Fossil fuels such as petroleum, coal and natural gas generate most of the energy consumed globally and pave the way for advancement and new inventions. Unfortunately, these carbon fuels are not renewable and they might be exhausted in the near future. What is more, their emissions are threatening (nie wiem czemu ale od egzaminu ustnego z konwers. staram się unikać present continuous więc może constitute a huge threat to) the fragile ecosystem of the Earth. There is a proposition that nuclear power will be the best way to provide safe and affordable energy whilst protecting the environment. However, the idea is highly questionable.
Dr Symonds assumes that nuclear power is safe because it preserves fossil fuels and does not produce greenhouse effect. To a certain limited extent, there is some truth in this, but several severe nuclear accidents that occurred in the last few decades have caused people to fear nuclear power. One of the worst nuclear accidents in history occurred at the Chernobyl power plant in Ukraine. A reactor at that plant suffered a complete meltdown. Due to this accident 31 people were killed and there were significant health and environmental consequences. Even today, the effects of this terrible accident are still being felt in Ukraine. What is more, nuclear energy produces radioactive waste which remains dangerous for tens of thousands of years (nie spotkałem się z czymś takim :P ale skoro tak napisałaś to chyba jest taka fraza :P). The radiation that is released from fuel rods is very hazardous to humans. Exposure to radiation can cause cancer, sterility, extreme tissue damage or even death.
Dr Symonds also claims that atomic energy is affordable. This argument is far from truth. Nuclear power is not cost-effective at all. First of all, the costs of it are massive, for example every year we hear of high cost repairs to power plants and huge cost overruns. Second of all, a lot of money has to be spent on security and safety and the...