Sample Policy TSOs

Will Electric Vehicles Really Reduce Pollution?

Does question mark hint the answer?

Introduction

1. Internal combustion engine vehicles are responsible for the vast majority of pollutants that plague urban areas today.
2. These emissions are directly responsible for many of the air quality problems faced in major urban areas.

Pollution from power plants

3. Electric vehicles produce little or no pollution directly; most of the pollution associated with their use is created at the power plant that provides their electricity. [Table]
4. While studies of the pollution-reducing ability of electric vehicles in California are quite favorable, they cannot be applied to the rest of the world as a whole.
5. [ending paragraph] We can expect similar results for the United States, namely, that while electric vehicles produce much less carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons, they use similar levels of nitrogen oxides and carbon dioxide, and increased levels of sulfur oxides.

Enhanced control of pollution at the source

6. Not all pollutants related to electric vehicles arise from the generation of electricity.
7. While electric vehicles may not always hold an outright advantage in terms of pollution reduction, they allow for more control over the pollution that is generated.
8. The use of electric vehicles would allow even further decreases in auto emissions over time because only about 10,500 power plants will have to be monitored, maintained, and upgraded as opposed to the over 100 million private automobiles.
9. Because so many tradeoffs in local versus global pollution are involved, it is impossible to say with certainty that electric vehicles provide the best short term solution to transportation related pollution.
   Revised The numerous tradeoffs between local and global pollution vitiate any conclusion as to the effectiveness of electric vehicles on transportation pollution

Conclusion

Abstract. The amount of pollution created by electric vehicles depends mostly on the source of the electricity used to charge them. This makes it impossible to determine if electric vehicles pollute less than internal combustion engine vehicles without considering where they are to be deployed and by what sources of electricity they are to be powered. An electric vehicle that is charged with energy from a clean source, like hydroelectric power, will produce very little pollution, while one charged with energy from an unclean source, like coal or oil, may produce more pollution than an internal combustion engine vehicle. The sources of energy for most regions fall somewhere between these two extremes. The use of electric vehicles will allow new possibilities in pollution control and management that may outweigh some of their potential failings. While not ready to be used everywhere, electric vehicles have the potential to pollute much less than internal combustion engine vehicles.

The Future of Nuclear Power Policy

Not a great title; want to hint at or give THM

Intro and Background

1. By utilizing developed, but unimplemented technology, and by educating the general public about the realities of nuclear power, the United States can lead the way to cleaner power while, at the same time, constructively use much of what is now deemed nuclear waste.
2. Thus the fuel in a nuclear reactor does not contain enough fissionable uranium to explode.
3. In the worst case disaster for a nuclear reactor, known as a meltdown, the core overheats and sinks into the ground in a meltdown.
4. The potential dangers of a meltdown, while unpleasant, are not as severe as those of a nuclear explosion.
5. A realistic and productive review of nuclear power must, however, balance the potential dangers against the likelihood of occurrence.
6. In contrast to these unlikely dangers, nuclear power releases fewer pollutants and so has less impact on general health and the environment. [with Table]

Three Mile Island and Chernobyl

7. Not TS.Now I wish to consider in some detail the 1979 radiation release at Three Mile Island. [with Figure]
8. Despite the impression that the people of Middletown, PA were irrevocably damaged by the radiation released at Three Mile Island, the exposure was small compared to the exposure from natural radiation.
9. The 1986 explosion and fire at Chernobyl in the then-Soviet Union was much worse than the Three Mile Island accident, but could not occur in a United States reactor.
10. While the core did not explode, as it cannot, the heat produced was sufficient to ignite surrounding materials.
11. It is important to recognize, however, the gross incompetence required for this disaster to occur.
12. Even more importantly, reactors in the United States do not have the design flaws inherent in the Chernobyl design.
13. Plants, including Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, had sensible regulations to prevent such disasters; the problem was that the procedures were broken.

Fuel Recyling

14. Despite these choices, it is clear that re-processing of spent fuel significantly reduces the nuclear waste problem, and does not contribute to, and may even work against, nuclear proliferation.
15. Much of the dangerous, long-lived nuclear waste that the country is now scrambling to store are not actually wastes, but fuels that we are choosing not to utilize.
16. The United States does not recycle fuel because of misconceived concerns about contributing to nuclear proliferation.
17. Not TS. There are also concerns about transporting nuclear fuel rods for reprocessing.
18. While not contributing to nuclear proliferation, reactors designed to burn reprocessed fuel could be used to burn the surplus of weapons grade plutonium.

Conclusion

Abstract. Sound decisions on nuclear policy require an understanding of the physical principles governing their operation, and realistic evaluations of the risks they pose. Contrary to popular belief, nuclear power reactors cannot harbor a nuclear explosion. Since both reasonable and unreasonable fears exist about the safety of reactors and of the potential dangers caused by accidents, it is useful to consider the two most serious nuclear power accidents to date, Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. Modern plant designs make such accidents unlikely to occur again. The Chernobyl plant actually had ties to nuclear weapon production, which is a fundamental concern with nuclear power, as is the disposal of nuclear wastes. Both of these issues will be discussed in the context of fuel recycling. From this it will be clear that nuclear power plants both are safe enough for commercial use and should stay in operation as a means of reducing bomb grade materials.