Dear Mr. Prime Minister,
I am writing to you, my Prime Minister to express my opinion about to potential of using nuclear energy in Canada. I have concluded that changing the entire infrastructure of energy generation would prove catastrophic because of the astronomical amount of money our country would have to pay, the fact that this system will soon find itself obsolete against new and improved forms of renewable energy, and the public, media, and other members of the legislature would have a field day about this.
While nuclear energy has many advantages and benefits when comparing it to other forms of energy such as natural gas, like how it’s a viable source of energy for any country, or how it has a high energy output necessary for the modern world, changing infrastructure to accommodate it within Canada’s system is a poor plan. Firstly, the sheer amount of costs needed to just open a power plant is likely to be in the billions, and our country as a whole doesn’t have that kind of money. Second, with the world moving towards newer kinds of energy, such as renewable energy, nuclear power will likely become obsolete within a few short years. Lastly, public opinion towards nuclear energy has never been too kind, tanked severely by the Chernobyl incident.
To finish, while nuclear energy has many advantages, it is inevitable that it would be dwarfed eventually by hydroelectric and solar energy. So, my thesis for this would be that changing fully to nuclear energy this late in the game is an inadequate idea.
Prompts:
- What are the positives and negatives of nuclear energy?
- Do the pros outweigh the cons of nuclear energy?
- Is nuclear energy better than fossil fuels and gas, and if so, is it pertinent that we switch our energy-generating system in BC or Canada?
Pros and cons of nuclear energy.
Positives:
- Low Greenhouse gas emissions.
- This system emits fewer greenhouse gases and emissions than other systems for gathering energy, so in this category, it’s very helpful for the environment.
- It doesn’t burn anything, so it doesn’t emit any harmful gases to the environment.
- High energy output.
- A must for this generation, as the energy needs and quotas, keep increasing.
- A small amount of uranium can power up to 1 million people.
- Hydroelectric systems for generating energy cannot keep up with the amount of energy consumed, but the sheer power of nuclear energy can keep up with the modern world.
- No fluctuations or unpredictability.
- Nuclear power doesn’t have the fluctuations of the fossil fuels or gas markets, nor the unpredictability of the weather (days without enough wind, a winter without the sun.
- Good for smaller communities.
- Nuclear power plants add about 400 permanent jobs when they get built, and bring prosperity to local communities, compared to the 40-100 jobs of a coal or gas plant.
- Some countries don’t have proper geography for other types of self-reliant energy.
- Some countries don’t have the geography for types of energy production, such as the lack of rivers to create hydroelectric dams to generate energy, or space for wind turbines.
- With nuclear power, even smaller countries can generate their energy and get closer to energy self-reliance. Nuclear power plants aren’t crazy big, they can even fit on a boat or submarine.
Negatives:
- Steep costs.
- There are very steep costs upfront when opening a nuclear power plant, costing up to billions of dollars. Building the plant also takes usually between 5-10 years.
- When the uranium has been fully used, it takes many years for it to decompose and can’t decompose out in the open. It must be located in specially designed storage, which costs a fortune.
- Past incidents.
- There have been some incidents regarding nuclear power, including the 1986 Chernobyl incident, where over 40 people died when a nuclear reactor was breached. There have been several incidents over the years, and while they are rare, they are very dangerous and make big news when they happen.
- Difficult with long term storage given nuclear energy has been around since the 1950s.
- Scientists don’t know the effects of putting nuclear waste aside for 100-200 years. They haven’t studied the long-term effects of storing nuclear waste yet because of it being so new.
- If we use nuclear power long enough, were either going to run out of money to spend on storage of nuclear waste or were going to run out of that space, and both are catastrophic.
- Not a renewable energy source.
- Contrary to popular belief, our world doesn’t have an infinite supply of uranium. It needs to be mined, processed and made into something the power plants can use.
- While nuclear power is perfect for our modern world, it will eventually come to an end because of the finite amount of uranium on Earth.
- Public aversion.
- The public has never been a big supporter of nuclear power since the Chernobyl and the 3-mile incidents. Seeing the disaster that was those incidents, the general public would only tolerate a nuclear power plant if it weren’t in their backyard.
Do the pros outweigh the cons when it comes to nuclear power production.
- The pros do outweigh the cons when it comes to nuclear power, but not by much. This is because of the sheer amount of energy produced by nuclear power plants. They produce so much energy, they can keep up with the amount of energy we consume daily.
- While nuclear power plants use 20 tons of radioactive waste every year, all of it is safely stored away from civilians. The plants don’t create any gases that damage the environment.
- While there have been some notable incidents regarding nuclear power plants, it isn’t something that happens often enough to be too much of a concern.
Is nuclear energy better than fossil fuels and gas, and if so, is it pertinent that we change our energy-generating system in BC or Canada?
- Not only is nuclear energy many times more efficient than fossil fuels, but it also is better for our environment. Because of these reasons, fossil fuels and natural gases should be abandoned and replaced with the nuclear power system. However, there are several reasons as to why we can’t just start changing our power system into one dependant on nuclear power.
- The first reason is that it would take time. As said earlier, setting up a nuclear power plant can take upwards of 5 years. This is a problem because by the time we set up nuclear power plants around Canada, we may have already found a way to be solely dependant on renewable energy. At that point, nuclear power would be obsolete and pointless to have and against public opinion.
- Another reason is that changing the entire energy-generating infrastructure would cost astronomical amounts, and if there is a chance to find better versions of renewable energy, all of it would be pointless. If anything, money should go to trying to make renewable energy capable of withstanding the consumer’s energy demands.
In summary, while nuclear power isn’t something the Federal Government of Canada can follow, because of the amount of money needed, the volume of space necessary for storage, and that nuclear power won’t be around for too much longer thanks to a changing industry. Canada cannot afford to change infrastructure to accommodate nuclear energy this late in the game.
Bibliography:
Text:
- “Nuclear Energy: Pros and Cons.” Renewable Resources Coalition, 19 Nov. 2016, www.renewableresourcescoalition.org/nuclear-energy-pros-cons/.
- “Nuclear Power.” Ontario Power Generation, www.opg.com/powering-ontario/our-generation/nuclear/.
- “Chernobyl Disaster.” Wikipedia, Wikipedia, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster.
- “Nuclear Power.” Edited by Deirdre S Blanchfield, Gale In Context, Gale, 10 Feb. 2020, go.gale.com/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=Reference&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=MultiTab&searchType=BasicSearchForm¤tPosition=2&docId=GALE%7CCV2644150965&docType=Topic+overview&sort=Relevance&contentSegment=ZXBE-MOD1&prodId=SCIC&contentSet=GALE%7CCV2644150965&searchId=R1&userGroupName=43riss&inPS=true&ps=1&cp=2.
- Edwards, Gordon. “Nuclear Power in Quebec.” Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, 1995, www.ccnr.org/Nuke_Quebec.html#costs.
Images: (lost some of the links)
- “Wind Turbines.” Wikipedia, Wikipedia, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_turbine.
- u/imnotyassin. “Not Stonks Template (Pretty Shitty but I Put a Sad Face).” Reddit, r/MemeTemplatesOfficial, 2019, www.reddit.com/r/MemeTemplatesOfficial/comments/c81vei/not_stonks_template_pretty_shitty_but_i_put_a_sad/.
