Is nuclear power really that dangerous?

Question

I saw a program about Chernobyl and it said that the actual effect of the radiation was grossly exaggerated. Is this true? I thought it was supposed to cause cancer but apparently it was proved that small doses decrease the amount of deaths from cancer in small mammals.

I did wonder whether this was kind of influenced by the UK government who think we should have more nuclear power stations.

Answer 1

Yes and no.

Let me start off by saying that I am a nuclear engineer and I believe that nuclear energy is the way to go. Also my opinion is biased,

Nuclear energy can be very dangerous if misused. There is no debate. A poorly designed reactor can cause catastrophic damage. Nuclear weapons can destroy entire cities killing millions. Large amounts of radiation can cause cancer or radiation sickness. Trust me you do not want to suffer for radiation sickness, it is one of the worst ways to die.

That being said, we really understand the physics behind nuclear energy. We know what makes a nuclear bomb blow up. We know what caused Chernobyl to go super prompt critical. We know how radiation interacts with matter. Because we understand the physics we know how to design, build, and operate nuclear reactors safely. We know how to build reactors that physically can not blow up like a bomb or Chernobyl. We know how to shield radiation and prevent exposure to the public.
In the US we can and do operate nuclear power plants with very little risk to the general public.

I warn people from saying that nuclear energy is not dangerous. Instead we have to respect the potential for danger, and then (and only then) can we use nuclear power safely.

Answer 2

The anti nuclear lobby are just stuck in the past.

The effects from Chernobyl were of course far less than the exaggerated figures given out by the anti nuclear lobby. Sadly some people will be effected by it for a few years to come.

But let us put this in perspective. Coal has killed not thousands but millions of people. Miners die in accidents, from lung disease and suffer terribly with skin conditions. The products of burning coal cause pollution that effects millions of people with breathing problems causing deaths and disease. It is the major cause of acid rain that does so much damage to the ecology and is a major cause of what people call Global warming. You would have to have hundreds if not thousands of Chernobyl's to catch up with coal!!!!

Modern reactors are fail-safe and the new pebble bed design allows for nuclear reactors to be small and built anywhere. They cannot melt down or go critical.

A recent discovery has shown that radio active half life can be reduced using powdered metal and some reactors can actually consume nuclear waste leaving nothing behind.

Nuclear reactors produce a 6th of the worlds electricity. Without that the doomsayers of Global Warming would by now be finding their predictions coming true!!!!

What is need is good science, honest debate and an end to the Luddite anti nuclear ranting. Any power source needs intelligent debate and challenges about safety and a host of other things. The anti nuclear lobby destroy their argument by failing to be open minded, scientifically correct and prone to extreme exaggeration.

Answer 3

While the generation of nuclear power is not that dangerous, and it can produce a large amount of electricity relatively cheaply, there are problems with the waste material afterwards.

Plants like gasoline, oil or coal power plants produce huge amounts of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide, as well as other air pollutants. Nuclear plants don't produce those, in some ways making them more environmentally friendly than fossil fuel plants. However, they do create radioactive waste materials that remain radioactive for thousands, if not millions of years afterwards. The only safe way to deal with this waste is to somehow sequester it somewhere where it can't ever contaminate anything that might come in contact with living beings, especially humans.

Getting radioactive materials in the groundwater is a particular fear, as it may not be detected until it has already done considerable damage. This is one potential danger of burying nuclear waste deep underground (which at first glance seems like an ideal solution).

It is the fear of what might happen with the waste materials that is the chief objection to using more nuclear power.

Answer 4

As an analogy, I liken nuclear power to driving on the German Autobahn... even though the speed is unlimited, they have far less accidents than the American highways, however, IF you have an accident, the chances of fatalities are much greater!

Nuclear power plants have a very safe track record for producing energy without directly or indirectly causing any harmful effect. However, when an accident does occur, it can be quite disastrous!

Answer 5

Ignorance is what is dangerous ,it is good u question ,but base your research on a solution not to go hide your head in the sand. Radio active materials are tricky so u need to know what u are doing. Just start reading and studying everything u can find. With the education that u have available to u there mshould not be a problem. If the people in Irian can do it I think any ine can.

Answer 6

Radiation is used to treat cancer, however nuclear fission radiation is just as likely to cause it, along with some other unpleasant disseases.

Answer 7

The nuclear means flora are not from now on risky through themselves.the placement is in straight forward words with the gas and the residue. it really is meant to be radio-energetic for a lengthy time period-say thousand years and any mishanding will be a possibility. we will be leaving the earth totaly risky to stay in. Any earth quake or harm to boxes of the uranium residue might want to have an fairly intense effect.

Answer 8

Ask the survivors of Chernobyl!

Answer 9

I think nuclear power stations are a good idea...

Answer 10

It`s dangerous only, if they are not maintained properly, or some terrorists wreck them