Nuclear Power

Bayh, E., & Gregg, J. (2014, November 17). Before we close more nuclear power plants,

we need a national conversation. Retrieved November 23, 2014, from

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/11/17/before-close-more-nuclear-power-plants-need-national-conversation/

 

In this article published by Fox news, the two reporters talk about the positives of using nuclear energy in our towns. They discuss how the closure of the plants will affect jobs, increase carbon emissions and will increase electricity rate. They present some startling evidence in which they state that, existing nuclear plants produce 20% of the US electricity, they provide 100,000 jobs, and pay billions in local, state, and federal taxes. It has been reported that last year the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant produced 26% of the new england area energy during the cold weather. They also pointed out that after the San onofre and the kewaunee nuclear plants closed there were lots of carbon emission problems because they had to go back to burning other less efficient power sources. Therefore they suggested that we should not be closing the plants but keeping them open so that we can reduce emissions and produce cleaner energy.

I agree with this article because we can see how nuclear power plants are helping local, state,and federal governments while developing thousands of jobs and powering homes faster and cleaner. Although many people say that using nuclear power is dangerous I agree but it is also very efficient and i would be willing to pay the cost for nuclear power plants. I also believe that if the united states is trying to produce cleaner energy and is trying to distance itself from coal and natural gasses, nuclear energy is the way to go because not only does it generate jobs it also stimulates the economy and reduces carbon emissions in the millions of tons. While many people might feel that nuclear energy is too dangerous or expensive, I feel that this type of energy is the future of the united states and its partners.

 

A Nuclear Future for Maryland

Ervin, D. (2014, August 26). Confidence –the nuclear option [commentary]. The Baltimore Sun. Retrieved September 8, 2014, from

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-nuclear-power-20140826%2C0%2C5377479.story

 

Maryland is attempting to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions from electricity by 36.5 percent by 2030, and it needs nuclear power to do so. In addition to an existing nuclear power plant, newer designs enable the construction of plants that produce more energy than they use. Solar and wind energy systems only produce power about a third of the time they are active. Nuclear power plants, although expensive to build, produce power 90 percent of the time they are active, and only cost 2.14 cents per kilowatt hour of production. In the long term, nuclear energy is cheaper, cleaner, and an option in which Maryland must invest.

 

Nuclear energy is definitely an attractive option for clean energy since it can produce lots of power and emits virtually no carbon dioxide. Exploring safe nuclear energy options could be the task of future environmental scientists since it seems like a viable option for the nation’s power needs. The key word is safe, however, since hastily building expensive nuclear reactors without proper safety protocol and waste-disposal methods could lead to environmental and economic disaster.