Nuclear Power Argumentative Essay

It seems as though nuclear power has always been under question regarding its safety. Its effectiveness cannot be denied, but people are highly skeptical of having a nuclear power plant anywhere near their home. Countless studies have been done to help determine how safe they really are, and most articles tend to say they are quite safe. While searching for an article talking about nuclear power, I came across one titled How safe is nuclear power? A statistical study suggests less than expected, by Thomas Rose and Trevor Sweeting. This title intrigued me because, in my personal experience at least, I have seen far less academic articles going against nuclear power. As someone who likes to see things as objectively as possible, I enjoy hearing

The counter-argument is completely statistical and adds a new dynamic to the article. It compliments the position of the authors and aids the initial hypothesis. The article finishes off with some compelling statements about nuclear power: “Scott Sagan adds: ‘…what I will call ‘normal accident theory,’ presents a much more pessimistic prediction: Serious accidents with complex high technologies are inevitable’ (Sagan 1995, 13). Statistical analysis supports this unsettling probability.” The assertive nature of this is an attempt to scare and convince the reader that there is a problem at hand. Lastly, Rose and Sweeting make it seem as though there are no other solutions other than theirs. This was a well designed piece of rhetoric because it was prepared by comments sprinkled throughout the other sections of the paper. Overall, I thought the connection between sections was well linked. The design structure of introducing the topic, then proving their argument, and then attacking a possible counter, was effective. The article successfully raising the reader’s attention to the safety of nuclear power and the problems preventing precise studies on their safety. In this sense, the author’s rhetoric was