How JustAnswer Works:

  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.

Ask judybailey61 Your Own Question

judybailey61
judybailey61, Bachelor's Degree
Category: Long Paper (3+ pages)
Satisfied Customers: 620
Experience:  Writing expert on justanswer.com for five years. College degree in mathematics. Long papers are my strong points!
46206387
Type Your Long Paper (3+ pages) Question Here...
judybailey61 is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

TO In this lab, you will see the time progression of impacts

Customer Question

TO ***** *****
In this lab, you will see the time progression of impacts associated with either coal-fired or nuclear power plants for electricity generation to help you write up a scientific paper that centers on the following:
Given that the current 2 primary sources of electricity generation are coal and nuclear power plants, which of these sources is better for human sustainability?
Analyze Energy Sources Lab
Everything people do in their daily lives involves the consumption of resources—particularly energy. With respect to energy, electricity is one of the most important resources consumed and also one of the highest in demand. Traditionally, fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas, and oil have dominated the U.S. energy mix; however, as it is well-known, carbon-emitting energy sources are very detrimental to the environment and are contributing to global warming. Fortunately, alternative energy resources such as solar, wind, hydro, and geothermal power are becoming more efficient and prevalent in today’s energy economy.
DUE 8-4-15
Submitted: 1 year ago.
Category: Long Paper (3+ pages)
Expert:  judybailey61 replied 1 year ago.
Hello and thanks for requesting me!

There must be more information for me on this one. Where is the lab?
Customer: replied 1 year ago.

Nebel, B.J., & Wright, R. T. (2008). Environmental science: Toward a sustainable future. (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.





The Energy Debate: Coal vs. Nuclear





Rutgers researcher finds factors other than global warming and potential for plant accidents figure into Americans' preferences









Three Mile Island Smokestacks

Three Mile Island




As America struggles down the road toward a coherent energy policy that focuses on a higher degree of self-reliance, policymakers face numerous issues and realities. These include: the finite supply and environmental impact of fossil fuels, the feasibility and costs to implement a widespread switch to renewable energy sources, and the variables that lead to consumers’ preferences for particular types of power generation.

They also need to find and employ tools to effectively communicate such a policy to a range of constituencies.

When it comes to traditional energy sources, coal, with its attendant air pollution and link to global warming, and nuclear power, with the potential for radiation-spewing accidents, such as befell Japan’s Fukushima’s Nuclear Power Plant, remain two of the most controversial.

Professor ***** *****berg, who studies environmental health at Rutgers’ Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, and ***** ***** Truelove, a postdoctoral fellow at the Vanderbilt Institute for Energy and Environmenthave researched consumers’ attitudes toward these two energy sources. Both are members of the Consortium for Risk, Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP). Their recent article in the journal Risk Analysis examines Americans’ risk beliefs and preferences for coal and nuclear energy, and finds factors other than global warming and the potential for nuclear power plant accidents figure into their choices.


Coal mine equipment

Energy production from coal has been linked to air pollution and global warming.




The U.S. Department of Energy funded the 2009 landline telephone survey of 3,200 U.S. residents – 800 selected randomly and 2,400 who lived within six, 100-mile-radius regions containing many nuclear and coal-fueled electricity generating and waste management facilities. The study was to learn the association, if any, between some common risk beliefs about coal and nuclear energy and consumer preferences; if global warning and serious nuclear power plant accidents were the strongest risk beliefs associated with preferences; and the characteristics of “acknowledged risk-takers” who were aware of the sources’ shortcomings yet wanted to increase reliance on them. The response rate to the survey was 23.4 percent.

The research followed an earlier survey by Greenberg that measured public preferences for various energy choices and their associations with respondent demographics and also trust, among other correlates. Due to widespread media coverage (and dramatized accounts) of global warming and the accidents at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, it was expected these two factors would be the “signature risk beliefs” about coal and nuclear power, respectively.

In the second study, the researchers investigated five sets of characteristics for respondents: age; the role of cultural, social and political identity; the effects of values about the environment and trust; respondent location; and risk beliefs about coal and nuclear energy.

Results from the total sample showed that about 25 percent of participants wanted to increase reliance on coal and 66 percent preferred to decrease dependence on it. The analogous proportions were 48 percent and 46 percent, respectively, for nuclear. Belief that coal use causes global warming, as expected, was related to preferences for coal, but, for example, ecological degradation was a slightly stronger correlate of coal-related preferences than global warming. With regard to preference for use of nuclear energy, there was a strong correlation with the possibility of a nuclear plant accident, but other risk beliefs, such as about nuclear waste management, nuclear material transport and uranium mining had just as strong or stronger relationships with preference for increased reliance on nuclear energy.

About 30 percent of respondents favored increased reliance on nuclear energy, despite admitting the possibility of a serious accident. About 10 percent favored greater reliance on coal, while acknowledging the fossil fuel’s role in global warming. The strongest correlates of the two groups were socioeconomic status and race/ethnicity. The acknowledged nuclear risk-taker group was affluent, educated white males, and the coal group was relatively poor, less educated African-American and Latino females. The three consistent factors across both groups were older age, trust in those who manage energy facilities and the belief that energy facilities help the local economy.

The authors conclude their findings have a role to play in the formulation of a national energy policy because they show “one or two simple messages that attempt to persuade the public to change its preferences for or against specific energy sources are unlikely to succeed, especially if the public has a negative image of the source.” More important, regardless of the existence of subpopulations with specific views about energy sources, “The United States needs a clear and comprehensive energy strategy that addresses the energy life cycle, beginning with securing the energy and transporting it, then to producing and transmitting the energy, and managing the wastes.”



Media Contact: Steve Manas
***-***-****, ext. 612
E-mail: *****@******.***






Expert:  judybailey61 replied 1 year ago.
Oh, my.

I'll have to read it to see if the lab is hidden somewhere in there.
Expert:  judybailey61 replied 1 year ago.

Still working on this. Something seems to be missing ... something which has a slider that changes time over a year for each of the fuels.

There are two ... one for coal and one for nuclear fuel.

Customer: replied 1 year ago.

I think that we can skip this one and just move on.

Thanks

Sue

Expert:  judybailey61 replied 1 year ago.

Okay ... be sure that I have all the info on the next one. Judy

Related Long Paper (3+ pages) Questions