The Chernobyl nuclear power plant disaster was the worst nuclear power plant accident in recorded history. The disaster occurred on April 26, 1986 in Pripyat, Ukraine. The isolation that occurred after the Cold War resulted in a lack in safety culture. This lack of safety culture led to employees lacking in training and improper management in regards to the power plant itself. People were unprepared to deal with a wrong doing on this scale.
Workers were preparing to start a test to determine how long turbines would spin and supply power to the main circulating pumps. The test was supposed to shed light on the loss of main electrical power supply. Workers had previously carried out similar tests; however, power from the turbine decreased significant, so new voltage regulator designs needed to be tested before use. The Chernobyl plant directed that the test needed to be postponed, which was a result of the lack of available power during the peak evening demand. However, operations not affecting power were still carried out. The workers disabled the emergency core cooling system intended to provide water to the core in case there was a loss of coolant. Once the test on reactor 4 started to begin, the operator went to shut down the reactor because of emergency.
By this point, the reactor was already in an extremely unstable condition. A strange control rod design then led to a dramatic power surge as they were inserted into the reactor. Hot fuel reacted with cooling water and formed fuel fragmentation along with steam production and a large increase in pressure. The design of the reactor led to damage to multiple fuel assemblies, which ultimately resulted in the destruction of the reactor. Over pressure within the reactor ruptured the fuel channels and jammed all the control rods. Steam generation filled the core, which was caused from water dumped into the core when the cooling system was shut off. The steam caused an explosion and released fission products into the atmosphere. Very shortly after, another explosion occurred and sent fragments from the fuel channels and hot graphite.
Two workers immediately died from the explosion. Emergencycrews responded to the accident and dropped boron, dolomite, sand, clay, and lead to extinguish the fire and limit the release of radioactive particles. Twenty-eight workers died within the first four months following the explosions, a result of severe radiation. The town of Pripyat was evacuated one day later. Approximately 100,000 square kilometers of land were significantly contaminated. The Soviet government evacuated about 115,000 people from the contaminated areas.
Shortly after the accident, 237 people suffered from acute radiation sickness, several hundred contracted thyroid cancer, and hundreds of thousands have contracted radiation poisoning. The disaster left radiation as a huge problem for many years following the explosion. The power plant was shut down, and it is now a popular tourist destination in Ukraine.
After the accident, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission emphasized the importance of several concepts. The NRC emphasized designing reactor systems properly on the drawing board and implementing them correctly during construction/maintenance, maintaining proper procedures and controls for normal operations and emergencies, having competent and motivated plant management and operating staff, and ensuring the availability of backup safety systems to deal with potential accidents. The emphasis on these aspects helps to ensure that disasters like this will not happen anywhere else. The estimated cost of direct loss following the disaster was fifteen billion.
The debate over the right to die has been an ongoing
debate for many many years. The right to
die is a moral principle that allows terminally ill patients to undergo
voluntary euthanasia to stop life-prolonging treatments, where continuing with
the disease would pro-long suffering. As
of now, only a few European countries (Belgium, The Netherlands, France,
Germany, and Switzerland), Colombia, and five U.S. states allow some form of
assisted suicide. The two most popular
forms of the right to die are assisted suicide and euthanasia. The two forms do not seem to be different;
however, the key difference is the doctor’s role. Assisted suicide is when the lethal drug is
given to the patient, and the patient himself must do the act. On the other hand, Euthanasia is when the
doctor does the act and euthanizes the patient using the lethal injection.
The right to die debate has been an ethical and moral
dilemma among societies for hundreds of years.
There have been many cases involving removal of life support throughout
the 1950s-1980s that started the modern concerns over the right to die. However, in 2006, the case of Gonzales v.
Oregon upheld the Oregon’s “right to die” law constitutional and was a
monumental case in the movement of legalizing the right to die through
euthanasia and assisted suicide. Oregon
enacted the Death with Dignity Act in 1994.
This state law was the first to authorize physicians to prescribe legal
doses of controlled substances to terminally ill patients. However, in 2001, Attorney General John
Ashcroft declared that the Death with Dignity Act violated the Controlled
Substance Act of 1970, and he made a comment that he would revoke physician’s
licenses if they practiced physician-assisted suicide. Oregon sued Ashcroft, and the court ruled
that Ashcroft’s accusations and directive was illegal. The Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 decision
that the CSA only prevented doctors from dealing illicit drugs, not to define
standards of medical practices. The
court also ruled that Ashcroft was not authorized to declare a practice
illegitimate. As of now, Washington,
Oregon, California, and Vermont have all enacted the Death with Dignity
Act. The Death with Dignity Act is legal
in Montana by court decision; however, it is not a law.
Supporters of the right to die say that tremendous
pain and suffering of patients can be saved, health care costs can be reduced,
reasonable laws can be made that protect the value of human life, and organs
can be saved. However, people who oppose
the right to die claim that it violates a doctor’s Hippocratic Oath (First, do
no harm), demeans the value of human-life, opens the gates to non-critical
patient suicides, and gives doctors too much power.
I believe that the right to die through either
assisted suicide or euthanasia should be legalized nationwide. People with terminal illnesses or patients
with dementia should be allowed to make the decision on whether or not they
want to end their life. It is morally
right to let these people die with dignity because their quality of life is so
low, that it is hurting them more being alive.
More states have started to consider the Death with Dignity Act. I also believe that the proper way to
nationally legalize the Act would be to include provisions that require
multiple doctors to approve, have families approve, and specify what illnesses
are protected under the act.
Wind turbines can be found across the country in a multitude
of states. Obtaining energy from wind
turbines is environmentally friendly and does not release gases that contribute
to global warming. The wind turbines use
wind to make electricity or mechanical energy.
The turbines turn in the air and power a generator that eventually
creates an electric current. Areas that
contain a large amount of wind turbines in a specific area are called wind
farms. While wind energy is a renewable
resource and produces no pollutants or greenhouse gases, there are still a few
environmental concerns. There is concern
regarding the sound produced by the rotors, and that birds fly into the rotors
and die. Wind power is a much larger
initial investment than fossil-fueled generators. The initial investment costs around one
million dollars per megawatt to install.
Around 80% of the initial investment is for the machinery necessary to
run the turbines. Once the turbines and
the energy source begins to work, electricity powered by wind is one of the
cheapest forms of energy to maintain.
There have been recent improvements in wind turbines that helps to
reduce the costs.
Distributed wind turbines produce electricity on the
distribution grid for businesses, homes, schools, etc. The major distribution and movement challenge
regarding wind energy is that wind cannot be stored. Wind does not blow exactly when electricity
is needed. Most of the good wind sites
are located in remote areas that are far from cities where the most electricity
is needed. Since these “wind farms” are
far away from areas of high population, it becomes difficult to transport the
electricity to the places in need. Wind
energy is a decentralized system. Wind
energy is decentralized because the energy is generated and stored by a variety
of small, grid-connected devices. The wind
energy is produced close to where it will be used.
The major obstacles to adopting wind energy are that wind
turbines are mostly located in remote locations, and turbines are mostly
installed on farming land. Cities are
the areas that need the most energy, and wind farms are located far away from
those cities. Wind turbines are also
installed on farming land, which raises concerns that the land should be used
for farming because it would be a greater profit and a better use of
space. The turbine installation on these
farmlands has to compete with alternative uses for the land. The federal government offers tax incentives and
grants/loans to curb demand for wind energy.
For example, the federal renewable energy Production Tax Credit allows
owners of renewable energy facilities to receive tax credits for each
kilowatt-hour of electricity generated by the facility over a ten year
period.
The Columbian white-tailed deer, an endangered species
that lives in the United States, has slowly been making a recovery since 1967
when it’s numbers were at 467. The
species joined the endangered species list in the first group of animals that
are protected under the Endangered Species Act.
It joined this group in 1967 along with the Bald Eagle and the
California condor. The Columbian
white-tailed deer live around the Columbia River area and have been making
great progress. As of 2015, there are
now nearly 1,000 deer in this area. The
recovery of this species has been so great that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service proposed that the group of deer move from the endangered list to the
threatened list.
Biologists and government workers added the Columbian
white-tailed deer to the endangered species list because of the great reduction
of deer. This reduction was a result of
habitat loss and modification by human activities. Modification of the habitats by human
activities was led by issues such as farming, logging, and commercial/residential
development. Habitat loss was due to
natural causes such as floods that destroyed the deer habitats. Since the habitat loss was so rapid and
extreme, the deer population did not have a place to live and slowly started to
die off.
The greatest political consideration of the problem is
being aware of the deer’s struggles and successes.The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service takes care
of the endangered species and eventually led the species to be moved to the
endangered list.In terms of social
consideration, communities and social groups are helping to reboot the deer
population.Communities throughout the Pacific
Northwest are trying to do all they can to rebuild the population through
refuges and controlling problems with farmers.“The more animals in more locations, the better off overall,” stated
Jackie Ferrier, a project leader for the Willapa National Wildlife Refuge
Complex.
The most beneficial solution to save the species is
the creation of Columbian white-tailed deer refuges. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service relocates
deer into the refuges to prohibit them from having too much experience with the
outside environment. The agency has also
relocated elk, the animal that competes with the white-tailed deer for
food. Wildlife officials have even gone
to the extreme measures of killing off coyotes that prey on deer, specifically
to protect the deer. The workers at the
refuges put most of their time into rebuilding habitats and doing everything in
their power to remove the species from the Endangered Species list. Ferrier mentioned, “We do pasture work and
riparian plantings because they like both grass and woody species. We do that and invasive species control.” Another large solution to the problem has
been the completion of a new dike by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. This new dike drastically reduces the risk of
the Columbia River flooding the deer refuge.
The main possible side-effect of the return of the
deer population is the new competition.
The other species in the area have been used to living without the Columbian
white-tailed deer. If the species is
eventually released back into the wild, the competition for habitat and food
will be greater and more difficult than it was before.
When asked about pesticides, almost everyone is familiar
with DDT. DDT stands for dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane
and was the first modern synthetic insecticide.
DDT was first discovered in the 19th century, however it was
not until the 1940s that people started to realize it was extremely effectively
in killing off insects. After WWII, people
found that this product was so efficient in killing insects that it quickly
spread throughout the United States. Not
only was DDT attractive to citizens of the United States, but it was also
attractive to countries struggling with diseases from insects such as Malaria,
Yellow Fever, and West Nile Virus. DDT
seemed like the magical product that could kill off all harmful insects that
were destroying farmer’s crops etc. This
product spread like wildfire to anyone who wanted it, however it was not all
good. While DDT was killing insects and
pests, it was spreading through the air and poisoning the ground. In 1963, Charles Wurster, a chemist at
Dartmouth College, conducted a study on the effects of DDT around the
environment. After conducting his study,
he found that more than 150 birds had suffered from convulsions before dying,
after being exposed to DDT. Once people
started to notice the environmental changes after excessive DDT use, they
started to refrain from using DDT.
Rachel Carson, a marine biologist and conservationist, wrote a
ground-breaking book called Silent Spring
in 1962. Carson was aware of the terrible effects
of pesticides such as DDT and wrote the book to explain the entire story and
enlighten people with what was really going on.
Her book became so popular that it prompted the development of the
Environmental Protection Agency. In
1972, the EPA issued a cancellation for DDT and a ban of its use because of the
environmental effects. Currently, the
EPA deals with international negotiations to control DDT use among
countries.
While DDT is banned in the United States, many countries
that have problems with malaria still use the product. The major countries that still use DDT are
India, China, South America, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Malaysia. These countries remain using DDT because the
discovered benefits outweigh the negatives for these societies. Malaria and Yellow Fever are huge problems
for the countries mentioned above.
Even
though DDT is still used in these countries, regulations are still
present. For example, in several African
countries, DDT use is only allowed inside to rid of insects living in houses or
buildings. The World Health Organization
(WHO) major anti-malaria campaign in 2008 relied heavily on pushing for DDT
usage indoors. Even though DDT is
allowed in several countries, many people living in those countries still
protest against the use. As a result of
these protests, successful malaria control programs have controlled DDT use to
ensure that DDT use is healthy and safe for people to use in the present
conditions.
Abortion has been a heated controversial topic among American politics and personal belief for many many years. Pro-life advocates and pro-choice supporters have been battling it out and no clear median seems to be coming into view. However, this summer an anti-abortion group released up to eight videos of Planned Parenthood representatives meeting to discuss selling fetal organs including hearts and brains to make money from them. The release of these videos fueled the protests of thousands of pro-life supporters while also sparking a concern in people who originally felt indifferent towards the issue of abortion.
Pro-life protests have increased in numbers dramatically following the release of the Planned Parenthood videos. These protests have been occurring in major towns and cities such as Denver, a D.C. suburb, St. Paul, and many more. The pro-life protests can range in size to a few hundred to thousands of people. The supporters who attend these events view the Planned Parenthood actions illegal and cruel. Even though they once already supported pro-life, after the videos these supporters decided to attack Planned Parenthood and do everything in their power to stop the funding for the institution. The main argument behind the protests is that any time someone decides to abort a baby, it is considered murder no matter the circumstances. They also see the selling of fetal organs as illegal. "Anytime you kill a child it's evil. It's called murder, We know that life begins at conception" stated Greg Watkins, the mayor of Shasta Lake. Many people who attended the pro-life protests were first time attendees. At one rally, the participants were asked to raise their hand if they were a first timer and an alarming number of people raised their hand. Even Mike Huckabee added onto the comments mentioning that there are two victims, one being the mother who will suffer from guilt years later and then the fetus being aborted.
On the other side of the argument, Planned Parenthood stepped forward at these anti-abortion protests and started to hand out pink t-shirts with the message "I stand with Planned Parenthood" printed across them. Obviously the leading argument in support of abortion is the fact that it is a woman's choice to decide whether or not she wants to carry a child. This argument has been the leading argument for years. While the anti-abortion protests claim their main goal is to shut down Planned Parenthood institutions, the pro abortion groups claim that the only motivation of the protests is to make abortion illegal entirely. Behind the pro-choice arguments stands the argument that Planned Parenthood does so much more for women than most people think. Planned Parenthood provides services such as cancer screening, family planning and free birth control for the ones who cannot afford it. A pro-choice supporter Julieta Slater commented "Many women come here not for abortions. Abortion is the minimum of services they are giving here. Planned Parenthood support is not about being a mother, it is a health care necessity."
In my opinion, I side with the pro-choice supporters. I believe that it is up to a woman to decide whether or not she wants the child that she will be carrying. While most people call it murder, I just think that a fetus that is under developed and has not even formed a conscious yet is not considered murder. In terms of Planned Parenthood, I completely support funding for the institution and I think without funding, it would hurt more than it would help. Planned Parenthood is an essential part of some women's lives and only 2% of women than go into Planned Parenthood get an abortion. I am also indifferent in regards to the selling of the organs. I am not necessarily for or against the issue of the videos.
Two workers immediately died from the explosion. Emergency crews responded to the accident and dropped boron, dolomite, sand, clay, and lead to extinguish the fire and limit the release of radioactive particles. Twenty-eight workers died within the first four months following the explosions, a result of severe radiation. The town of Pripyat was evacuated one day later. Approximately 100,000 square kilometers of land were significantly contaminated. The Soviet government evacuated about 115,000 people from the contaminated areas. 
