What are the Impacts of Uranium and Coal on the Environment and Humanity

Societal dependence of electricity is detrimental to the well being of earth and its inhabitants. This anathematization was challenged during the twentieth century’s atomic age by uranium’s ability to fission. Following this discovery in 1938 by Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassmann (Uranium), nuclear powered electrical generators became a subject of interest, because nuclear reactors generate electricity by means of fission. Unfortunately, extreme amounts of radiation are emitted from the highly unstable uranium-235 (U-235) isotopes required by nuclear reactors. This socially unacceptable radioactivity has led to the continued support of coal. In fact, coal is used to produce nearly half of all the electricity consumed by America (Coal Basics), allowing it to continue dominating the energy sector. Only by perusing the environmental and humanitarian effects of coal and uranium, can an erudite comprehension of the two be formed. To grasp an absolute understanding, research must begin with the excavation process of the two.

Mining companies have become ecstatic about uranium, since its value has risen to $120 a pound (DFE). Regrettably, accompanying uranium’s monetary appeal is horrifying mining risks. Due to mass levels of dust and radon, miners are subject to high risks of lung cancer and respiratory disease for the duration of the uranium dig. In addition to the mines malevolence on its workers, the environment suffers as well. From contamination of underground aquifers to human errancy, the environment takes the brunt of uranium’s radioactive malady. Another environmental issue with mining uranium is tailings. Once uranium is mined, it must be tilled to separate it from the unwanted rocks. Tilling the uranium creates massive piles of radioactive rock, respectfully known as tailings. It isn't uncommon for mining companies to abandon these tailings once all the uranium has been extracted from the site, allowing them to contaminate the area. All the while, mining companies continue to take these risks for its profitability, just as the coal industry has in America since the 1740s (ABH).

Following the invention of the steam engine by James Watt (ABH), the industrial revolution began. During the early 1800s the revolution made its way to America and by the 1880s, coal was being used to generate electricity (ABH). Throughout the years, two separate methods of extracting coal have been developed. The first method utilizes underground tunneling techniques to dig deep below the surface. Lingering throughout these tunnels is 10% of America’s methane gas, which requires mining companies to install immaculate ventilation systems (Coal Basics). However, even with proper ventilation, coal mine dust continues to plague miners. The United States Department of Labor affirms “respirable coal mine dust can cause lung disease such as coal workers pneumoconiosis (CWP), emphysema, silicosis, and bronchitis-known collectively as black lung” (EBL), a malady also found in strip-mining. Strip-mining, although still hazardous, is much safer, cost less, and only contributes about 2% of the methane gas in America’s atmosphere (Coal Basics). The dangers of this mining method pose greater environmental risks, due to the majority of mining being located on the surface. Its impact has left landscapes destroyed and waterways polluted. In the 1990s, controversy over this mutilation of nature created strict regulations, requiring mining companies to reclaim the devastated terrain (Coal Basics). As more restrictions and regulations are placed on mining companies, environmental excavation tragedies will slowly diminish, but the havoc of burning coal will carry on.

Environmental devastation is unavoidable with entourages of greenhouse gasses continuing to be anathema to, not only the well-being of humanity, but the earth’s atmosphere. In an attempt to harbor electricity from a clean source of power, the nuclear powered electrical generator was engineered in 1957 (Uranium). Nuclear power plants generate electricity via boiling water. The steam from the water is then used to rotate a turbine which generates electricity. This method allowed electrical generation, without its deadly greenhouse gas byproducts. While society remained skeptical of nuclear power, it proceeded to rise in popularity until March 28, 1979. Reactor number two at Three Mile Island had undergone delays during its construction, leading to the falsification of operational data by the operators in an attempt to avoid the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Forman, Sherman, 2004). Ultimately, the meltdown at Three Mile Island was a result of lethargy and avarice. This tragic event, less than a year after the reactor’s initial startup, led to its total shutdown. In the next few days, following the catastrophe, pregnant women and children were asked to leave the area while the FDA ordered a “quarter-million bottles of potassium iodide solution” for the remaining citizens (Forman, Sherman, 2004). This panic, by the FDA, was a reaction to the possible threat of radioactive contamination, leaving society with a fear of the term “nuclear.” On the contrary, while a nuclear meltdown can potentially devastate society, proper regulation can prevent such a tragedy. Yet, the pollution produced by the burning of coal cannot be regulated.

In reference to the Annual Energy Review 2007, burned coal emitted over 2,100 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2006 (CDE). Yet, coal remains the leading fuel source for electrical generation. In an article referencing carbon dioxide poisoning, published in the British Medical Journal, a victim “was deeply comatose and having continuous convulsions” after being asphyxiated by high levels of carbon dioxide (Williams). Aside from medical maladies related to coal emissions, an array of pollutant gasses congests the air. Methane, just one of many gasses, is “twenty-one times more powerful at warming the atmosphere than carbon dioxide”, allowing it to play a major role in the hypothetical phenomenon of global warming (GHGP). While coal fueled generators may never lead to the evacuation of cities, this devastating worldly matter, if found to be fact, could slowly destroy every aspect of life.

From the novel fission of U-235 to the traditional burning of coal, electrical generation has become a vital requisite to society. All the while, this mandate causes the well being of humanity and the environment to suffer. Uranium and coal can be considered a bit of a catch-22. Whereas the revocation of coal may reduce environmental devastation, nuclear power could lead to a humanitarian cataclysm. Hindrances, such as these, drive the persistence of engineers to develop a new source of energy, one that offers society an environmental panacea that’s benevolent to humanity.

Bibliography

“A Brief History of Coal Use.” Fossil Energy. U.S. Department of Energy. Science and Technology (Citizen Gateway). Web. 27 October. 2011.

"Carbon dioxide emissions from energy consumption, by fuel, 2006." Energy: Supplies, Sustainability, and Costs. Sandra M. Alters. 2009 ed. Detroit: Gale, 2010. Information Plus Reference Series. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 24 Oct. 2011.

“Coal Basics.” Energy Kids. U.S. Energy Information Administration. Science and Technology (Citizen Gateway). Web. 24 October. 2011.

"Demand for Energy Fuels Rush for Uranium in Utah." The Online NewsHour 2010.Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 20 Oct. 2011.

“End Black Lung.” Mine Safety and Health Administration. United States Department of Labor. Science and Technology (Citizen Gateway). Web. 24 October. 2011.

Forman, Paul “Sherman, Roger.” Three Mile Island: The Inside Story. 2004. Science and Technology (Citizen Gateway). Web. 24 October. 2011.

“Green House Gas Properties.” Methane. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Science and Technology (Citizen Gateway). Web. 27. October. 2011.

"uranium (U)." Encyclopedia Britannica. Encyclopedia Britannica Online Academic Edition. Encyclopedia Britannica, 2011. Web. 24 Oct. 2011.

Williams, H.I. “Carbon Dioxide Poisoning.” British Medical Journal. 2.5103 (1958): 1013. Science and Technology (Citizen Gateway). Web. 30 October. 2011.