Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
06.06 Honors: Regulating Nuclear Power
Transcript of 06.06 Honors: Regulating Nuclear Power
to change balance
6:06 Honors Nuclear Power
"Proponents maintain that nuclear power is an economical, safe and clean form of energy. Critics cite industry disasters, problems of nuclear waste and links to chronic and sometimes fatal diseases. Massive anti-nuclear protests occurred throughout the '70s and '80s and have continued on a smaller scale into the 21st century." 
"The pro and con arguments over the cost and the economics of nuclear power are difficult to untangle. Ask 20 different experts and you will get 20 different answers.
Proponents of nuclear power often measure its economic prowess in kilowatts. Nuclear power plants produce more kilowatts than coal, wind or solar for fewer cents. As more plants are built, it's expected that construction costs will come down, making the price of nuclear-generated electricity that much more attractive." 
Nuclear power plants provide low-cost, predictable power at stable prices and are essential in maintaining the reliability of the U.S. electric power system. Nuclear power is a major national energy source.Nuclear energy is our nation's largest source of emission-free electricity and our second largest source of power.Nuclear plants also contribute to national energy security and ensure stable nationwide electricity supply. nuclear energy is a secure energy source that the nation can depend on. It is not subject to unreliable weather or climate conditions, unpredictable cost fluctuations, or dependence on foreign suppliers
the storage and management of dangerous high-level radioactive waste; the possibility of proliferation of nuclear materials and potential terrorist applications; the high cost of building nuclear facilities and the possibility of accidents. the most urgent is that of nuclear waste disposal. High-level nuclear waste can last for thousands of years before being safe again, so this is a major hurdle which must be overcome before nuclear power can expand.Nuclear power is also very expensive, and given the amount of time it takes to build nuclear facilities, we will need other solutions for the short term.
High-level radioactive waste is very dangerous, and can remain so for tens of thousands of years before decaying to safe levels. It is highly radioactive and is a major barrier to the expansion of nuclear power. If there is to be a "nuclear renaissance", a sophisticated method of dealing with this waste must be refined. This point itself has sparked a surprising number of debates.
Its i very dangerous and can kill lots of people...
Nuclear power catastrophe
Chernobyl disaster - April 26 ,1986
Nuclear power can be convenient and can keep us from using more resources than we need. It produces no pollution and is a great source of protection.
It is also dangerous because if the nuclear fission and fusion isn't handled properly, the power plant can explode. It will result in many deaths and diseases will be spread. It it isn't disposed properly, it will soak into the soil and kill plants, so no plants no oxygen. And also it will kill animals because they eat the plants.
Is this good or bad?
By : Isaiah Mills
Three Mile Island accident - March 28, 1979
Browns Ferry - September 15, 1984
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant - February 1, 2010
St. Lucie Unit 1 -February 26, 1983
Some may argue that we need power plants and can avoid the risk and make it work, but i disagree with that. I agree with the protestors that nuclear power is very dangerous. I think he government choose to use power plants because it cost less and they don't care about the health of the human beings. The risk definitely outweighs the benefits. The potential energy will destroy a small town like Townsville and will cause the population life-threatening diseases.