Reichert 1

University of South Florida

On the Implications of Nuclear Power

Daniel Reichert

Acquisition of Knowledge IDH 2010

Professor Calvin Falwell

18 November 2019
Reichert 2

Abstract

The overarching political debate upon the effectiveness of nuclear power has inspired

many to dive in to the short, and long-term effects of using nuclear power. By considering how

nuclear power effects the environment, the social dynamic, and technological advancement, it is

shown that the overwhelming power produced by the use of nuclear power does justify the

positive and negative effects that nuclear power could potentially impose.

Thesis Body

Over the last half of a century the implications of the developments in nuclear power

have been heavily debated in all parts of the globe. Many people have inferred that with a

change in our power supply, there will be a significant change socially, technologically, and

environmentally. But these realizations allow for a lot of speculation in regard to effects that

nuclear power will have on the world. And the conclusion seems to be that the power produced

by developments in nuclear reactors does justify the effects of nuclear power environmentally,

socially, and technologically.

The concept of nuclear power generation was first theorized by Italian physicist Enrico

Fermi, who won the Nobel Prize in 1938 “for his work on the artificial radioactivity in neutrons

and for nuclear reactions brought about by slow neutrons” (Enrico Fermi - Biographical). When

Fermi moved to the United States, he began to build the first nuclear reactor. This demonstrated

the first controlled man-made nuclear chain reaction in 1942 at the University of Chicago

(Nuclear Engineering Division of Argonne National Laboratory). This reactor and its

advancements paved the way for nuclear power as it is known today. All nuclear power is

currently generated by the fission of atoms. This means that the nucleus of an atom is split apart
Reichert 3

into two lighter nuclei and energy is released. This splitting apart occurs when a neutron collides

with a nucleus. When the bonds that hold together a nucleus are broken, a nucleus splits into two,

and an enormous amount of energy is released as both heat and radiation. This energy can then

be used to produce electricity (U.S. Energy Information Administration - EIA - Independent

Statistics and Analysis). The energy from nuclear reactions heat up a source of water, the

temperature rises, and the water boils into steam which turns a turbine to produce electricity

(U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service/Ecological Services Program). Essentially a nuclear power plant,

is just a large steam engine, where the heat is provided by nuclear reactions, rather than burning

coal.

Now that it is understood how nuclear reactors produce energy and hence electricity, it is

important to consider how much energy is actually produced by nuclear reactors. According to

the United States Department of Energy Department of Nuclear Energy, each nuclear reactor

produces roughly one gigawatt per hour. This means that it would take roughly 3,125,000 of the

standard solar panels that generate 320 W per hour in order to compensate for one nuclear

reactor. But it only takes 431 of the standard 2.32 MW per hour wind turbines, to compensate

for the hour of nuclear production. This means that for every hour, a single nuclear reactor can

produce enough electricity for roughly 100,000,000 LED 10 W light bulbs (Mueller). This power

production is immense. With the United States having 98 nuclear reactors currently working,

that means that yearly the United States produces 807 TWh which is only roughly twenty percent

of the United States total electrical output according to the World Nuclear Association (Nuclear

Power in the USA). The United States Energy Information Association, states that as of the end

of 2018 there are about 9,719 coal-based power plants in the US (U.S. Energy Information

Administration - EIA - Independent Statistics and Analysis). And in 2018 1146 TWh of
Reichert 4

electricity was produced from coal-fired plants, while 807 TWh were produced by nuclear

power. In considering these numbers, 9,719 coal power plants produce1,146 TWh a year, and 98

nuclear reactors make 807 TWh a year. That means that each nuclear reactor can create the same

amount of power as 70 coal power plants. That is a lot of power coming from a nuclear reactor.

When debating the implications of nuclear power, one of the most often debated topics is

the environmental effects that nuclear waste will have on the environment. It is understandable

to be skeptical of the idea of nuclear power due to the environmental impacts that it could have.

As what good would nuclear power be if we solved the environmental problem of carbon

emissions by creating a new problem with nuclear waste. Luckily, this is not the case.

According to studies done by the US National Renewable Energy Laboratory in 2014, the

greenhouse gas emissions for pressurized water nuclear reactors and boiling water nuclear

reactors were releasing 12g and 13g of carbon dioxide per kWh produced respectively, while

coal power plants were releasing about 1000g of carbon dioxide per kWh produced(Schlömer,

Nuclear Energy and Climate Change). Nuclear power releases significantly less amounts of

carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere; implementing more nuclear

reactors and relying less on carbon-based power plants will decrease the greenhouse gas waste.

Which means that the human contribution towards global warming will be significantly less.

But greenhouse gases are not the only form of environmental waste that needs to be

considered when discussing nuclear power. In addition to the small amounts of greenhouse gas

waste, nuclear reactors also produce radioactive waste. The common idea of radioactive waste is

often based on the nuclear reactor meltdowns of Chernobyl in 1986 and Fukishima in 2011;

radioactive waste is also produced in research related to medicine, space, particle physics, and is

often a by-product of oil and gas usage, in addition to mining. Currently radioactive waste is
Reichert 5

categorized into three separate groups: high, intermediate, and low-level waste. These are

classified by their radioactive content. Currently the high-level radioactive waste is the most

dangerous, as it holds 95% of the radioactive content produced by a nuclear reactor. But in

comparison, it is only 3% of the volume of overall nuclear waste. That means that the seemingly

most dangerous by product is produced in the least amount (What Are Nuclear Wastes and How

Are They Managed). Nuclear waste could post significant harm to the environment. If not

handled properly, it could affect both animal and plant life, forming abnormal mutations, and

essentially toxic ecosystems similar to that in Chernobyl. But that is if the nuclear waste is not

handled properly. It has been shown that handling and storing nuclear waste can be safely done if

cooled, and if workers are shielded from the radiation produced. In order to shield from radiation

dense materials must be used, such as concrete, steel, or even a few meters of water. As the other

component of the safe storing and handling of radioactive materials is that it must be cooled,

water proves to be an efficient defense mechanism against the radiation of nuclear waste.

Facilities like the CLAB in Sweden are using pools of water to cool and store the radioactive

materials until they are safe to be moved to a repository or a reprocessing center. At repositories

the nuclear wastes are being stored safely, deep under significant geographical structure that

allow for the best shielding of the remaining radioactive qualities of the materials. At

reprocessing centers the nuclear waste is being repurposed as nuclear fuel again to produce more

power, and then stored at the repositories. While currently there is not a cycle within the

creation of nuclear power, there is work being done to recycle the nuclear waste and one day

enable nuclear fission and fusion to enable the energy to create an energy producing cycle.

Currently, as per the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 the nuclear waste is being repurposed

and then safely disposed of at specific repositories within areas near the nuclear plants; these
Reichert 6

areas cause minimal or no effect on the environment, or the people that handle the radioactive

material(What Are Nuclear Wastes and How Are They Managed).

In addition to the environmental implications presented from the development of nuclear

power, the development of a greater reliance on nuclear power will present a number of

implications socially. The development of more nuclear facilities will create a number of new

jobs for both running the nuclear facility, and the construction needed in order to build the new

facilities, in addition to providing a new multimillion-dollar industry for each town that the

nuclear power plants are introduced. But at the same point, as the nuclear plants begin to

produce more energy, the reliance on coal-based power plants will decrease, and the workers at

coal facilities will need to adapt to the changes in energy production. In addition to the effects

that the production of nuclear energy will have on the job market, this will also affect the

international relations between various countries. This is because many countries internationally

cannot produce enough power to supply their needs currently. This means that whichever

country could potentially over produce nuclear power and sell their excess to the under

producing countries. This would contradict with the current countries that are power generation

superpowers. And with a greater development of nuclear power, the potential of a small nuclear

engine could exist that could essentially combat the global oil producing superpowers and

change international interactions. The potential developments in nuclear power and energy

could cause drastic social changes within the economy, and with global relations but it also

brings up a variety of ethical implications. With the potentials of nuclear meltdowns similar to

Chernobyl in 1986, and Fukishima in 2011, the impact that occur in communities with nuclear

reactors in them could be immense. If the reactors are not properly maintained and held to the

safety and performance standards the implications to the hosting communities could be
Reichert 7

catastrophic. The residents of the areas hosting nuclear facilities are already placed “under

increased risk for cancer and other health problems due to long-term exposure to low-level

radioactivity”, and a nuclear meltdown would put them at catastrophic risk.( Xiang, Hui, and Yi

Zhu) Until proper isolation of repositories and other regulations upon the handling and relocation

of nuclear power are imposed and upheld, the risk of living in an area near a nuclear reactor

seems to be large. The advancement in nuclear power causes many different social implications,

but this price to pay may be worth the benefits provided by not only the power created but also

the technological advancements.

Some people also believe that all of the benefits of cleaner energy production can be

achieved through the use of renewable energy sources. And seemingly it could be. Rather than

using a nuclear reactor, 431 windmills could be built, or 3 million solar panels and the energy

would slowly be able to become equivalent (Mueller). But the primary difference in the

development of nuclear rather than using renewable energy resources is the advancements that

could be made from its study. While renewable energy would be suffice, that’s all it would

become. The energy field would become complacent, and the seeming advancements would

seem to stop. But the development of better nuclear reactors, and power plants inspire a whole

new realm of possibilities that could be uncovered.

Every generation is defined by the different advancements that it makes for society, and

a potential impact for this century is the technological developments related to advancements in

nuclear technology. If nuclear power plants are developed, and the production of electricity

allows for excess energy, that means that research could be done using vast quantities of energy.

These developments could correspond to engines running off nuclear power. This production of

energy could promote the development of greater boundaries of space travel and allow
Reichert 8

transportation to reach a whole new horizon of speeds, and efficiency. With advancements in

nuclear power we could potentially see the development of light speed travel, the foundations of

nuclear fusion, the development of under privileged communities that currently can’t attain

power and electricity due to its high costs. The development of nuclear energy could promote the

growth of better international transportation systems, and better understanding of quantum

mechanics. With developments in the nuclear field, the energy needed for wireless power

distribution through tesla coils, or lasers could be obtained, or with more research the necessary

power for teleportation through quantum entanglement. The current forms of power production

are one of the greatest restrictions that is holding scientific advancement from expanding at an

exponential rate. Not only is the current power production insufficient for the technologies of the

future, but the current costs are holding the development in technology back. Once nuclear

power is established as a primary produced of energy, and becomes extremely cost effective,

more and more great minds of this generation will be able to work towards advancements that

can adapt to the use of this kind of power and propel technology into the next age. The potential

technological impacts alone are enough to speculate that the advancement in nuclear power

production is necessary.

In conclusion the power produced by developments in nuclear reactors does justify the

effects of nuclear power environmentally, socially, and technologically as each nuclear

production plant can produce power to equate an immense number of either windmills or solar

panels. With the reduction of carbon emissions from that of coal power plants, nuclear becomes

an important candidate for the production of power especially as nuclear wastes are increasingly

handled with greater safety and regulations. Despite the possible health impact upon

communities the revenue and jobs created for the community seem to compensate in regard to an
Reichert 9

increase in standard living. Bust most prevalent is the seeming advancements in technologies. As

the development of nuclear power not only increasing the human capacity of energy use, but also

will act as a catalyst for the development of technology for generations to come. Nuclear reactors

are full of potential, and this energy produced will be a foundation for the world to improve upon

in all aspects.
Reichert 10

Works Cited

“Enrico Fermi - Biographical.” NobelPrize.org,

www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1938/fermi/biographical/.

Mueller, Mike. “INFOGRAPHIC: How Much Power Does A Nuclear Reactor Produce?”

Energy.gov, 6 Feb. 2018, www.energy.gov/ne/articles/infographic-how-much-power-does-

nuclear-reactor-produce.

“Nuclear Energy and Climate Change.” Nuclear Basics - World Nuclear Association,

www.world-nuclear.org/nuclear-basics/nuclear-energy-and-climate-change.aspx.

Nuclear Engineering Division of Argonne National Laboratory. “Reactors Designed by Argonne

National Laboratory.” Early Exploration - Reactors Designed/Built by Argonne National

Laboratory, www.ne.anl.gov/About/reactors/early-reactors.shtml.

“Nuclear Power in the USA.” Nuclear Power in the USA - World Nuclear Association, Oct.

2019, www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-t-z/usa-

nuclear-power.aspx.
Reichert 11

Schlömer, Steffen. “Annex III Technology-Specific Cost and Performance Parameters.” Climate

Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change: IPCC Working Group III Contribution to

AR5, IPCC Working Group III, 2014, pp. 1329–1356.

“U.S. Energy Information Administration - EIA - Independent Statistics and Analysis.” How

Many Power Plants Are There in the United States? - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information

Administration (EIA), 2019, www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=65&t=2.

“U.S. Energy Information Administration - EIA - Independent Statistics and Analysis.” Nuclear

Explained - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), 2019,

www.eia.gov/energyexplained/nuclear/.

“U.S. Energy Information Administration - EIA - Independent Statistics and Analysis.” Nuclear

Power Plants - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), 2019,

www.eia.gov/energyexplained/nuclear/nuclear-power-plants.php.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service/Ecological Services Program. “Nuclear Power.” Official Web

Page of the U S Fish and Wildlife Service, 2018, www.fws.gov/ecological-services/energy-

development/nuclear.html.

“What Are Nuclear Wastes and How Are They Managed?” What Are Nuclear Wastes and How

Are They Managed? - World Nuclear Association, www.world-nuclear.org/nuclear-

basics/what-are-nuclear-wastes.aspx.
Reichert 12

Xiang, Hui, and Yi Zhu. “The Ethics Issues of Nuclear Energy: Hard Lessons Learned from

Chernobyl and Fukushima.” Online Journal of Health Ethics, vol. 7, 2011,

doi:10.18785/ojhe.0702.06.
Reichert 13

Appendix 1

Name: Daniel Reichert

Writer Review Form

Reichert 14

Please attach copies of this sheet to all copies of your own paper. Please answer as specifically

as possible.

1. Who is your intended audience? Be specific.

The intended audience for this paper is people that are not scientists but are trying to make an

educated decision on whether or not to support the production and research on nuclear power.

2. What are you trying to do in this paper (what is your purpose)?

To show people that the advancement of nuclear power has clear benefits, and that its

developments need to be emphasized internationally.

3. What is the central conclusion or thesis of the paper, and where is it stated?

“the power produced by developments in nuclear reactors does justify the effects of nuclear

power environmentally, socially, and technologically” – Paragraph 1, and Restated in the Last

paragraph

4. What type of reasoning and evidence do you use to support this thesis? Do you feel you have

made a convincing case?

The amount of power produced, the environmental impacts, the social impacts, and the

technological impacts. Yes, I do feel I have made a convincing case.

5. How have you organized your paper (topically, chronologically, etc.)? You may include a

brief outline if you like.

Reichert 15

I have organized the paper topicologically.

1. Introduction

2. Brief History, and concept explanation

3. Power Production

4. Environmental

5. Social

6. Address of renewable energy

7. Technological

8. Conclusion

6. What do you like best about the paper? What are its strengths?

I really like the broadness of the explanation. That the justification of the development in nuclear

power isn’t just in one field, and that it can be conceived to be beneficial amongst many topics. I

feel that its strengths are the broadness of the ideas concerned.

7. What are the paper’s greatest weaknesses? What changes would you want to make in

another draft?

I feel like the papers greatest weaknesses are the lack of concrete numerical data analyzed in the

second half of the paper, and that the technological advancements section is hypothetical

inventions that could be made with the use of nuclear power advancement. If I was to rewrite

another draft, I feel that the largest changes I would make would be in the flow from paragraph

to paragraph
Reichert 16

8. What specific questions do you have for your readers?

Is there anything that needs to be explained more clearly such as the concepts in nuclear

fission, or the numerical ratios. Also do you think that I should provide any statistical data

more towards the end, and in what regards? What do you think would make the argument

more justifiable?

Peer Review 1.

Name of Reviewer__Michael Roberts__________________

Author and Title and Draft:____Daniel Reichert “On the Implications of Nuclear Power”

(Give both positive and negative comments. Make your responses as concrete as possible.

Think about what feedback would be helpful to you to hear and how you would like to hear it.)

DEFINITION OF TOPIC:

What is the thesis statement? Which aspects of placement and presentation of the thesis did you

find helpful?

The thesis statement is “And this paper will stand to prove that the power produced by

developments in nuclear reactors does justify the effects of nuclear power environmentally,

socially, and technologically.” The placement of the thesis statement at the end of the
Reichert 17

introductory paragraph is helpful as it provides a clear statement as to what the essay will be

about.

Which aspects of the thesis did you find unclear? What additional background or context would

you require in order to understand the thesis?

The thesis is clear in its meaning and properly relates the goal of the essay to the reader. And

though the introductory paragraph lacks in context, this issue is remedied almost immediately in

the following paragraph.

ARGUMENT AND STRUCTURE:

Which parts of the paper are the most convincing? Be specific.

The parts of the essay that was the most convincing were the used to support the body

paragraphs. In particular, the paragraph that deals with the handling of radioactive waste was

very convincing. This is because of the language used to categorize waste which made it easy to

see how the most harmful radioactive waste is actually the least produced radioactive waste.

Also, the paragraph had a nice and logical flow of its ideas so as to make it seem focused and not

just a random mashing of ideas.

Which parts are the least convincing? Why? Gaps? Counter-arguments that should be

acknowledged? Unrelated strands?

The last paragraph that discusses why nuclear power should be used over renewable sources of

energy is the least convincing as it does not provide any sources or factual evidence to back up
Reichert 18

its claims. This causes the paragraph to be open to counter-arguments and rebuttals as the

paragraph seems like conjecture. This can be easily fixed by just finding some sources that

support its points.

USE OF REASONING AND EVIDENCE:

Where does the author make effective use of reasoning, evidence or examples to support a

conclusion?

The author uses effective reasoning and evidence when describing the technical aspects of

nuclear energy and when supporting the points brought up in the thesis. This is evident in the

paragraph describing the history of nuclear energy and the paragraphs discussing radioactive

waste.

Are there paragraphs where the author could have used more support?

The last paragraph where the author described why nuclear power should be used over renewable

sources of energy due to its potential to aid innovation was all reasonable. However, it felt like

the author could not back up those ideas as they were not presented with any sources or

evidence. Thus, the ideas simply seemed like conjecture than a possibility. I believe that the

paragraph, itself, is well thought out and greatly supports the thesis. But, it requires some factual

evidence so as to not seem overtly hypothetical.

Peer Review Form p. 2

INDIVIDUAL COMMITMENT OR CONTRIBUTION:

Reichert 19

What unique insights did the paper offer?

A unique insight that the paper offered was in its last body paragraph where it describes the

potential benefits of using nuclear energy over renewable energy. This was unique as I did not

expect the essay to address the potential benefits because of the paper’s focus on the technical

aspects of the nuclear energy in the earlier paragraphs. Also, all of the claims presented in this

paragraph, was logical and clear.

Where would you have liked the author to commit him or herself more fully?

I would have liked the author to commit to fixing the grammatical errors present in the paper. I

also think the author should commit to finding sources for the last body paragraph.

FORM AND STYLE:

List examples of use of language that you found interesting or that helped you as a reader:

An interesting and helpful use of language that the author used was in the categorization of

radioactive waste. This was helpful as it allowed the readers to clearly identify which radioactive

waste is harmful and poses a threat to nature. It also allowed the reader in justifying that the most

toxic waste is produced in the least amount by nuclear plants.

Which features of the writing got in your way as a reader?

I think that the meta elements of the paper should be removed. This can be seen, for example, in

both the thesis statement where the author referrs to “this paper” and in the concluding statement

where the author states “no pun intended.” This took me out of the essay almost immediately. It
Reichert 20

provided a first-person perspective when the rest of the essay is written in third-person

perspective, creating a jarring experience.

The essay, though consisting of strong ideas, featured a plethora grammatical errors (sentence

structure, improper punctuation and spacing, and comma usage) that, sadly, hindered my reading

experience. I was often having to reread sentences multiple times to understand the author’s

intentions behind writing them. The author also pushes a lot of ideas into the same sentences.

This caused some of the sentences to be hard to understand and follow. This can be easily fixed

by the author and would greatly benefit the essay.

Did this paper meet the expectations of its audience? Why or Why not?

Yes, the paper met the expectations of the audience. I felt this way because the paper deals with a

large-scope topic that requires a lot of thinking from the reader, and the author cleverly addresses

this would-be issue by organizing the essay in an easy and logical path. The paragraphs also use

a lot of analysis and factual data to back up the claims made in the essay.

GENERAL COMMENTS:

Given all of the above, remind the author (and yourself) what you liked best in this paper?

I liked the organization of the essay. The paragraphs were small enough to be easily read, while

flowing easily from one paragraph to another. The organization was logical and easy to follow. I

also believe that the use of factual data and analysis while discussing the technical aspects was

wholly convincing and strengthened the claim of the author. I also enjoyed the change of pace

provided by the discussion of the potential benefits when using nuclear energy over renewable

sources of energy.
Reichert 21

What do you think should be the author’s priorities in revising this piece?

I believe that author should prioritize in fixing the grammatical errors present in the essay. I also

think that the author could also remove all of the first-person perspective sentences from the

essay.

Peer Review 2

I never received a peer review two on canvas.

Writer Review Form: Revisions

Please attach copies of this form to your revision. Please answer as specifically as possible.

9. How have you changed this paper from the last version? Please be as specific as possible,

discussing any of the following: audience, purpose, thesis and argument, reasoning, evidence

and examples, organization, context, style, or any other aspect of the paper that you have

changed?
Reichert 22

The primary change that I made to my thesis is the grammatical errors were all fixed, and I made

all of the confusing sentences flow together better. I feel that I just simply made my paper easier

to read. None of my reasoning really changed.

10. What do you like best about the revised paper? What are its strengths?

I love the breadth of this paper. It doesn’t just consider nuclear power in one aspect. It also

brings it down to a more humane level that people can actually understand rather than just sayinf

nuclear power ooooh thats so scary. I feel that this paper brings it down to a level that most

people with a decent high school education can understand;.

11. Are there weaknesses or problem areas that remain? What are they?

I feel like the primary weakness of this paper is that in the last paragraph considering

technology, a lot of what was said was speculation, and various ideas that have been had since

the development o nuclear power but as they are all potential inventions there is no proper

citation and documentation that allows me to justify my claims.

12. What specific questions do you have for your readers?

Reichert 23

What is unclear?

How can I bring the understanding down better to a level that more people can understand.

Is there anything else I need to commit more for.

Appendix 2

Guided Fascinations Report

The implications of developing nuclear power and technology on our current state of civilization

could be extremely immense. The effects that it could have would not only change the way we

live day to day, but also could impact the longevity of natural resources of the Earth. The idea of

advancements in nuclear power and technology, are key topics for scientists, environmentalists,

politicians, and technological experts. The development of this kind of power and technology

would affect every person, as the change in their daily life could be extremely dramatic.

Understanding the benefits and drawbacks of nuclear power and technology would allow people,

governments, and scientists to make better informed decisions on the research and development

on nuclear systems. Depending on what is discovered about nuclear systems, and what research
Reichert 24

is done to develop them, my life and the lives of those around me would change drastically. As

things like transportation, communication, exploration, and research are all powered with the

new nuclear systems, what comes from it will be unknown yet nevertheless consequential to the

life we live today. When considering the topic of nuclear power and technology, the factors of

different understandings must be taken into account. The jargon, or understood words, in the

field of nuclear power and technology will need to people explained in order for the varying

demographics of people to all understand it. By considering the perspective of many different

people, whether it is a scientist, politician, environmentalist, or just an average person, it would

allow different views on the process of nuclear engineering to be discussed. The technological,

political, environmental, and economic impacts are just a few of the different considerations that

need to be made. The people that we need to be concerned with the most, is making sure that the

basic individual understands, as the power of the people can shift abnormal citizens into taking

the steps necessary to promote or demote the study of nuclear power and technology. When

guiding my research I want to pose questions in regards to the ethics, environmental impacts,

economic impacts, and technological impacts that it will not only have on my direct community

but also the world. Nuclear power and technology is just one outlet in regarding advancement

into a new technological age, and in order for it to happen a foundation of understanding needs to

be established first.

Annotated Bibliography
Reichert 25

“Economics of Nuclear Power.” Nuclear Power Economics | Nuclear Energy Costs - World

Nuclear Association, Sept. 2019, www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-

aspects/economics-of-nuclear-power.aspx.

The authors of this article from the World Nuclear association addresses the economic

benefits in global investment in nuclear power. Throughout the article and its subsections,

the economic efficiencies of various types of electricity generation are compared, and they

take into account both the weight of economics, and that of the cost of long-term

sustainability, proper waste disposal, maintenance, and startup costs. This piece seems to

be directed at both industrial employees, and the general populous of those that are just

eager to understand more about the potentiality of nuclear power. This piece will help me

address the economic effects of Nuclear Power in my thesis, and the sustainability of

effective nuclear power, monetary wise.

“Nuclear Power.” American Public Power Association, www.publicpower.org/policy/nuclear-

power.

The authors in this piece try to discuss the political aspects in such a way to have as little

bias as possible. This piece explains and references political facts about nuclear power,

such as the laws passed, and what was approved. It also considers in country spending on

nuclear power and brings to attention various parts of policies that arose in the American

government in regard to nuclear power. This piece will help me define various political

aspects that nuclear power may have an effect from.

Reichert 26

Mueller, Mike. “INFOGRAPHIC: How Much Power Does A Nuclear Reactor Produce?”

Energy.gov, 6 Feb. 2018, www.energy.gov/ne/articles/infographic-how-much-power-does-

nuclear-reactor-produce.

This infographic created by the US Department of Energy Department of Nuclear Energy

displays the amount of power actually produced in a nuclear reactor and relates it to

concepts of power that the common person can try to actually understand. This piece

addresses the power produced without the jargon on the Nuclear engineering field and

eases the transitional concepts that allow normal people to quantify the amount of power

actually produced. This piece will aid in removing jargon from my paper and creating

something about nuclear power that the general populous can understand.

“U.S. Energy Information Administration - EIA - Independent Statistics and Analysis.” Nuclear

Explained - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), 4 Oct. 2019,

www.eia.gov/energyexplained/nuclear/.

This piece by the US Energy Information Association describes the processes of nuclear

fission on the subatomic level. But its description is primarily directly to the point,

excluding details that only nuclear physicists need to understand. It provides a basis

understanding of how nuclear fission works and will allow me to expand upon the topics

covered to explain the basis of a nuclear reaction efficiently.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service/Ecological Services Program. “Nuclear Power.” Official Web

Page of the U S Fish and Wildlife Service, 2 May 2018, www.fws.gov/ecological-

services/energy-development/nuclear.html.
Reichert 27

In contrast to the EIA Article, this article from the US Fish and Wildlife Service explains

the processes of a nuclear reaction on a larger scale, in regard to how it is actually

produced commercially at a plant. In addition, this brings to attention the various

environmental concerns that result when dealing with nuclear reactions. But this piece

identifies many different effects of nuclear waste and explains which part of the plant

creates each waste, in order to better understand where this waste came from. This will

help create a good argument for the environmental concerns in my thesis and allow me to

explain various wastes effects on the environment.

“What Are Nuclear Wastes and How Are They Managed?” What Are Nuclear Wastes and How

Are They Managed? - World Nuclear Association, www.world-nuclear.org/nuclear-

basics/what-are-nuclear-wastes.aspx.

This article from the World Nuclear Association presents international statistics about the

waste production of nuclear power facilities and breaks down the various types of nuclear

energy into easily understood terms. In addition, this source considers the potentially of

renewable nuclear power, and possibly solutions for eliminating some waste, and reducing

the production of waste in general. This piece will help refute the environmental concerns

presented in the Fish and Wildlife article cited above.

Precis
Reichert 28

In response to the global need for reduced carbon emissions, many countries are

attempting to develop alternative solutions to carbon fueled power generation. But the shifting to

new solutions such as nuclear power has brought up various concerns about the potential harmful

effects of nuclear power that could occur for the environment and various other fields. But the

power generated from nuclear reactors does justify the social, economic, political, and

environmental consequences from nuclear power production. In this paper, various topics of the

social, economic, political, and environmental consequences of nuclear power production will be

compared in order to back the claim that the power produced is justified. First how much power

is actually produced and understanding how the power is produced will be considered and

explained. But then the different consequences will be explained. For example, the impact that

nuclear power production will have on the economy. We will consider the economy in terms of

jobs both new and lost, as the job market will switch from coal industry to nuclear industry. In

addition, the potential shift in power production standpoints will change economic relations for

the United States and the middle east. If a nuclear fission engine could be built and

transportation would no longer require oil, and many of our trade relationships could shift to

internal production and development, though this may mean changes in political relationships

with oil producing countries. Additionally, if nuclear power is researched and emphasized, the

potential surplus of energy would allow for electricity prices in the US to decrease as the supply

will exponentially increase. But at the same point when as nuclear plants are researched and

improved, potential uses for this efficient form of energy production will be developed. And as

these new systems are development, that brings about many other consequences. As nuclear

power is developed more nuclear waste will be produced, which provides extreme concerns for

the environment as various ecosystems near power plants could be affected. But as this
Reichert 29

development continues, and scientists have proactively been determining the causes and effects

of nuclear waste, scientists will continue to discover and implement new processes that will

effectively reduce the amount of waste produced by nuclear power production, and are even in

the process of developing renewable nuclear energy sources. The potential consequences, both

good and bad, of nuclear energy are broad and immense. But the current methods of energy

production are not only inefficient, and nonsustainable but they are also killing planet Earth.

Therefore, decisions need to be made on the development on nuclear power. There will be

sacrifices made along the way to efficient and clean nuclear power, and while those decisions are

yet to be known, they will need to consider what is best for all people of all nations, and socially

adhere to preserve the best interest of all people on Earth for generations to come. While nuclear

power’s spectrum of consequences is very broad, the potential for it to be an efficient source of

power does justify the consequences, as the consequences of good and bad equal out and lean

towards a better life for all people.

Writing Timeline:

Basic Research and Find at least 5 Sources for the Précis. Oct 14: This should take roughly 5

hours of committed time without distractions. In order to find credible sources and start

dissecting them
Reichert 30

FT 3: Précis and Annotated Bibliography Oct 21 by 8am: In addition to the first week this should

take roughly five hours in order to break down and formulate good ideas for the thesis

Have a Rough Draft of Thesis Oct 28: Depending on how much is done for the précis this should

take between 5 and 10 hours to have a full rough draft

FT 4: Freshman Thesis, Full Draft for Peer-Review Nov 4 by 8am: This should take 3 to 4 hours

to critique myself and rewrite and add sections to my rough draft

FT 5: Freshman Thesis, Peer-Review forms Nov 11 by 8am: Should spend 1-2 Hours Reviewing

the papers of my peers, and then 2-3 Hours reviewing the comments that I got back and editing.

Also have a new abstract written, and Works Cited

GEA1_FT 6: Freshman Thesis, Final Draft Nov 18 by 8am: Should take about 10 hours to

revise, edit, and compile all documents associated with the Thesis