Site Loader

 Nuclear energy canbe seen as one feasible mitigation policy in the battle against climate change,as this type of energy resources has extremely low carbon dioxide emissionsduring its life cycle. (Dones, R.

, Heck, T., Hirschberg, S.,Cutler, J.

Best services for writing your paper according to Trustpilot

Premium Partner
From $18.00 per page
4,8 / 5
4,80
Writers Experience
4,80
Delivery
4,90
Support
4,70
Price
Recommended Service
From $13.90 per page
4,6 / 5
4,70
Writers Experience
4,70
Delivery
4,60
Support
4,60
Price
From $20.00 per page
4,5 / 5
4,80
Writers Experience
4,50
Delivery
4,40
Support
4,10
Price
* All Partners were chosen among 50+ writing services by our Customer Satisfaction Team

C., , 2004).  Generally,it is assumed that except dramatic measuresare taken to cut down global warming, the world might perhaps face anenvironmental disaster. (Stern, 2007; Adamantiade, A., Kessides, I.,, 2009; Reddy,B.S., Assenza,G.

B.,, 2009; Decanio, 2009). Without decisiveaction, energy-related emissions of CO2 will be more than twice by 2050 andhigher oil demand will increase concerns over the security of supplies. (IEA., 2009a)The benefit of nuclearenergy has also become even more irresistible as a result of the KyotoAgreement that requires signatories to significantly reduce their emissions ofCO2 so as to cut down to on global warming (Becker and Posner,2005). Many people are of the opinion that nuclear energy, as anessentially carbon free source of energy, is one of the answers to globalwarming and energy safety (Elliot, 2007;Ferguson, 2007). To thisend, severeapprehensions over growing fossil fuel prices, energy security, andgreenhouse gas emissions have brought about the significance of nuclear energyto the vanguard of the broader problem of the energy debate.

Nuclear energy is drawingnew awareness for increasing the variety of energy supplies, for improvingenergy security, and for providing a low-carbon alternative to fossil fuels. (InternationalEnergy Agency, IEA, 2008).(Pidgeon et al., 2008), hasit that the view about nuclear energy policy at the moment is obviously not as dividedas it was in the 1980s and 1990s , the assumptions underlying new buildproposals have been vigorously contested by some environmental groups andacademic commentators.

Nuclear power is still bedeviled with uncertainties overits economics, doubts about accidentrisks and nuclear explosion, and the quest to finding a long-term solutions forradioactive waste.The literature on nuclear power opinions points to establishedpublic fears in many Western nations for some time now. Major disastersincluding the 1957 Windscale fire in England, and those at Three Mile Island in1979, and Chernobyl in 1986, and recently the Fukushima accidents, in additionto the environmental worries as it relates waste disposal, only served toreinforce such concerns.

The resistance to the building of more nuclear powerplants in the United States improved from around 20% in the mid1970s to morethan 60% in the early 1980s, Rosa and Freudenburg (1993) .A comparablehistorical pattern was also seen from theEuropean data ,but amplified furtherby the impacts of the Chernobyl accident in 1986 (van der Pligt, 1992). Duringthis period, nuclear energy and radioactive waste were seen as uniquely “dreaded”and unknown (Slovic, 1987; Pidgeon et al., 1992),

Post Author: admin

x

Hi!
I'm Dora!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out