Environmental Issue in Business - Essay Example

A shift to nuclear energy – is it feasible? How can economic, financial, social and environmental considerations help in shifting to nuclear energy? Energy efficiency has a boundary. The population of a country determines its energy consumption. With the growth of the economy, the consumption of energy increases simultaneously. This means more resources are used as each person consumes energy resources for his or her own needs. Alternative ways of energy and energy generation are required so that the world does not lose its resources. Resources may be available in abundance but they are not limitless. To cope up with the growing demand of energy consumption, alternate ways of energy are used and these nuclear plants are costly but give more energy than common fossil fuels. Also, generally they are less hazardous than fossil fuels which emit higher levels of C02. Here are a few benefits in comparison with fossil fuels. The paper discusses in detail the various elements of fossil fuels along with the benefits that can be derived from nuclear forms of energy. Fossil fuel plants emit higher amounts of carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide. It leaves trails of soot and arsenic which are poisonous to humans as well as to other forms of living beings. If compared the process of mining to the exhaust material generated by a nuclear plant, the mining process emerges as a filthy process with higher emissions of CO2 due to the burning of coal. The cost of a nuclear plant is high than a coal mine but the raw material used to produce electricity is barely minimum. The uranium needed to get a nuclear reaction is less than the amount of coal or gas needed to heat up turbines to produce friction and generate electricity. Also, nuclear plant can run aircraft in minimum resources. The nuclear energy is generated internally in the raw material and thus can be used successfully to generate large amount of electricity as needed. The nuclear power consumes fewer resources. As a result, it is assumed as the safest form of power generating technology as compared to uranium that has limited usage in generation of electricity. Another big question that is looming large is the possibility to benefit from the renewable technology to achieve efficiency in energy consumption. However, the technology to generate renewable energy is still in its nascent stages of development. Until it is developed and made fully functional, the levels of CO2 needs to be kept at low and at the same time, cater to the needs of the society. Thus, ensuring that the CO2 gas emissions are restricted from further damage to the Ozone layer that gives rise to global warming (Storm van Leeuwen, 2007). Nuclear power can be used as a mode of transport, to generate electricity, to run ships, to generate and distribute electricity with minimum resources involved. This is going to help in the long run as fewer resources will be exhausted and the fossil fuels that are not much in quantity can be saved. The area of using nuclear energy has been explored to the very minimum and is an area that can help the world in conserving the already limited resources that we have. The Nuclear Power Plants have countless benefits. At the same time, it poses serious challenges to the economies. For instance, the primary by-product of the nuclear energy is the production of radioactive material which is in large quantity. When the atom is split, it creates isotopes as well as plutonium that is a heavier form of atom. Importantly, the process of formation of nuclear energy does not require these atoms which makes them nuclear waste (Greenpeace International, 2009). Furthermore, the nuclear waste is highly radioactive even though its quantity is less than the quantity of the waste of a Fossil Fuel Plant. This radioactivity can be dangerous to human kind much more than the waste material being left over and being emitted by fossil fuels therefore, it becomes a question as to how this radioactive material will be disposed off in the long run. Being exposed to radioactive material in large doses is harmful. For the safety of the people of the metropolitan where these plants have been set up, it is important to have safety mechanisms in place that are effective and efficient ones. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is responsible for the establishment and deployment of detection programs for identifying any lack of safety measures against the radio active material. Many countries of the world, like, Finland, Sweden, Canada and France, have adopted models to produce nuclear energy in a safe way. On the other hand, Chernobyl and Three Mile Island encountered accidents from their nuclear reactors. Therefore, it is viable that lessons should be learnt from the past accidents and to analyze the benefits or hazards of nuclear power. For instance, in the accident of Three Mile Island’s nuclear reactor, the lack of proper training to operate the reactor and major flaws in its design were found to be responsible for the accident (IAEA, 2010). Therefore, when constructing or building a strong nuclear power plant, it is imperative that such design issues and safety issues are taken care of. The next significant challenge in a nuclear reactor is the containment of the nuclear waste. Isotopes have the ability to keep on multiplying and growing. The normal life of an isotope before its decay is 100,000 years. Due to this prolonged life span and its highly radioactive nature, it is necessary that it should be kept away at safe levels where there is no connection with human beings or living organisms. Possible ways to isolate isotopes is to develop layers upon layers that acts as barriers underground. Furthermore, it is kept in water pools for 20 to 40 years as water helps the isotopes remain cool down and saves the environment from its radioactivity. With the increase in the aging of the nuclear waste, the intensity of radioactivity gradually decreases where it comes in a position that it can be safely stored in dry facility. In the dry condition, the nuclear waste further decays and makes it easy to handle it. In 1986, the Chernobyl accident occurred in which the core entered into the atmosphere due to over heating of the nuclear reactor. As a result, 28 people died due to the radiations and more than 134 people were severely affected. Most of the people were the employees of Chernobyl. Furthermore, the children born after the accident were detected with thyroid cancer. However, due to the lack of knowledge and advancement in medication at that time, the children died. Nowadays, thyroid cancer can be prevented from spreading by the use of potassium iodide. It was feared at that time that due to the accident, it was estimated that another 110,000 new cases of thyroid cancer would surface but no such incident occurred. But, the actual victims of the Chernobyl’s accident were the pregnant women numbered as 200,000 who were in Europe at that time. These women became hysteric and thought that their fetuses were feared to get damaged through radiation. As a result, they terminated their pregnancies. However, it was later on found that that the defects in the genes are not caused by the radiation which is in low dose. Also, those women who did not seek abortion in the post-Chernobyl accident observed that the radiation did not affect their child’s normal condition. Comparatively, the nuclear energy is less harmful for the environment and ecosystem than the coal or silt. The hydroelectric dams changes the ecosystem with its wastes and the coal damages the Ozone layer. However, the nuclear energy has the ability to produce 20,000 times more energy than that produced by one pound of coal. Likewise, the coal that is fired in the plants produces 320 lbs. of poison and ash as compared to nuclear waste which is of the size of one tablet produced for one person in one year. Importantly, the 10% of the ash produced from coal enters into the atmosphere damaging the ecosystem and the environment. The 99% of the uranium-238 is used in the nuclear reactors which converts it into plutonium. The Earth’s crust largely comprises of uranium. In the book, “The Nuclear Energy Option”, Bernard Cohen highlighted that the average life of uranium-238 is 1000 years or more. Therefore, its supply will not fall short for a very long time to come (Greenpeace International, 2009). As a result, nuclear energy can be assumed as the most viable, efficient, cheap and abundant source of electricity in the world. On 11th March 2011, the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactors were explored due to the occurrence of a powerful earthquake of 9 magnitude on the rector scale in the sea which gave way to a tsunami in which the waves rose to 15-meter high wall. The Fukushima tragic accident was due to many avoidable reasons. In the post-tsunami days, the reactor released radioactive material into the atmosphere which caused severe problems for the residents who were forced to evacuate their homes to save their lives from the nuclear reaction. Around 100,000 people moved to other cities, 20,000 people died from the Great East Japan Earthquake and completely damaged 560 sq.km land (Nuclear Energy Institute, 2008). Nuclear energy plants are developed and established in a few countries. Japan, France and USA have 45% of the nuclear power plants whereas 19 countries have the remain 45% of the nuclear reactors (Schneider, Froggatt & Thomas, 2011). It only highlights the fact that building and maintaining a nuclear reactor is a challenging task which requires finances and high safety measures for the radio active material. It has been observed that coal and fuel power plants are less expensive to construct as compared to a nuclear reactor. The conditions in which the nuclear reactor functions properly are very different from those of the others. The United States renewable energy industry is unwilling to invest into the nuclear energy regardless of the fact that it has all the favorable conditions like political support, strong capital markets and acceptance from the society. Importantly, the development of a nuclear reactor is only possible once the government of the country is willing to invest into the project and is ready to take necessary measures to ensure safety of its ecosystem, employees and people. Furthermore, the opinion of the people is also significant in the formation of a nuclear reactor as it is the people who eventually benefit or suffer from such practices. The importance of nuclear energy can also be understood from the fact that it is attained the status of ‘official technology’ as compared to all other alternatives of energy production (Brownstein, 2011). It is a political decision to produce nuclear energy instead of a normal business or market decision. EDF is the largest producer of nuclear energy which is located in France and holds 85% share in global nuclear energy production. Likewise, Tepco Group is another conglomerate that has a large share in the global nuclear energy production. Tokyo has sought for 40% share in Tepco.This is how nuclear power plants are governed by the government the world over and the main concern are the economics of building a nuclear power plant. The nuclear power plant development costs composed of four types of costs, namely: (1) Cost of construction, (2) Cost of operation and production of energy, (3) Cost of Waste Management and (4) Cost of nuclear reactor’s decommission. After almost a quarter century of relative stagnation, the American nuclear power industry would be tremendously expensive to rekindle). Two nuclear power reactors proposed in Florida are expected to cost as much as $6 million and $9 million respectively. According to some estimates, the projected price of nuclear energy could be as high as $6,000 for every kilowatt of production capacity (Civil Society Institute, 2011). The advocates of nuclear energy believe that it is the most viable and safe source of energy in the world as it does not have CO2 emissions, regardless of the dwindling situation of the climate change in the last decade or so. However, the Fukushima incident has raised a number of questions regarding the future of nuclear energy. There are raised eyebrows for the unavoidable and disastrous situation of the nuclear reactors at Fukushima when one by one all of its reactors exploded. They caught severe fire and continued to explode as more and more isotopes were formed with no way to stop the chain of reaction. The World Nuclear Industry Status Report published in 2011 showed that 437 from 443 nuclear reactors as counted by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) are now operable. This is due to the fact that 6 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactors exploded in the event and they are no more operable. In terms of emerging nuclear markets, India, Brazil and China began to set up their nuclear reactors a decade ago however, they are still in progress stage. Factually, the nuclear energy has little production and consumption in these emerging countries. Presently, China has 13 nuclear reactors that produces 1.9% of electricity whereas, there are 27 more nuclear reactors that are in the construction phase. By 2020, Korea, Russia, Japan, United States, France and China will have the largest number of nuclear reactors according to the government’s intentions (Investigative Reporting Workshop, 2010). The 27% of the anthropogenic CO2 emission represents the greenhouse gas emissions which is the largest source in the world (Mez, Schneider & Thomas, 2009). Conclusion By 2030, nuclear energy production will increase manifold according to the projections of IAEA. South Asia is the primary region that is expected to grow its production and consumption of the nuclear energy as a primary source of energy. Likewise, Europe and United States will also observe a significant increase in nuclear energy production. The current trend of nuclear energy reliance is reflective of the sky-rocketing demands for gas, oil and coal apart from other renewable energy like fossil fuel. At present, Asia has no history of nuclear energy production as well as consumption. However, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia are considering the option of nuclear energy as their primary source of energy. At the environmental front, there is a conflict of fact and perception. One perspective is that nuclear energy is safe and viable for the ecosystem and economies as a whole. However, the other perspective argues that it is uncontrollable when it comes to natural disasters like the Fukushima incident. Nevertheless, the need for energy will continue to rise in the next years and therefore, to meet this demand, countries are aspiring to rely on nuclear energy. By 2015, Vietnam will have its first nuclear reactor in operation whereas, Thailand will have it by 2020. Thus, energy shortages can be covered through the production of nuclear energy and to find some viable measures to avoid any adverse instances in the future. References Brownstein, R 2011, “The Price Is Not Right”, The National Journal. Accessed 30 April 2012. Civil Society Institute 2011, “Americans Want to Hit the Brakes on More Nuclear Power”. Accessed 30 April 2012. Mez, L, Schneider, M & Thomas, S 2009, “International Perspectives on Energy Policy and the Role of Nuclear Power”, Brentwood: Multi-Science Publishing. Accessed 30 April 2012. Nuclear Energy Institute 2008, “White Paper. The Cost of New Generat-ing Capacity in Perspective”, Washington DC. Accessed 30 April 2012. Schneider, M, Froggatt, A & Thomas, S 2011, “The World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2010-2011”, World Watch. Accessed 30 April 2012. Available at: Storm van Leeuwen, JW 2007, “CO2 emissions from nuclear power”, Oxford Re search Group, Briefing Paper, Pages. 40-44. Accessed 30 April 2012. Available at: (http://www.oxfordre searchgroup.org.uk/publications/briefing_papers/secureenergy.php). Investigative Reporting Workshop 2010, “Nuclear Energy Lobby Working Hard to Win Support”, American University School of Communication. Accessed 30 April 2012. Greenpeace International 2009, “Nuclear Power: a Dangerous Waste of Time”, Greenpeace Publication the Netherland. Accessed 30 April 2012. IAEA 2010, “The Long Term Storage of Radioactive Waste: Safety and Sustainability”, IAEA Vienna. Accessed 30 April 2012. Read More