Nuclear plant gaseous releases fall into the following categories:

y Water vapor from cooling towersy Ventilation exhaust from those buildings that do not have any processes with

radioactivityy Diesel generator exhaust

y Gases and steam from the air ejectors, that are in the main steam systemy

Ventilation exhaust from those buildings that do have processes with radioactivityy Gases removed from systems having radioactive fluids and gases.

The first two release paths are non-radioactive. Often, news photos of nuclear plants tend tofocus on the tall (400 foot high) dry cooling towers (e.g. Three Mile Island, Perry). The major

effect of these cooling towers is heating of the air around the plant. Warm water vapor is all thatis released (unless chemicals are injected for biological treatment). The cooling towers are often

required by state and/or federal regulatory agencies to reduce the thermal impact if a river of alake is the primary cooling source. The second source ± ventilation exhaust from those buildings

that do not have any processes with radioactivity ± are just like releases from ventilation systemsfrom any office building.

The air ejector exhaust at PWR s is usually non-radioactive. Only in those cases where there may

be leakage through a steam generator tube could that exhaust have any radioactivity. At BWR s,the air ejector exhaust is radioactive.

Water-Liquid Releases

Nuclear plant liquid releases fall into the following categories:

y Non-radioactivey Slightly radioactive

Water that has been used to cool the condenser, various heat exchangers (e.g. to cool oil, steam,water) used in the turbine-generator support processes, or that has passed through the cooling

towers is non-radioactive. Some or all of this water may be discharged to a river, sea, lake. Thethermal discharge of any type of power plant, nuclear or fossil fuel, using a steam cycle

operating under the same conditions (e.g. steam pressure, inlet condenser water temperature)should be the same. In some cases, a coal plant may operate at higher temperatures and steam



pressures than a nuclear plant, thus it may have a slightly higher efficiency, with slightly lower release of thermal discharge to the environment..

Usually water released from the steam generators (called blowdown) is also non-radioactive.

Very low levels of leakage (e.g. less than 400 gallons per day) may be allowed from the reactor

cooling system to the secondary cooling system of the steam generator. However, in any casewhere radioactive water may be released to the environment, it must be stored and radioactivitylevels reduced through ion exchange processes below levels allowed by the 10CFR 20 regulation.

Within the nuclear plant, there are a number of systems that may contain radioactive fluids. As

noted above, those liquids must be stored, cleaned, sampled, and verified to be below acceptablelevels before release may be done ± AND ± mistakes are not tolerated by the NR C. Effluent

requirements are specified in Appendix B Table 2 of 10CFR 20. As in the gaseous release case,radiation detectors monitor release paths and isolate (close valves) if radiation levels exceed a

preset setpoint.

Solid Releases-Ground Effects

Solid radioactive materials only leave the plant by three paths:

y R outine non radioactive office, process, and building material waste via traditional means

y R adioactive waste (e.g. clothes, rags, wood) is compacted and placed in drums. Thesedrums must be thoroughly de-watered. The drums are often checked at the receivinglocation by regulatory agencies. Special landfills must be used.

y Spent resin may be very radioactive and is shipped in specially designed containers, In

case of Sri Lanka, where are we going to put these and ship them to,.

For introductory information on low level waste, see Low Level Waste and More on Low Level

Waste.



Currently, the used fuel assemblies are stored underwater in large cooling pools at the plant. Insome cases, where storage has become limited, dry cask storage on-site may be used. This

storage is covered by the regulation 10CFR 72 for Independent Spent Fuel Storage Facilities. For introductory information on high level waste, see High Level Waste and More on High Level

Waste.

Ultimate Disposal of Spent Fuel

Originally, the intent had been that the spent fuel would be reprocessed. The limited amount of highly radioactive waste (also called high level waste) was to be placed in glass rods surrounded

by metal with low long term corrosion or degradation properties. The intent was to store thoserods in specially designed vaults where the rods could be recovered for the first 50-100 years and

then made unretrievable for up to 10000 years. Various underground locations had beenconsidered ± salt domes, granite formations, basalt formations ± and finally ± Congress

designated Yucca Mountain in Nevada. The desire was for a geologically stable location withminimal chance for groundwater intrusion. There is currently some controversy regarding the

suitability of Yucca Mountain as a final repository.

The intent had been to recover the plutonium and unused uranium fuel, then reuse it in either

breeder or thermal reactors as mixed oxide fuel (also called MOX). Currently, France, GreatBritain, and Japan are using this process and well known for their radioactive leakages to the

surroundings. In Japan the sea boarding the plant is untouchable..

Impact on the Biosphere

In the 1960¶s, the Atomic Energy Commission funded research to investigate effects of radiationon people, plants, and animals. Some of the studies were conducted at the Lawrence R adiation

Laboratory in Livermore, California and at various government and university laboratories. Anumber of studies entitled the BEAR (Biological Effects of Atomic R adiation) and BEIR

(Biological Effects of Ionizing R adiation) studies reported on these effects. The most recent,BEIR VII Phase 2, ³Health Effects of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing R adiation´, (see

summary) was published by the National Academy Press in 2005. A down to earth discussion of radiation is presented in the University of Wisconsin Graduate School¶s Whyfiles ± Radiation

Reassessed .

Mining, Milling and Enrichment Issues

Are we planning to do a open mines to keep the supply. Then God Bless Sri Lanka.

Nuclear-related mining effects are similar to those of other industries ± generation of tailings and

water pollution. In Grand Junction, Colorado. In the 1970¶s, this fill was removed when it wasrecognized that this mined material produced general background radiation levels higher than

maximum acceptable levels. The fill had to be placed under cover.

Uranium milling plants process naturally radioactive materials. R adioactive airborne emissions

and local land contamination is resulted.



The US has older enrichment plants. These were originally designed to enrich U-235 for bombs, but subsequently were diverted to enrich uranium for NPP fuel. Because they were built in the

1940¶s and in rural areas, they happen to use coal and oil. Also, the enrichment process requireslarge amounts of electrical energy to produce enriched material. That energy, while currently

produced by coal and oil, could be produced by nuclear plants. Newer enriching technologies,

e.g. gas centrifuges, are used in Europe.

Nuclear Impact

Documents