A Need for Alternative Energy

There is also another hidden cost that is often left out.  This is not the financial cost to create nuclear power but the environmental cost.  Many advocates of nuclear power claim that is an environmentally friendly form of energy with no carbon emissions, the leading cause of global warming today.  This ignores the long and arduous construction required for nuclear power plants.  The fact that you must first enrich the uranium for use in the plant, which requires the use of coal energy today, shows that the idea of emission free nuclear power is false.  The other issue here is that the actual process to create enriched uranium is a very environmentally costly process. The chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) releases from two of the enrichment facilities in the United States represent 93% of all CFC emissions in the nation.  Considering that CFC’s are about 10,000 to 20,000 times more potent than carbon emissions the production of nuclear energy are just as large as a threat to the environment as fossil fuels.

Assuming that all of these issues disappeared somehow; that is to say that the price of nuclear power was truly as low as proposed, and that its production was truly emission free, there is still one hidden cost that many people fail to recognize: the health cost.  One of the played down products of nuclear technology is strontium 90.  Strontium 90 was largely evident in the atmosphere after nuclear tests began in the 50’s and 60’s and especially after the Chernobyl power plant meltdown.  Its presence should have dropped to nothing after the ceasing of nuclear tests yet it is still found today primarily in areas surrounding nuclear power plants.  The other thing about strontium 90 is that it closely resembles calcium and often fools the human body into depositing it into the bone structure which doesn’t cause weaker bones or any similar side effects.  Some may ask, “What’s wrong with strontium 90?  So what if it is in my bones, they are still just as strong.”  The major thing about strontium 90 is that it also happens to be a carcinogen as in it causes cancer. 

The fact that anyone thinks that a source of energy that can cause cancer is a viable alternative to today’s situation is ridiculous.  It is crazy to even propose nuclear energy when there are so many clean forms of energy such as wind and solar power, which by the way both happen to be cancer free.  Like I said early it is like putting down a cigarette and picking up a heroin needle; you’re trading you current problems for much worse ones.  This is why nuclear energy is not a solution to today’s energy crisis.  It is merely a wolf in sheep’s clothing because it is very profitable and will require a large upkeep to maintain.