Free Answers Question & Answer Example

Lynas’s main point is that nuclear power together with renewable power could prevent the climate change. However, the author has doubts that negative perception of nuclear power will change in the near future. He would like to prove his point of view starting from the very first paragraph in the article.
Lynas appeals to the very wide audience - both supporters and opponents of nuclear power. He assumes that many readers will disagree with his statements, because information concerning nuclear power is usually one-sided. Additionally, environmentalists and politicians prefer to criticize use of nuclear power stations ignoring other opinions. As the result, almost all readers think that nuclear power is something very dangerous that should be prohibited.
Lynas provides a large number of statistical facts and refers to different studies that were carried out by international organizations. In some paragraphs, he directly accuses environmentalists of their reliance on false information. Emotional and informative text has a very large influence on the readers.
In my opinion, information about Chernobyl did not help Lynas to support his claim. He writes that negative consequences of disaster in Chernobyl are exaggerated. Nevertheless, it is clear that if 300,000 people had to move from their native towns, it means that there were very big problems with stopping further spread of radiation. In the meantime, Lynas’s statement concerning health problems makes sense, because he refers to the official figures.
2) I was persuaded by the author’s argument after reading the first four paragraphs. In the opening paragraphs he showed that problems of nuclear power and climate change are very complex and there is no one simple solution. He accused environmentalists of ignoring supporters of nuclear power and it made me think that indeed there should be more than one point of view about sustainable development. Statistical information about safety of nuclear power and the fact that 440 nuclear power stations produce 16% of world’s electricity persuaded me that society should not view nuclear power as something very bad.
3) In my opinion, the weakest evidence in this text was a paragraph about Chernobyl. I think that author was not able to persuade readers that this technological disaster had a little impact on people. If I were the author, I would not use the story of Chernobyl in the debate about nuclear power. In turn, the strongest supporting point was when Lynas wrote that renewable energy sources will not be enough to cover current consumption. Thus, all readers might come to conclusion that there should be a mix of power sources and nuclear power may be the best alternative to power that is generated from coal and oil burning.