Nuclear assumed that except dramatic measures are taken

Nuclear energy may be seen as one
feasible mitigation policy within  the
battle against climate change ,as this sort of energy resources has extremely
low greenhouse gas emissions throughout its life cycle. (Dones, R.,
Heck, T., Hirschberg, S.,Cutler, J.C., , 2004).
 Generally,it is assumed that except
dramatic measures are taken to slash down climate change, the humanity might perhaps
face an environmental disaster. (Stern, 2007; Adamantiade, A., Kessides, I.,, 2009; Reddy,B.S.,
Assenza,G.B.,, 2009; Decanio, 2009). If critical action
is not taken, energy-related emissions of CO2 will be more than double by 2050
and higher oil demand will increase apprehension over the security of supplies. (IEA., 2009a)

The benefit of nuclear energy has jointly become
even more irresistible as a result of the Kyoto Agreement that requires
signatories to extensively cut back their emissions of CO2 so as to cut down to
on global warming (Becker and Posner, 2005). Many of us are of the opinion that nuclear energy,
as an essentially carbon free source of energy, is one of the answers to
climate change and energy safety (Elliot, 2007;Ferguson, 2007). To this end, severe
apprehensions over growing fossil fuel prices, energy security, and greenhouse
gas emissions have brought about the significance of nuclear energy to the vanguard
of the broader drawback of the energy discussion. Nuclear energy is drawing new
awareness for increasing the range of energy supplies, for improving energy
security, and for providing a low-carbon alternative to fossil fuels. (International Energy
Agency, IEA, 2008).

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

(Pidgeon et al., 2008), has it that the view regarding nuclear
energy policy at the moment is obviously not as divided as it was within the Nineteen
Eighties and Nineties , the assumptions underlying new build proposals are
smartly contested by some environmental teams  and academic commentators. Nuclear power
continues to be bedeviled with uncertainties over its economic science, doubts
regarding accident risks and nuclear blast, and also the quest to finding a lasting
solutions for radioactive waste.

The
literature opinion on nuclear power points to established public fears in
several Western nations for some time now. Major disasters including the 1957
Windscale fire in England, the Three Mile Island in 1979, the  Chernobyl in 1986, and recently the Fukushima accidents,
in additiona to the environmental worries as it relates  to waste disposal, solely served to reinforce
such considerations. The resistance to the building of a lot of  nuclear power plants within the United States improved
from around 20% in the mid1970s to more than 60% in the early Nineteen Eighties,
Rosa and Freudenburg (1993) . A comparable historical pattern was also seen
from the European data ,but amplified further by the impacts of the Chernobyl
accident in 1986 (van der Pligt, 1992). Throughout this era, nuclear energy and
radioactive material were seen as exclusively “dreaded” and unknown (Slovic,
1987; Pidgeon et al., 1992.