Introduction As time passes, humanity is increasingly being asked how to continously produce enough energy to supply our demands. Many of todays resources that are used, are non-renewable, and cause polution. Many resources such as fossil fuels are continously running out. Therefore, one of the questions that have arose fairly recently due to more sophisticated technology, is: Should nuclear power be developed as a solution to Australia?s future energy needs? Several arguments suggest the positives and the negatives for such a question: Positive: Fossil fuels are rapidly diminishing.
Health risks are fairly low compared to coal.
Nuclear is cheaper.
Negative: Nuclear has environmental risks.
Nuclear weapons can be developed.
Present sources of energy can be improved instead.
Positive: Fossil fuels are rapidly diminishing Most energy consumed in the world comes from fossil fuels. Although this type of fuel is seen by some people to be renewable, it unfortunately takes millions of years to regenerate.
Therefore it is more practicle to say that fossil fuels are a non-renewable source of energy, and that they are continously depleting. There is much unsurity about when our fossil fuels will become completely exauhsted if we keep using them.
Some say it will happen in the year 2040, others say in a century or two. Nevertheless, we do know that we are using them up, without sufficient time for it to re-generate.
Nuclear energy can be a saviour when this occurs, and can even prevent it from ever happening. Nuclear energy is a renewable source and can be a very good suppliment to our diminishing fossil fuels.
Health risks are fairly low compared to coal At the moment, coal proves to be a very fatal substance. Many many deaths have occured because of coal, both to workers, and the general public. Nuclear is much more...