Nuclear Waste Should be Disposed
In one of his lectures “Nuclear Waste” Richard A. Muller, discussing the nuclear waste problem, scientists’ attempts to find the solution, and the public’s fear around it, gives the audience his personal evaluation. He makes a point that since the nuclear waste is here, we have to store it and storing at Yucca Mountain is not the worst option, because the dangers of storing it there is smaller than the dangers of not doing so. This lecture makes me recall the tragic event in my country when one of the nuclear reactors exploded at Chernobyl nuclear plant in 1986. The consequences of this accident were and still are terrible for people and the environment in Ukraine and in surrounding countries. Furthermore, recent consequences of earthquakes and tsunamis in Japan at Fukushima nuclear plant increase the importance of the scientific debate against nuclear power, and force people around the world to come out against the nuclear power. People using nuclear power cannot control the whole process of its generation, as well as they do not know what to do with nuclear waste. Since we have nuclear waste, we are facing the necessity of disposing it. Muller notes that storing nuclear waste will not seem such unacceptable if we evaluate the danger of waste storage in comparison with two other dangers: the danger of the uranium originally mined, and the danger of the natural uranium left in the soil. The point is that we cannot guarantee the absolute security, but even the nature cannot; and the possible waste leakage is not a kind of danger that cannot be minimized.
In order to support his claim and connect the arguments, Muller uses a variety of rhetorical strategies. Although his authority, logical arguments, facts and evidences effectively corroborate his viewpoint, my feelings on this topic are mixed. On the one hand, I agree that the existent problem should be solved, and the solution should be based on a scientific ground, not...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document