Confronting Risks: Regulatory Responsibility and Nuclear Energy

The Nuclear Option

  • Nuclear energy was once hated radically by environmental activists.
  • Today nuclear power is being rethought due to its promise as a more climate-friendly energy option.
  • Overall safety and cost-effectiveness of nuclear power are still considerable arguments in the contrast between the impacts of nuclear power and coal.
  • Even though nuclear power plants have the potential to cause catastrophic accidents, their downsides and risk are worse, but less probably than those of coal.
  • Questions arise such as is the “nuclear option” worth the potential major downsides. Scientists and researchers are also figuring out how to compare the risks associated with nuclear power plants compared against the risks and danger of climate change.

Alternative Solutions

  • There are obviously severe negative and positive aspects to both the continuation and implementation of nuclear power plants along with issues that arise from alternative sources of energy.
  • However, of the safety and cost-effectiveness of renewable forms of energy are accurate than alternative forms of energy are the more ideal solution.
  • Renewable energy options may someday replace fossil fuels entirely. But in the meantime, some scientists argue that the continuation of nuclear plants compared to coal-fired plants are the more ideal solution until renewable forms of energy can meet the world’s needs.
  • We should simply try to live more sustainably in order to act fairly towards one another on this planet earth.



Vanderheiden, Steve. “Confronting Risks: Regulatory Responsibility and Nuclear Energy.” Environmental Politics, vol. 20, no. 5, Sept. 2011, pp. 650-667. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1080/09644016.2011.608532.

Leave a Reply

St. Lawrence University