Abstract
This paper examines the problem of nuclear wastes and how it presents a particular dilemma on various fronts including health and security issues. Nuclear energy and technology has become an endemic part of modern society. The paper points out that concomitant with the significant advances in the production of nuclear energy as well as its application to the areas of medicine and defense has been the escalation of the problems of nuclear waste disposal.
Includes several graphs and tables and diagrams.
1. Introduction
2. Classification of Types of Nuclear Waste
3. Sources of Nuclear Waste
3.2. Storage of Low Level Waste
3.3 Long-Term Storage of High Level Waste
3.4. The Storage of Plutonium
3.5. Transmutation
4. Conclusion

From the Paper
"This debate emphasizes the dilemma and the importance of finding a permanent and less environmentally hazardous solution to the problems of nuclear waster. All of the methods discussed above provide some solutions to the problems - but they do not as yet present a permanent and fully acceptable means of waste disposal and many of the methods have significant drawbacks and are often manpower intensive and open to the vicissitudes of human error. The answer to what to do with nuclear waste has not yet been adequately answered."

Tags:disposal, energy

Abstract
An argumentative paper, exploring the chemical make up of uranium, showing that it is extremely difficult to dispose of this material in a complete way. It looks at current disposal practices in the world and analyzes their pros and cons.

From the Paper
"Radioactive material is defined as having atoms with extremely excited outer electron shells. This makes them unstable, excitable and an efficient means of providing energy to a population that can afford a nuclear power plant. The main source of this energy is Uranium. This is a naturally occurring element found in rocks and seawater. It is the most heavy element in the periodic table, having 146 neutrons and 92 protons in its stable form. The instable form has 143 neutrons and this is the kind that is used in cores to create energy (UIC website)."

Tags:disposal, nuclear, radioactive, sun, waste, water

From the Paper
"NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL
Introduction
This research considers the issue of nuclear waste disposal in the United States. The nuclear waste present in the United States is a combination of spent fuel rods from commercial nuclear power generators, high-level liquid radioactive waste from government-owned nuclear reactors uses in the production of nuclear weapons, and miscellaneous low-level nuclear wastes.
While the way in which nuclear waste should be disposed is a volatile issue, one issue that has not been adequately considered is the separation of the spent fuel rods from the commercial reactors from the high-level weapons production-related nuclear waste with respect to disposal of the materials. Currently, policy calls for all nuclear waste to be placed in long-term storage at..."

Abstract
The paper looks at the issue of nuclear power generation and its viability within, primarily, the Canadian context. Specifically, the paper examines the argument that the greatest deterrence to relying upon nuclear energy as a chief means of energy is the problem of what to do with waste disposal. In particular, a case can be made that nuclear waste constitutes a more serious danger to Canadians than potential terrorist attacks or even reactor safety for a few reasons: firstly, there is plenty of reason to believe that nuclear waste is more threatening because, once in the water tables or in organisms upon which we feed, it harms Canadians from coast to coast - not simply Canadians who are within the vicinity of a terrorist attack focusing upon a major landmark; secondly, nuclear reactors are actually safer than nuclear waste because of the extensive safety measures that are undertaken at these facilities. Ultimately, the paper concludes that Canadians will have to take a long, hard look at nuclear energy before they agree to rely upon it.

From the Paper
"The following paper will look at the issue of nuclear power generation and its viability within, primarily, the Canadian context (though American sources and examples will be used where applicable). Specifically, the next several pages will examine the argument that the greatest deterrence to relying upon nuclear energy as a chief means of energy is the problem of what to do with waste disposal. In particular, a case can be made that nuclear waste constitutes a more serious danger to Canadians than potential terrorist attacks or even reactor safety for a few reasons: firstly, there is plenty of reason to believe that nuclear waste is more..."

Tags:nuclear, power, generation

Abstract
The paper discusses how nuclear power offers tremendous potential for human development. The paper focuses on the benefits and dangers of nuclear energy and considers the long-term consequences of exclusive reliance on fossil fuels as well as the dangers regarding operational safety, disposal of nuclear waste and protection from terrorists. The paper concludes that the value of nuclear power outweighs the risks that are manageable through appropriate regulation.

Outline:
Executive Summary
Introduction - Nuclear Energy
The Benefits of Nuclear Energy:
Nuclear Power Plant Safety Concerns
Nuclear Power Plant Safety in the Age of Global Terrorism
Conclusion

From the Paper
"Nuclear power is a relatively cheap and abundant sources of usable energy that currently provides approximately one-fifth of all the electric power used in the United States and as much as four-fifths of that used in other countries. The nature of highly radioactive materials has always posed significant safety concerns, but even more so since the onset of global terrorism. While operational safety, responsible disposal of nuclear waste, and protection from terrorists are crucial matters, a comprehensive risk-benefit analysis suggests that the eventual widespread shift to nuclear power is necessary and not associated with greater overall risk of harm than conventional energy sources or production cycles."

Tags:terrorism, waste, disposal, radioactive, materials, uranium, bombs, fossil, fuels

Abstract
This paper explains the reasons behind the halt in nuclear power plant construction in the United States. Factors in the decline of nuclear power plants include raising costs, disposal of nuclear waste, concern for safety, declining public opinion and governmental programs and decisions not favorable to the nuclear power industry. Footnotes.

From the Paper
"After a period of rapid growth in the nuclear power industry, resulting in over a hundred nuclear power plants being constructed in the United States alone, in the early 1970's the industry began to slow and even began to decline in the 1980's, while the rest of the world continued to increase their nuclear industry capacity. In the mid-1970's the Atomic Energy Commission predicated that by the year 2000 there would be more than 1,000 nuclear power plants in the United States.[1] No new nuclear power plants have been ordered in the United States since 1973 and several plants have gone off-line since.[2] Between 1990 and 1995, 20 additional nuclear power plants came online outside of the United States, with an additional 36 under construction. Furthermore, Robert Newman, the President of ABB Combustion Engineering Nuclear Systems, in a October 6, 1996 New York Times article suggested that his company had been approached by the government of China with a plan to build as many as 150 nuclear power plants over the next 40 years.[3] Currently, there are over 437 nuclear power plants operating around the world.[4] Hence, while the rest of the world is increasing their dependence on nuclear power, the question becomes, why is the Untied States making a rapid reversal in its dependence on nuclear power? Several tangible factors have been suggested: the rising costs of construction of a nuclear power plant, the increase in time that it takes to construct a nuclear power plant, the disposal of low grade and high grade nuclear waste, public safety of living near a nuclear power plant, declining public support for nuclear power, and the fear of nuclear power plants contributing to the proliferation of nuclear weapons around the world."

Tags:plant, age, US, commission, waste, production, weapon, uranium, environment, meltdown, registration, license

Abstract
This paper discusses alternatives to nuclear power like fossil fuels, solar and hydroelectric power and describes the problem of waste disposal at the Yucca Mountain Repository for nuclear waste.

From the Paper
"Dealing with Radioactive Waste
Introduction
The problem of disposing of radioactive waste has existed for over 50 years now and the country is not much closer to a universally acceptable resolution. Initially there was almost a laissez faire attitude on the part of scientists and the government. More recently the public has become so mistrustful that anything less than a near 100 percent risk free solution might be rejected. The amount of nuclear waste keeps growing, yet no one has suggested that we stop producing the things that create this radioactive waste.

Dimensions of the Problem
Radioactive waste is the residue from the production of ..."

From the Paper
"One of the most pressing problems facing humankind today is the lack of long-term assurance of energy supplies. Most energy resources in use are finite; there are only so many coal, oil, and natural gas reserves that can be tapped-and those reserves are not bottomless in quantity. The limit is fast approaching, as technology demands higher and higher levels of what resources are available. One of the most controversial sources of alternative energy is that of nuclear power. The mere mention of the phrase brings immediate response, whether of the enthusiastic or the (more common) hostile variety.

The idea of nuclear power as a viable source of energy has been around for at least half a century now. Yet, general acceptance and usage of this potentially constant resource is no closer today than back when it was regarded merely as a science ... "

From the Paper
" Many people have concluded that nuclear power is fundamentally evil (Morgan 7). Those who oppose nuclear power do so because, at least in a rough qualitative way, they have balanced the risks and benefits as they understand them and have concluded that no amount of readjustment in the organizations that manage the technology or in the nature and balance of the risks and benefits it brings will make nuclear power acceptable. Other people still view this issue as a balance of risks, costs, and benefits. Proponents of nuclear power argue that, with much re-education and some re-examining of current organizations and technology, the public can be persuaded to welcome back nuclear power (Morgan 7).


Although nuclear power continues to play an active role in the energy planning of other nations, the U.S. nuclear power..."