Nuclear Energy

  •  
  • 178
  • 0
  • 1
  • English 
Jan 16, 2017 03:39
The article states that nuclear energy is next solution for produce energy, because, fossils damaged our environment and provides three reason of supports. However, the professor explains that it is not only solution and has many problems. He refutes each of the author's reasons.

First, the reading states that nuclear energy is very cheap in comparison of fossils, because it is abundant in Earth. The professor refutes this point by stating that it is not cheap at all. Building of power plants needs many experts than fossils and a lot of money for building. Also, there are many register for emergency for it that increases the cost.

Secondly, the article claims that it is a safe energy. The radiation form power plants controlled well and there is many equipment for monitoring these radiations. However, the professor contends that accident happen always. Although, human can likely prevent it, but maybe occur. He states that a power plant in Pennsylvania has small radiation that not sensed. After some years it make a lot of bad effect to environment that USA spend some billion dollars to fix it.

Third, the reading avers that radiation in nuclear plants controlled well. Human reuse fuel that decreased their harmful effect. The lecturer opposes this point by saying that it is not easy to control them. Fuel reprocessing need high level technology. Also, he claims that during this process, Plutonium produced this has military application. Government use it to build weapon. In addition, wasted material burn in ground for 100 years. This has harmful for environment and society committee have plan to prevent it.