Jeremy Ackerman Nature and Human Values Professor Dan Miller 4 November 2008 Nuclear Revolution Never in the history of humanity have we been so dependent on energy, and never before has such a dependence been so dangerous. As the supply of petroleum dwindles and the environmental impact of combustion isbetter understood, the need to find a cheap, clean, safe, and efficient alternative energy solidifies. Nuclear energy is one proposed solution to our energy dilemma. The proponents of nuclear power, such as Michael J. Wallace, argue that reactor science is proven technology that produces cheap, reliable, and clean energy. In the essay, “Nuclear Power 2010 Program,” Wallace shows the need to quickly expand our nuclear capacity, and suggests the government help fund these ventures. On the other hand, many people like Karen Charman do not think nuclear should replace fossil fuels. Through the essay, “Brave Nuclear World,” Charman shows nuclear is not as well understood or controlled as it needs to be to be acceptable. The opposition to nuclear energy touts the terrible nuclear disasters of the past, the waste disposal problem, and poor testing of operating and future reactors. Charman proposes the energy void should be filled by a plethora of renewable energy sources. In the essay, “Nuclear Power 2010 Program,” Michael J. Wallace tellscongress what he believes is the best course of action for the country. Wallace represents Constellation Energy, which has a major stake in nuclear power, but the Nuclear Energy Institute also endorses his statements. To begin, the essay outlines the strategic value of switching much of our dependency on coal and natural gas over to nuclear. Wallace suggests nuclear energy will stabilize our volatile energy situation. Nuclear energy will supply the world with electricity, such that other fuels such can be used in ways nuclear cannot like home heating and automobiles. Nuclear power will reduce stress on natural gas and coal;...