people.highline.edu  · web view“nuclear energy is the only proven technology that can provide...

Chris Shin

English 205

February 16, 2011

Rhetorical Analysis: Fiasco of the nuclear power

[Clean Air Energy]

[11 Nuclear Disaster] [United States]

[Great Britain] [Japan Nuclear Explosion]

“Nuclear energy is the only proven technology that can provide emission-free, affordable

base load electricity.” (NEL).

The Appeal to Tradition is used in this quotation because the scientific technology proven

from the past is not always right. The nuclear power could be one of great invention in this

century. People need nuclear energy since the natural resource is becoming scarcity

(ThinkQuest). The nuclear can produce huge energy with less fuel and it provides 13.5 percent of

the world’s electricity (NEL). On the other hand, the nuclear power could be the worst

technology when it comes to disasters. However, the above quotation persuades to believe that

nuclear power is the only primary of essential instrument for electricity without considering

unpredictable accident. It is truth the nuclear power is more beneficial than other energy

resources because nuclear power is carbon free to produce electricity than coal and oil (Moniz,

2011). Even so, the history has tragedy nuclear power. There are many example of world

nuclear accidents such as Chernobyl, Kyshtym, Wind scale Fire, Three Mile Island, Fukushima

and Hiroshima Nagasaki atom bomb (Discovery news). Moreover, victims of those nuclear

accidents are still suffering from the horrible past.

In the Japan, on March 2011 the worst earthquake and Tsunami lead to nuclear meltdown

and four nuclear reactors had exploded in the Fukushima. Moreover, it followed by high levels

of radiation and 140,000 people were resident of Fukushima and they were terrified from being

exposed radiation (Ishii, 2011).There are 435 Nuclear powers are operating in the world (NEL),

however it is unsure that we can prove or predict such a disaster will happen like Japan in the

future.

“Japan should have had sealed backup diesel generators or updated some of their designs.

However, nuclear still compares very, very well to the other energy sources.” (Deaths, 2011).

The Nuclear reactors were 40 years old designs in the Fukushima which new generation

of reactors are consider to safety and efficacy (Marks, 2011). Although, when the earthquake hit

the nuclear reactors the system was shut down automatically because that is how those reactors

designed to Support for emergency situation (Pool, 2011). Which nuclear reactors could handle

the damage by earthquake includes cooling systems. However, the 14-meter of tsunami occurred

and it was higher than Japanese government predicted which the tsunami was huge damaged for

the cooling system (Moniz, 2011). Moreover, the cooling system is one of essential part to

make stable temperature to keep operating of nuclear reactors. Although Japan could prevent

nuclear explosion from the earthquake, they could not against the next flowing of the 14-meter

high tsunami (Moniz, 2011).

Japan is still struggling with unpredictable earthquake and tsunami also Japan has many

experienced about the number of worst earthquakes and Tsunamis back in the history. Also,

another nuclear power station closed by earthquake in the part of Japan four years ago (Moniz,

2011). Therefore, even Japan prepare the backup plan for the earthquake and Tsunami,

Japanese government would not able to guarantee such as nuclear accident with many of nuclear

reactors because of it caused by natural disaster. In addition, nuclear is very well to other energy

sources however it is illogical to compare with it. Every energy production has advantage and

disadvantage to produce energy. The above quotation indicates slippery slope which we cannot

compare that nuclear power is better than others. Since, the nuclear power also cannot guarantee

100 percent safety as well as other energy resources.

“Chernobyl is unique. That kind of accident will not happen in any other nuclear power

plants because all the reactors currently in operation around the world are placed inside a

containment building (Chernobyl was not)” (Miller,2004).

Although the nuclear power is beneficial for human life, the above quotation showed the

risk-less point of view about nuclear planet. According to Doctor Donald who is cardiac surgeon

and Professor of Surgery at the University of Washington, he predicted in 2004 that the nuclear

accident would not be happen again after Chernobyl’s deadly nuclear accident (Advantages of

Nuclear). Therefore, Doctor Donald’s quotation “That kind of accident will not happen” is

wrong and it does not prove that the safest and cleanest way is nuclear power because there is

still nuclear accident happened in the world. Also, Doctor Donald’s statement indicate Hasty

Generalization because he must know simply assume that nuclear disaster will not happen due to

uniqueness of Chernobyl disaster. The Chernobyl nuclear station was the worst nuclear disaster

in the history. In fact, the Chernobyl nuclear accident the damage was uncountable in the format

of Soviet Union (Cockburn, 2011). Thus, the unique Chernobyl is same as the ordinary nuclear

disaster.

Reference

[11 Nuclear Disaster]. CNBS. Retrieved from http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/CNBC/Sections/News_And_Analysis/_News/_SLIDESHOWS/NuclearDisasters/CNBC_11_nuclear_meltdowns_disasters_cover.jpg

[Clean Air Energy]. NEI. Retrieved from http://www.nei.org/static/images/main.jpg

Cockburn, A. (2011). From chernobyl to fukushima: what will it take?. The Nation, 292, 10. Retrieved from http://moe.highline.edu:2190/docview/862632262/134F4E6CE591706E168/1?accountid=1327

Deaths per TWH by energy source. (2011). Retrieved from http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html

Discovery news. (n.d.). Retrieved February 16, 2012, from http://news.discovery.com/tech/top-five-nuclear-disasters.html

Fallacy: Appeal to Tradition. (1991-2011). Retrieved from http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-tradition.html

[Great Britain]. Discovery News. Retrieved from http://news.discovery.com/tech/2010/04/13/windscale-fire-825x825.jpg

Ishii, M. (2011). Fukushima nuclear power plant accidents caused by gigantic earthquake and tsunami-healthcare support for radiation exposure. World Medical Journal, 57, 141-144. Retrieved from http://moe.highline.edu:2065/ehost/detail?vid=6&hid=106&sid=1fb2d388-4ed7-41e4-bf7e-1bde5c5a83aa%40sessionmgr114&bdata=JkF1dGhUeXBlPWlwJnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=a9h&AN=66962922

[Japan Nuclear Explosion]. LahoriMera. Retrieved from http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/183701_10150113765357891_266706972890_6552377_2726426_n.jpg

Marks, P. (2011). How newer reactors would have survived fukushima. The New Scientist, 209, 11. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0262407911606556

Miller, D. (2004). Advantages of nuclear power. Retrieved from http://www.lewrockwell.com/miller/miller13.html (Miller,2004)

Moniz, E. (2011). Why we still need nuclear power: making clean energy safe and affordable. Foreign Affairs, 90, 83-94. Retrieved from http://moe.highline.edu:2190/docview/900492751/134F4A479CA270C9255/1?accountid=1327

NEL. (n.d.). Retrieved February 16, 2012, from http://www.nei.org/resourcesandstats/nuclear_statistics/worldstatistics/

Pool, R. (2011). Fukushima: the facts. Engineering & Technology, 6, 32-36. Retrieved from http://moe.highline.edu:2065/ehost/detail?vid=8&hid=106&sid=1fb2d388-4ed7-41e4-bf7e-1bde5c5a83aa%40sessionmgr114&bdata=JkF1dGhUeXBlPWlwJnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=a9h&AN=60997095

ThinkQuest. (n.d.). Retrieved February 14, 2012, from http://library.thinkquest.org/3471/nuclear_energy_body.html

[United States]. Discovery News. Retrieved from http://news.discovery.com/tech/2010/04/13/three-mile-island-825x625.jpg