Energia Nuclear
Páginas: 2 (329 palabras)
Publicado: 25 de febrero de 2013
Debating:“Nuclear power should replace oil”
Hello my name is ……………. and I don’t agree with the fact that Nuclear power should replace oil.
To begin with, nuclear power is very dangerousand risky. That is to say that this source of energy holds a huge danger behind its “safe” walls. Many nuclear tragedies were held since countries started to use it, causing a large amount ofvictims. Furthermore, there is no need of an accident to hold a risk. Radiation is a very important issue that makes sick a lot of people causing diseases that lead to death in many cases.In addition, nuclear energy may harm not only people but also the environment. Huge catastrophes cause human and non-human victims. Soil pollution, dead forests, corps and cattle is an exampleof it. Nuclear accidents may devastate a whole region and end with make it useless (even dangerous) for people to live in. Chernobyl catastrophe illustrates this in a very clear way. A lot ofpeople were killed and even more were affected by radiation.
Moreover, this source of energy brings up many conflicts. The development of this technology is related to war equipment andperformance and this might be seen as a threat. USA’s attacks against Japan in World War II give us an idea of why countries fear nuclear growth.
In addition, this high tech is limited to a smallnumber of countries. It is very expensive and difficult to produce although radioactive materials such as uranium and plutonium are relatively cheap.
Last but not least, there are otherforms of energy rather than oil or nuclear power. Sources of energy such as hydroelectric energy are safer, cheaper and easier to develop.
In conclusion nuclear power isn’t a wise choice asfar as replacing oil is concerned. If countries wish to stop using oil I think they should take into account other sources of energy rather than nuclear due to its costs, risks and conflicts.
Hello my name is ……………. and I don’t agree with the fact that Nuclear power should replace oil.
To begin with, nuclear power is very dangerousand risky. That is to say that this source of energy holds a huge danger behind its “safe” walls. Many nuclear tragedies were held since countries started to use it, causing a large amount ofvictims. Furthermore, there is no need of an accident to hold a risk. Radiation is a very important issue that makes sick a lot of people causing diseases that lead to death in many cases.In addition, nuclear energy may harm not only people but also the environment. Huge catastrophes cause human and non-human victims. Soil pollution, dead forests, corps and cattle is an exampleof it. Nuclear accidents may devastate a whole region and end with make it useless (even dangerous) for people to live in. Chernobyl catastrophe illustrates this in a very clear way. A lot ofpeople were killed and even more were affected by radiation.
Moreover, this source of energy brings up many conflicts. The development of this technology is related to war equipment andperformance and this might be seen as a threat. USA’s attacks against Japan in World War II give us an idea of why countries fear nuclear growth.
In addition, this high tech is limited to a smallnumber of countries. It is very expensive and difficult to produce although radioactive materials such as uranium and plutonium are relatively cheap.
Last but not least, there are otherforms of energy rather than oil or nuclear power. Sources of energy such as hydroelectric energy are safer, cheaper and easier to develop.
In conclusion nuclear power isn’t a wise choice asfar as replacing oil is concerned. If countries wish to stop using oil I think they should take into account other sources of energy rather than nuclear due to its costs, risks and conflicts.
Leer documento completo
Regístrate para leer el documento completo.