The Mining and Burning of Coal to Generate Energy - Thesis Proposal Example

Name Course & Code Tutor Date Burn hydrосаrbоns, burn thе еаrth Problem In the contemporary world, the fossil fuels are the main source of energy having to supply the major population globally. More than two thirds of the continent rely on the energy for their day to day activities may it domestic or industrial use. The fossil fuels include coal, oils and natural gases (World Nuclear Association (a), 2016). The use of fossil fuels have greatly increased with the United States ranking its usage in a gauge of over 80% of its normal operations. The mining and burning of coal to generate energy in many industries and large scale use of oils and natural gases towards same purpose have become a great concern in the United States. This source of energy has many negative impacts accruing with it; most of this impacts falling in the environment and the greater health of the American citizens (World Nuclear Association (a), 2016). Environmentally, use of fossil fuels have led to great impacts such as global warming, deterioration of the air, oil spill, acid rain among many other effects accounted for in the states today. Consequently, the emission of large volumes of pollutants resulting from burning of the fossils have resulted into a series of illnesses in the current united states. These illnesses including Asthmatic attacks which has been on the rise, pneumonia, cardiovascular ills and many others which have come with attached negative issues in the state at large (World Nuclear Association (a), 2016). Background information Coal being of the significant source of energy of America has impacted it negatively .That is by degrading its environment. Coal’s extractions process poses harmful effects on the surrounding landscapes, combustion of the same intoxicates the atmosphere. Electricity drawn from coal places high demand on water resources (Nuclear Energy Institute, 2016). Fossil fuels such as natural gas leads to global warming making it unconducive for living. Despite efforts to reduce use of carbon, natural gas has been discovered to be playing a less significant role in production of electricity and transportation purposes. Though some oil –fueled generators produce electricity, oil accounts less contribution for U.S electricity demands. These fossils fuels are undeniably the course of global warming which has affected the weather and hence adverse climatic changes. The United States seeks to protect the ozone layer by opting for a more air-clean and environmental friendly source of energy. Being among the most reliable and readily available sources of energy, fossil fuels is on the top as relied by the USA citizens. The major effects being air, land and water pollution, global warming, deterioration of air quality, acid rain and oil spillage. These effects have negatively impacted greatly in the lives of the citizens (World Nuclear Association (a), 2016). Frankly, US can move from the dirty fossil fuels towards cleaner, environmental friendly health sensitive source of energy. It is high time to say enough is enough to the negative effects of fossil fuels and adopt otherwise for a safe, healthy as well as sustainable future (Nuclear Energy Institute, 2016). Thesis proposal Over-reliance on the fossil fuels in the U.S. is the major reason to why their effects are greatly felt. There is no doubt that United States of America requires an alternative sooner or later to supplement if not to substitute the fossil fuels for a healthier and an environmental friendly life. This thesis proposes that United States should therefore opt for Nuclear Energy in place for the fossil fuels due to the advantages accruing. Like the fossil fuels, nuclear energy is used to drive turbines for electricity production. The nuclear energy is produced from nuclear fission in the nuclear power plants (Comby, 2010). Nevertheless, unlike the fossil fuels, during the nuclear fission, no greenhouse gases are produced and very little of these gases are emitted during the whole process of nuclear energy production (Comby,2010). Therefore being the best option to replace the fossil fuels. Solution For Nuclear Energy to be adapted in the United States of America, there must be interventions to lender a hands in the elevated energy production and usage. The USA government has a task to therefore, ensure that there is sustainable nuclear energy. To implement the shift from fossil fuel consumption to Nuclear Energy, the United States of America’s government should be much more involved in the research and development of the Nuclear Power plants. Through research and development, more effective ways of production will be established in the private nuclear power production (World Nuclear Association (b), 2016). By fund the research and development projects in the energy sector, the government will therefore, sensitize and facilitate productivity and therefore higher consumption of the energy. Additionally, cheaper methods of productions will be established through constant research studies. The more economical the overall production cost is the cheaper the end product price will be. The cost is always a factor of customer choice, cheaper energy will attract more people to the consumption. Additionally the USA government should be involved more in the sensitizing for safety and environmental regulations. By so doing the government might to some extent discourage the production of fossil fuels and hence supporting the productivity of Nuclear energy which is rather environmental friendly and health sensitive. The USA government should also support nuclear energy during the national energy goals setting. The goals setting process should majorly support the production of the Nuclear energy by erecting more nuclear power production stations in the country (World Nuclear Association (b), 2016). The U.S Government should therefore put more emphasis on the consumption of nuclear sources of energy in place of the alternative sources. This way, the government will make the Nuclear power to be the main source of electricity in the United States at the long run. The government should be more committed in making nuclear energy the long-term strategy for the United States. The further involvement would encourage the US citizens to use the nuclear energy, where the government’s commitment would be more of a promotional act to the nuclear plants (World Nuclear Association (b), 2016). The nuclear wastes are a major drawback to the use of Nuclear Energy in the US. The power plants’ strategic managements, scientists and experts should find ways to properly store and dispose the high-level nuclear waste. Resolving this quagmire would also be an added advantage to the use of Nuclear Energy. Currently, the US government is doing just fine in the sector of improving the image of people towards the source of energy (World Nuclear Association (b), 2016). Over the last three decades, the public opinion has positively been on the rise regarding the consumption of the nuclear energy. Justification of proposal Health Benefits of USA citizens. The health of people should be priority number one at all cost. In that regard, the USA citizens have to be protected from the health hazards from burning of fossils for electricity production as well as pollution from the vehicles and other coal powered industries. The quality of life is significantly affected by the diseases related to pollution. USA is the major consumer of the electricity from the fossil fuels. The effects of pollution thereof, range from trivial to austere and they all have major negative impacts on the health of the USA citizens. The major effects lie on respiratory system where since the pollutant in the air are breathed and hence affecting the health of the individuals. Therefore, long-term exposure to these pollutants will automatically result to detrimental health effects on the people (Fischetti, 2011: pp1). The major effects include COPD, which is chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder, asthma, lung cancer, pneumonia, acute bronchitis, as well as cardiovascular illnesses. Many of these air pollution effects have been noted with the rise of patients in the hospitals. Additionally, for the working class many working days are lost as a result which renders more disadvantages (Fischetti, 2011: pp1). The USA would possibly avoid all these effects once they adopt Nuclear energy as their main source of energy because it is safe, clean, inexhaustible and reliable (Comby,2010). Environment Benefits America’s largest environmental friendly source of energy for electricity is nuclear energy from nuclear fission. Nuclear as a source of energy produces carbon- free and air-clean electricity from the initial stage to the point of consumption. The nuclear energy doesn’t pollute the air because it doesn’t emit greenhouse gases which is its major advantage over the fossil fuels. Nuclear energy alleged a compliance with the Act that stands for Clean Air in 1970. Using Nuclear energy as the main source of energy in the United States would therefore be an addition to the clean-air campaign. Due to the low emission of the greenhouse gases, Nuclear energy has been proposed as the most appropriate alternative in line with the initiative in climate change and hence in the curb of global warming as a whole (Comby,2010). Additionally, the nuclear energy is clean for the transport sector. The electricity produced from the nuclear energy is clean when being used in the automobiles hence ensuring that there is no further pollution. The transport sector gains from the clean electric power when they rely on nuclear energy more than the fossils fuels whose electricity in the vehicles is just another major disaster when it comes to the transportation sector (Comby,2010). Ecologically, nuclear energy is on the lead due to its dismal emission of pollutant, its waste materials are easily isolated from the environment and it takes up a small chunk of land for it to be extracted (Comby,2010). Economically The use of nuclear energy in the United States has great impact on the entire economy compared to the fossil fuels. The overall costs of the fossil fuels outwits the original purpose and objectives of the setting making it necessary for an alternative to be drawn. Nuclear Energy provides very cheap electricity in the economy in a more efficient way than fossils. Although one may say that setting up a nuclear plant is a bit costly, the relative cost of uranium the mineral used in nuclear energy creation is very low (Nuclear Energy Institute, 2014). It’s even cheaper due to the low cost of running required once a plant is established. Therefore, the nuclear energy is in the long run cheaper than the fossils which have already displayed great costs both in production and running of the plants (Nuclear Energy Institute, 2014). Nuclear energy also assures a continuous supply that is guaranteed following da availability and less cost of uranium. It contains huge reserves that can sustain the economy with a sure service compared to the limited coal, oil and natural gases which could vanish any moment thereby cutting off supply. Consequently, nuclear energy production requires very little raw materials to be in operation. This eases or rather waives the transportation costs in a great way since less amounts are need to produce a great magnitude of energy. These is rather very friendly compared to the natural or fossils like coal which are required in great amounts and have proved to be bulky thereby increasing transportation costs. Nuclear energy therefore, other than proving to be very efficient and powerful, possesses great economical boosts to the United States government and people (Nuclear Energy Institute, 2014). Opposing viewpoint Oil companies that stand to lose financially Despite having many disadvantages, the fossil fuels have significant economic benefits to USA, which will be lost once the country abolishes the production and use of their electricity. Oil is a key driver of the economy in the United States over the past centuries. The transport system as well as the agricultural sector has also developed by being powered by the fossil fuels. Therefore, shift from reliance on the fossil fuels means a down turn economically (Nuclear Energy Institute, 2010). Having been exploited for years, fossil fuels have well established and developed industries which will stand to suffer once the United States of America decides to shift their energy sources. A great effect will be generally felt in the economic sector. Moreover, the government will therefore experience financially losses bearing in mind that these industries have been for a long time the source of revenue for the government. Therefore, as much as opposed, Fossil fuel has its significant advantages especially in the economic development (Nuclear Energy Institute, 2016). Nuclear energy better than fossil fuels In the contrary, Nuclear power has been discussed before to produce reliable and cheap electricity. Uranium which the source of nuclear power through nuclear fission, is inexpensive and very readily available. Despite having high establishment cost, the cost of maintaining and running the factories is relatively lower than fossil fuels (Comby, 2010). Additionally, Uranium is very proficient in that a small amount of Uranium produces energy of highly density. A nuclear reactor has a long life and hence can be used over and over for as long as 80 years (Comby, 2010). On the other hand, fossil fuels are costly to extract and run bearing in mind it has so many additional cost including transportation of the energy from the production to consumption. As a result, the general cost of electricity from nuclear power is distributed and hence significantly lower when compared to fossil fuels. Conclusion Fossil fuels has been previously seen as the major source of energy supply in the United States of America. The facts remain that despite its major negative effects towards the health and the environment people still use it. The effects it has showed are obvious especially global warming from the high release of carbon dioxide to the air. Burning the fossil fuels as well as the use of their products such as petroleum, is detrimental to the environment because of pollution. This thesis therefore, proposes the shift from the Fossil fuels to the Nuclear energy as discussed above. Nuclear energy is a clean source of energy having very low or no release of carbon dioxide to the air. Nuclear energy is also very reliable, economical and with a longer life span of production. Therefore, Nuclear energy should be opted for as the alternative source of electricity for both industrial and domestic use in the United States. Works Cited Comby, Bruno. The Benefits of Nuclear Energy. (2010). Retrieved from: ecolo.org/documents/documents_in_english/BENEFITS-of-NUCLER.pdf Fischetti, Mark. The Health care burden of fossil fuels. (2011). Retrieved from: www.scientificamerican.com/article/graphic-science-health-care-burden-of-fossil- fuels/ Nuclear Energy Institute. Nuclear Energy’s Economic Benefits- Current and Future. (2014). Retrieved from: www.nei.org/corporatesite/media/filefolder/policy/papers/jobs.pdf World Nuclear Association (a). Electricity Generation – what are the options? (2016). Retrieved from: www.world-nuclear.org/nuclear-basics/electricity-generated- what-are-the-options.aspx World Nuclear Association (b). US Nuclear Power Policy. (2016). Retrieved from: www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-t-z/usa- nuclear-power-policy.aspx World Nuclear Association (c). Economics of Nuclear Power. (2016). Retrieved from: www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/economics-of-nuclear-power.aspx Read More