Impacts of Nuclear Fission
The author’s argument is sound and takes a stand against nuclear fission technologies- nuclear fission technology can only be a suitable option if it is better than the existing sources of energy implying that if nuclear energy harms human health and natural surroundings, then it is not a viable option. Taking a clear stand in an argument points to a well-researched background against which the author makes his argument. Secondly, the author's argument is sound because it does not only take a stand against nuclear fission technology, it draws out a recommendation- humans should look for better energy alternatives if they cannot mitigate the negative impacts of nuclear power. The author goes on to state that one of the many ways of regulating the negative impact of nuclear power is through the installation of mini-nuclear power stations. Mini-nuclear power stations minimize risks commonly associated with nuclear power (Kortelainen et al., 2012). In other words, the argument states a stand, takes a direction, and describes recommendations. Lastly, the argument gives people a role to play and suggests the formation of the agreement to regulate to use of nuclear power. On the other hand, one somewhat incoherent thing is the inability to specify the impact of nuclear power on human health and the environment and then proceed to argue from that point of view. This makes the argument takes a different direction in terms of planning, point of action, and advantages of nuclear power to the future (Apergis et al., 2010). Thus, the author could have made the argument coherent if he could only specify where the problem is and then formulate ways of interpreting and finding an evidence-based solution. Also specifying the implementation of strategies is important while trying to solve a problem.
References
Apergis, N., Payne, J. E., Menyah, K., & Wolde-Rufael, Y. (2010). On the causal dynamics between emissions, nuclear energy, renewable energy, and economic growth. Ecological Economics, 69(11), 2255-2260.
Kortelainen, M., McDonnell, J., Nazarewicz, W., Reinhard, P. G., Sarich, J., Schunck, N., ... & Wild, S. M. (2012). Nuclear energy density optimization: Large deformations. Physical Review C, 85(2), 024304.
