The Production of Nuclear Energy Should be Abandoned - Essay Sample

Introduction

One of the contemporary issues in environmental physics that remain a matter of global concern is the argument whether or not it is possible to have a nuclear-weapons-free world, and if so, should nuclear energy be abandoned. From the ruins of the nuclear weapon used in the Second World War, the world has been challenged to reevaluate the use and production of nuclear energy. More often than not, nuclear energy is primarily associated with nuclear weapons. As a result of the perceived threats, policymakers have developed arguments against the use of nuclear weapons from different perspectives; security threat, humanitarianism, and economic effects of production and maintenance of nuclear energy. In response to these aspects of nuclear production, steps such as disarmament have been put in place to regulate the production of nuclear energy. To achieve a secure, safe and sustainable developing world, the only guarantee against the use of nuclear weapons is complete elimination and prohibition of nuclear energy use and production.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

On the basis of security concern, elimination and prohibition of nuclear energy significantly address the challenge of the arms race. The concept of arms race is perhaps associated with the two world wars more than any other historical phenomena. Many scholars argue that one of the underlying causes of both world war one and world war two was the unrestricted production of weapons, and the competition for superiority in owning arsenals ("Arguments for Nuclear Abolition | ICAN"). What resulted from this competition was tension, which was triggered into actual war in the following years. In the modern world, the arms race has taken the form of nuclear energy production (Roche 213). For example, the case of North Korea reluctance in abandoning nuclear weapons in conformity with the Nuclear Weapons Convention has resulted in great tension between the country and the United States. Furthermore, the tension has spread to other countries, with each country having a different view on the ban of nuclear weapons, arguing that it should affect all states ("Arguments for Nuclear Abolition | ICAN." Such tension is a threat to world peace and may result in an actual war if not averted through complete abandonment of nuclear energy.

Secondly, the abandonment of nuclear energy gains more legitimacy on a humanitarian basis. Chiefly, there is a global consensus that abandonment of nuclear energy is a humanitarian necessity, owing to the great threats it poses to humankind existence. For example, the effects of radiation from the use of nuclear energy are perceived to have catastrophic effects immediately and years after the initial explosion of bombs ("Much of Japan Has Lost Faith in Nuclear Power"). Interestingly, such effects are not only felt after the use of explosives. Testing, production, and deployment of nuclear weapons also pose almost equal threats as the use of bombs in the actual war ("Arguments for Nuclear Abolition | ICAN"). Notably, fission of the atomic nucleus results to release of million times more energy than any other used source of energy by man, with heavy nuclei which are rare such as plutonium-239 and uranium-235 results to the fissile nucleus and consequently become one of the major threats to humankind. Therefore the management of the reactors and management of nuclear waste which are highly radioactive is a huge threat to humankind. Although it's arguable that developed nations are in a position to handle such operations with safety precautions, the threat to humanity supersedes any advantages associated with their use.

Finally, the economic concern on the production and maintenance of nuclear energy goes beyond any logic in support of their use. One global concern by international organizations such as the United Nations is the level of poverty in the world today. Currently, only a few selected developed nations are in a position to economically sustain nuclear weapons production ("Waiting for the Redirection."). Ironically, countries such as India are seen to have the necessary know-how and the ability to operate such production despite the globally known levels of poverty in the country. Primarily, such operations cost tens of billions of dollars at the expense of pressing concerns such as health care, education among others ("Arguments for Nuclear Abolition | ICAN"). Redirecting such funds to elevate other threats to humanity and empower nations and individuals economically should be a basic concern, not nuclear production.

However, is a world free of nuclear energy really possible? In respect to global warming, many people argue that the use of nuclear energy is more advantageous as a source of energy as compared to other sources such as oil and coal. This argument is based on the fact that relatively very little amount of carbon emission takes place with the use of nuclear energy as compared to any other source of energy used by man (Roche 212) . Notably, the consumption of fossil fuels in the modern world is way much faster than production. This unbalanced use of fossil fuels does not only make it irrelevant and reliable in future perspectives but also results in more generation of fossil fuel resulting in increased greenhouse emissions like CO2. Additionally, less fuel is consumed in nuclear energy production as compared to fossil fuels. Consequently, this directly reduces cost in extraction, transportation, and handling. Generally, the cost of nuclear production is approximated to be 20% that of fossil fuel ("Nuclear Power & Global Warming"). With this counter-argument, it is in doubt if really man can live in a nuclear-free world by taking the risk of completely abandoning the use of nuclear energy.

Conclusion

In conclusion, achieving a secure, safe world with sustainable development can only be achieved through the abandonment of the use of nuclear energy. This argument is logically consistent with the threats associated with nuclear use and production. Security wise, the new face of an arms race in the form of nuclear production aversion can only be achieved through the abandonment of nuclear production. Secondly, the threat posed by nuclear radiation to humanity and the surrounding environment should also not be overlooked. Last but not least, the economic effects of production and maintenance of nuclear production goes beyond reason in the context of poverty and pressing issues such as health care and education. However, in relation to global warming, the use of nuclear energy is seen to be the only solution towards the fight against excessive emission of greenhouse gases. Nevertheless, despite the few advantages that some may argue relate to nuclear energy, its use should be abandoned.

Works Cited

"Arguments for Nuclear Abolition | ICAN." ICAN | International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, www.icanw.org/why-a-ban/arguments-for-a-ban/. Accessed 20 Feb. 2019.

"Much of Japan Has Lost Faith in Nuclear Power." Energy Post, 8 Feb. 2019, energy post.eu/six-years-after-Fukushima-much-of-Japan-has-lost-faith-in-nuclear-power/. Accessed 20 Feb. 2019.

"Nuclear Power & Global Warming." Union of Concerned Scientists, www.ucsusa.org/nuclear-power/nuclear-power-and-global-warming#.XG1kWfrVLZY. Accessed 20 Feb. 2019.

Roche, Douglas. "A World Free of Nuclear Weapons." The Challenge of Abolishing Nuclear Weapons, 2017, pp. 211-216.

"Waiting for the Redirection..." Waiting for the Redirection.., timeforchange.org/pros-and-cons-of-nuclear-power-and-sustainability. Accessed 20 Feb. 2019.