Coal or nuclear: which way should we go?

1. 1. Introduction

   Electrical energy and its production represent an important aspect of human growth, the improvement of quality of life, economic development, and the overall enhancement of living standards. This is because electricity is required for the functioning of numerous items and technologies that are commonly utilized by humans (DOE/EIA, 2010). Such items include computers, televisions, lighting, and a countless list of such items. Thus, as the standard of living increases, energy consumption also increases. However, the increase in energy consumption does pose numerous threats to the overall sustainability of the human race as it results in the emission of global climate-changing gases that endanger our survival in numerous ways. In line with that, this research seeks to analyze the difference between coal and nuclear energy in a bid to determine which of them should be utilized as an effective and efficient source of energy.

   2. Coal or nuclear: which way should we go?

   Coal-fired power plants use coal to generate electricity.Such plants make use of steam to power a turbine that is connected to a generator, and the generator then creates an electrical current with the aid of an oscillating magnetic field through coils of wire (Gabbard, 1993). The generated power is then conditioned before being sent to the electrical power grid.

   In the case of nuclear power, nuclear plants generate energy by utilizing the energy that is released from atoms of nuclei that are undergoing the fusion process. Fusion is a process that involves a larger nucleus decaying or breaking into smaller nuclei. In the nuclear process, the main reaction is the fission of uranium (specifically U²³⁵) into smaller atoms that are known as "daughter products" (De Moor, 2001; Miller et al., 2011).

   In line with the above discussion, Table 1 below details the advantages and disadvantages of using each source of energy.

   Table 1: Pros and cons of coal and nuclear power

   	Coal	Nuclear power
   Pros	1. Building and maintaining coal plants is cheap. Additionally, little technical know-how is required. 2. Coal is readily available because of the numerous deposits across the world. 3. Coal production is nearing completion, and the prospect of environmentally friendly coal is on the horizon. 4. Coal is a cheap and reliable source of energy.	1. The cost of production is relatively low, and this is because the fuel used in generating nuclear energy is highly affordable. 2. It is a renewable source of energy, which ensures overall sustainability of supply and usage. 3. Nuclear energy is susceptible to changes in price, as even a large increase in uranium will not affect the price of nuclear energy. 4. Nuclear plants don’t generate any carbon emissions during plant operation. The little carbon emitted comes from the burning of fuels used to power the plant.
   Cons	1. Coal is an impure fuel as it contains sulfur, aluminum, iron, uranium, thorium, and other impurities. 2. Coal combustion emits hazardous CO2, which is regarded as the single most significant polluter and emitter of climate-changing gases. 3. It is non-renewable, which means that it is not a sustainable means of energy as depletion will affect overall availability.	1. Nuclear power is generally viewed as the largest emitter of radiation to the environment because its main reactors, uranium and thorium, and their daughter products are the major source of radiation. This is very dangerous to both humans and the environment. 2. Nuclear plants are easily prone to disaster as both natural and artificial conditions need to be perfect in order to ensure their functionality. In times of disaster, released radioactive wastes and waves can cover huge areas and affect millions in the process. For instance, radioactive waves from the Fukushima plant disaster in Japan traveled down to the USA. 3. Building and maintaining nuclear plants is expensive and requires advanced human resource skills (capitals) that can take numerous years to acquire.

   Stephen (2011) is the source for this adaptation.

   From the above analysis, it is obvious that nuclear power is a better source of energy because it is eco-friendly and more sustainable. Additionally, it is affordable and provides a high density of energy supply (DOE/EIA, 2010; De Moor, 2001; Miller et al., 2011; Tarjanne and Kivistö, 2008; Gabbard, 1993). However, it poses a great threat to human lives with its radioactive wastes that can take hundreds of years to decay. On the other hand, coal is easier to operate, and its wastes don’t pose much of a threat like those of nuclear power. However, coals emit dangerous gases that affect our climate.

   As such, it is recommended that nuclear power be chosen over coal. This is because, ceteris paribus, it is an efficient, affordable, sustainable, renewable, and environmentally friendly source of energy as opposed to coal, which is non-sustainable and dangerous to the sustainability of our environment. In the case of radiation issues, it is recommended that isolated spaces (such as deserts) be allocated for disposing of the waste in order to ensure that human beings are not exposed to such effects. In times of natural disaster, operators can shut down the reactor and adopt other approaches used in Japan to combat such issues. Thus, if effectively managed, nuclear power is more reliable than coal.

   In conclusion, it is clear that nuclear power is more reliable than coal. However, a decision to utilize such a source of power should also consider its dangerous effects. If all things are made equal, nuclear power will help to create a better environment as it doesn’t emit CO₂.

1.      Reference

De Moor, A (2001). Towards a grand deal on subsidies and climate change. Natural Resource Forum.

DOE/EIA-0484 (2010). “International Energy Outlook 2010,” U.S. Energy Information Administration. 5 May 2010.

Gabbard, Alex. (1993) “Coal Combustion: Nuclear Resource or Danger,” Oakridge National Laboratory Review.

Miller, Veronica B., Landis, Amy E., & Shaefer, Laura A. (2011). A benchmark for life cycle air emission and life cycle impact assessment of hydrokinetic energy extraction using life cycle assessment. Renewable Energy.

Stephen, J., O. (2011). Comparative Assessment of Coal-Fired and Nuclear Power Plants. Available at: http://www.ewp.rpi.edu/hartford/~odells2/EP/Comparative%20Assessment%20of%20Coal-Fired%20and%20Nuclear%20Power%20Plants.pdf [Accessed on: 7-11-2014].

Tarjanne, Risto, & Kivistö, Aija. (2008). Comparison of electricity generation costs. Lappeenranta University of Technology.