Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Nuclear energy essay in easy words
Essay of nuclear power
Essay of nuclear power
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Nuclear energy essay in easy words
The Tommyknockers and Nuclear Energy
The Tommyknockers, a book seemingly about an alien ship buried in a small town in Maine that affects the townspeople, has a much deeper message about humans and our usage of nuclear energy. There is much evidence to confirm that King as strong views on nuclear power and is trying to convey them in the book.
King’s book about himself, On Writing, includes a reference to nuclear war in a passage about his early life. “I was born in 1947 and we didn’t get our first television until 1958. The first thing I remember watching on it was Robot Monster, a film in which a guy dressed in an ape-suit with a goldfish bowl on his head-Ro-Man, he was called—ran around trying to kill the last survivors of a nuclear war. I felt this was art of quite a high nature.” (34). He later references nuclear superpowers as a fix to overpopulation and a chance to start over (202). Before getting to The Tommyknockers, King seems to have strong ideas about nuclear war. He sees it as the end of the civilization.
The word “nuclear” appears 39 times in The Tommyknockers. The first mention (on page 56) speaks of fear of a power plant during an earthquake. On page 98, one of the main characters, Jim Gardener, thinks to himself “insanity of nuclear power” and proceeds to ramble on about conspiracies, meltdown cover-ups, and its overall dangers until the end of the chapter on page 114.
The Internet article titled with the quote “…late last night and the night before…” has a lot to say about the dangers of nuclear energy being a motif in The Tommyknockers. The author makes the comparison of the way the ship changes people (known as “The Becoming”) and effects of radiation poisoning. “The Becoming” also gives people the power to build tremendous technology, such as a super hot water heater or a mind reading typewriter. However, it neglects to give them comprehension of what they are doing. The comparison to nuclear energy there is “a society of people playing around with powers they don’t understand.”
In On Writing, King says “I don’t believe any novelist, even one who’s written fortyplus books, has too many thematic concerns; I have many interests, but only a few that are deep enough to power novels. These deep interests (I won’t quite call them obsessions) include how difficult it is—perhaps impossible!—to close Pandora’s technobox once it’s open (The Stand, The Tommyknockers, Firestarter) (207)” One can argue however that nuclear energy is potentially one heck of a Pandora’s box.
In order to better understand the historical context of nuclear development it seems to me as though Iversen dove into a fair amount of investigative journalism. The book focuses primarily on the events of Rocky Flats and her life through a narrative nonfiction interpretation. By providing a journalist approach, Iversen makes it easy for the reader to build a relationship with the characters presented throughout the book. At times I found myself visualizing the intensity of the fires, the whirlwind of emotions from locals, and the lasting environmental impacts that would not only plague Colorado, but taint the reputation of what it means to be human.
As both of the world’s superpowers attempted to outstrip each other in a nuclear arms race, it grew increasingly apparent that should one nation attempt to strike the other or its allies with nuclear weapons, the consequences from the secondary strike would cause an unacceptable loss of life and likely the extinction of the human race. Consider the Cuban Missile Crisis, for instance. There were multiple times where all out nuclear war between the East and the West came close to occurring. From the Soviet and American missiles that were readied in Cuba and in other parts of the globe, to nuclear torpedoes aboard the Soviet submarine B-59, and nuclear missiles carried aboard US bombers and interceptors, the realization that complete annihilation for nations would ensue with one wrong move greatly influenced the decisions of Soviet and US leaders alike. This was especially true when President Kennedy attempted to use diplomatic and military pressure against Khrushchev to remove the missiles, rather than ordering bomber runs and an invasion against Cuba.
We are told, "To love thy neighbour" and "To treat." our enemies, as we would want to be treated. " If you were to look at these commandments you would see that nuclear warfare could never be justified, and if you do provoke a nuclear war, you should be punished. That brings me into the second reason why countries retain nuclear weapons and that is a threat. It is a way of protecting your country, but you will protect yourself and retaliate if provoked.
Something always curious and provoking happens in science writing. Gwyneth Cravens is an author of five novels and many publications, and one who studies a topic in great detail. She creates an enormous work about nuclear energy for the last decade. Cravens’s research in her last published book titled Power to Save the World: The Truth About Nuclear Energy has led her to do an about-face on the issue. In her article “Better Energy” which was published in May 2008 in Discover magazine, she disputes and claims that nuclear energy is currently best alternative and should be considered as our future energy source. At the beginning “Better Energy” she commences by introducing James Lovelock, who was greatly honored in the green movement for creating the Gaia hypothesis, which combines everything on earth as entirely organic. In the past Lovelock opposed nuclear energy. Unfortunately, to his fans, he changed his views beginning to support nuclear energy. Throughout the article Cravens goes with the explanation how the use of nuclear energy will be able to soft issue about global warming. Current fossil fuel power plants cause serious health problems in thousands of Americans, furthermore, continue to drive the warming. She tries to prove to the audience that currently there is no possibility that U.S. nation can use any of renewable energy sources such as the wind and sun (in which she looks to find common with public views about this case), and that nuclear energy is safe, and this is the best option to get the necessary amount of needed energy.
If we look at the number of bomb shelters being built and drills being conducted in classrooms during the late fifties and early sixties, we would see evidence that would point to the overall feeling in American society that the end was near. The nuclear genie was safely contained by the super powers. But I think that Vonnegut saw that all it would take was one small country who possessed end of the world technology, to have an accident and it would spell the doom of mankind. Vonnegut writes, when speaking of ice-nine, that "apparently the United States of America and Union of Soviet Socialist Republic had it..understandably surrounded by electrified fences and homicidal German shepards" (Chapt. 110.
...nce World War II to the present day, the technology of nuclear power has increased significantly in terms of energy output and safety. The energy efficiency of nuclear power is far superior to its counterpart fossil fuel and renewable energy. Compared to fossil fuels, tiny amounts of fuel used by nuclear reactors is equivalent to a large sum of coal. This is a no brainer. Why mine a ton of coal when a little uranium can be used to gain the same amount of energy? Not only is it efficient, it’s safe to use. Used fuel is packed away in storage safely, so there isn’t any chance of radiation leaking out. In the present day, nuclear power incidents haven’t been occurring lately. Advancements in technology and equipment used have made nuclear energy a very reliable and safe source of energy. With today’s energy needs, nuclear power has the ability to keep up in the race.
“Face it. Nukes are the most climate-friendly industrial-scale form of energy” (Power, Reiss, Pearlstein, 655). This statement is what I’m trying to promote through my argument. It also ties Inconvenient Truths: 10 Green Heresies by Matt Powers, Spencer Reiss, and Jonanna Pearlstein and Nuclear Power is Best Energy Source: Potchef Stroom together by bring out the main point all authors are trying to get across. Global warming has been a big concern for years now and one of the biggest causes for it, is the burning of fossil fuels to get energy. People that live in the United States of America use a huge amount of energy in their daily lives and that amount continues to grow with our population growing with it. My purpose of this piece is to persuade people to switch to nuclear power for a cleaner energy source because it’s the cleanest energy source.
What Nuclear power has the ability to do is get a lot of power in a little amount of space. “Roughly 1.6 billion people live without access to electricity, and 2.4 billion rely on traditional biomass because they have no access to modern fuel.” (General Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei) With nuclear power put into these countries that are without power we can have it to where electricity will be accessibility to everyone. By having power accessible to everyone we can accomplish so much more and unlock more possibilities in our world today.
Nuclear power is the generation of electricity from an atomic reaction. (World Statistics: Nuclear Energy Around the World n.d.) Though it produces zero carbon emissions there has been a decline in support for nuclear power and increased its support for alternative energies in the pursuit for a fossil free energy sector. Factors that have resulted in the reduction of support for nuclear energy include nuclear accidents and waste and the positives of renewable energy which include clean energy, sustainable and reduced health and environmental risks.
Carbon, Max W. Nuclear Power: Villain or Victim?: Our Most Misunderstood Source of Electricity. Second ed. Madison, WI: Pebble Beach, 1997.
The Cold War was a time of great tension all over the world. From 1945 to 1989, the United States was the leader and nuclear power and was competing with the Soviet Union to create huge stockpiles of nuclear weapons. However, even though the Cold War ended, nuclear weapons are still a threat. Countries around the world strive to create nuclear power, and they do not promise to use it for peaceful purposes. Some examples of the struggles caused by nuclear weapons include the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and Iran’s recent nuclear weapon program. Surely, nuclear weapons have created conflict all over the world since the Cold War era.
In 1962 nuclear war seemed inevitable to the world, it was the first time nuclear war was hanging on a thread. The Cuban Missile Crisis presented a threat to the world, in which the USSR planted nuclear missiles on Cuba. America’s response was to threaten launching nuclear missiles at the Russians. This incident launched the world into a new time, which presented nuclear weapons as a source of power.
The use of nuclear power in the mid-1980s was not a popular idea on account of all the fears that it had presented. The public seemed to have rejected it because of the fear of radiation. The Chernobyl accident in the Soviet Union in April of 1986 reinforced the fears, and gave them an international dimension (Cohen 1). Nevertheless, the public has to come to terms that one of the major requirements for sustaining human progress is an adequate source of energy. The current largest sources of energy are the combustion of coal, oil, and natural gas. Fear of radiation may push nuclear power under the carpet but another fear of the unknown is how costly is this going to be? If we as the public have to overcome the fear of radiation and costly project, we first have to understand the details of nuclear energy. The known is a lot less scary then the unknown. If we could put away all the presumptions we have about this new energy source, then maybe we can understand that this would be a good decision for use in the near future.
Nuclear power, the use of exothermic nuclear processes to produce an enormous amount of electricity and heat for domestic, medical, military and industrial purposes i.e. “By the end of 2012 2346.3 kilowatt hours (KWh) of electricity was generated by nuclear reactors around the world” (International atomic energy agency Vienna, 2013, p.13). However, with that been said it is evident that the process of generating electricity from a nuclear reactor has numerous health and environmental safety issues.
Media coverage of such cases have made the public less comfortable with the idea of moving further towards nuclear power and they only opt for reducing human activities to reduce global warming. It is true that there have been some notable disasters involving nuclear power, but compared to other power systems, nuclear power has an impressive track record. First, it is less harmful and second, it will be able to cater for the growing world population. Nuclear power produces clean energy and it delivers it at a cost that is competitive in the energy market (Patterson). According to the US Energy Information Administration, there are currently 65 such plants in the Unite States (National Research Council). They produce 19 percent of the total US energy generation.