Yet, it is uncertain whether Mueller clearly has a good argument and/or answers the questions that many people linger to know. In Richard A. Mauler’s article “Nuclear Waste,” the author states clearly about how he is against the issues on nuclear waste and how it could pose a risk in society.
Mueller starts his essay by critiquing his opinion in a very persuasive introduction. He was very persuasive about his opinion when he States his questions about the issue like “How can we possibly make sure that this material is safe and that we can certify this material and it can be kept safe for 1 00,000 years? (Mueller 207)I think that these questions were purposely stated to enable the reader to answer questions that reinforce his case, and allow them to work towards taking action in some way. I also think it influences the readers and people in general to try and understand the risks of nuclear waste. We as humans need to keep in mind of the risks of nuclear waste, and how radiation could affect one’s health.
As Mueller have stated, “Children should be concerned about their health because the exposure of radiation can allow them to suffer quicker than adults would t’ (M Euler 206) Therefore, Mueller presents his case with facts and his opinion on how nuclear waste can affect adults and the onus as well. While Richard A. Mueller implies his opinion in being against nuclear waste, Mueller seems to be convinced that he made a strong position on nuclear waste since the start.Although, I notice that as he states his position, he presents facts and statistics that it almost looks like he denies his case. However, near the end of the essay, it seems that Mueller changes his position and points out that the possibility of “if all the nuclear waste was to be leaked and managed to get in lakes and rivers, and oceans; the risks imposed would be 20 times less than other wastes such as uranium that loud impose a threat. ” (Mueller 21 2) From what I believe, I think that the author knows that his position does not exactly put out a good argument.
By Mueller addressing that nuclear waste leakage is 20 times less than uranium leakage, he is saying that nuclear waste is safe. This may cause people to be confused by the fact that Mueller states that is anti-nuke about nuclear waste. Throughout the essay, felt that Mauler’s argument in his essay was weak after his my confession paragraph. It was a bit odd because Mueller doesn’t seem like he holds his case as strongly as before. He seemed like he was tryingly against nuclear waste but he doesn’t State how we should add this problem.I think it was interesting that the author did not have a very clear position at all. It is clear that he dislikes nuclear waste, especially when he presents his case and pinpoints the facts with great persuasion.
However, he didn’t really mention what he feels that we should do about the case. Mueller doesn’t address all of society unanswered questions such as how society should go about doing with nuclear waste. He only tells the readers what he thinks of politicians and scientists’ point of view and what they are or loud be doing wrong.Rather, he describes how people are wrong in handling nuclear waste and how it is making people more worried than they should be.
At one point he asks, “Why are people so worried about transporting nuclear waste? To a great extent, we have gone to such lengths to ensure the safety of transporting the wastes. But it is obvious that society thinks the dangers and risks are greater than it really is. ” (Mueller 21 3) However, hasn’t he been constantly trying to get our attention in trying to build his case of how dangerous nuclear waste is? With all that Mueller has said, Mueller has made people more worried.But it is clear that contemplating on what to do about nuclear waste is not an easy topic to choose sides on. Mueller made many arguments in his essay by pursuing his opinion of being anti-nuke towards nuclear Waste. However, it seems like he denies his case and did not provide much of a clear position.
He addresses in his essays facts and statistics on/ about nuclear waste, but fails to answers choice’s wandering questions. As Mueller says, “If we call storage unacceptable, then its purpose put aside alone s considered an unacceptable answer.