The principal aim of the lab test is to investigate energy sources regarding the quantity as well as environmental and health impact. By analyzing the coal and nuclear power sources would help to balance between the benefits as well as environmental hazards for each type of energy source. In general, the entire lab test was purposed to examine the effects of the growing demand for coal and nuclear energy.

You're lucky! Use promo "samples20"
and get a custom paper on
"Analysis Of Energy Sources"
with 20% discount!
Order Now

The search for new energy sources has articulated the need the need for evaluating the feasibility, health and environmental impact of energy sources. One of the alternative energy sources is coal and nuclear power (Vujić et al., 2013). The expansion of oil has moved coal to the power station as well as the use of uranium for nuclear fuel. However, the inputs are easily quantified, for instance, the energy required to produce a ton of coal or uranium. The health and environmental consequences of energy production are also considered, the measuring carbon (iv) oxide emissions, solid waste, sulfur dioxide, among other emissions (Everett et al., 2013).

The nuclear energy source is more environmentally friendly and safer than coal.

During the lab test, the quantitative method was used to estimate the quantity of uranium needed as well as the emissions from the energy sources. On the other hand, calcium hydroxide (limewater was used to test the presence of carbon dioxide and separate it from sulfur dioxide (Karr, 2013). The solid waste products were also measured, and statistics regarding the occurrence of accidents was taken. The data was later interpreted and analyzed using the qualitative method.

The results obtained by the end of the experiment were in line with the hypothesis set earlier before the lab test. The results show that coal requires a larger amount of fuel when generating energy than in nuclear power. Coal Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4 need 0.625, 1.25, 1.875 and 2.5 million tons of fuel respectively. On the other hand, Nuclear Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4 need 18,750, 37,500, 56,250 and 75,000 tons of fuel during energy production. It was found that nuclear source does not emit Sulfur dioxide to the environment, hence making it more environment-friendly than coal. There were also minimal cases of accidents when using nuclear as a source of energy. To sum up, the experiment proved that nuclear is the better source of energy than coal.

  • Everett, R., Boyle, G., Peake, S., & Ramage, J. (2012). Energy systems and sustainability: power for a sustainable future. Oxford: Oxford Univerity Press.
  • Karr, C. (Ed.). (2013). Analytical methods for coal and coal products (Vol. 2). Cambridge: Academic Press.
  • Vujić, J., Antić, D. P., & Vukmirović, Z. (2012). Environmental impact and cost analysis of coal versus nuclear power: the US case. Energy, 45(1), 31-42.