Liptak 1

Annotated Bibliography

Is Nuclear Power a Safe and Reliable Form of Producing Energy?

Joey Liptak
Professor Malcolm Campbell
English 1103
17 March 2016

Liptak 2

Annotated Bibliography
Grandin, Karl, Peter Jagers, and Sven Kullander. Nuclear Energy. AMBIO: A Journal of the
Human Environment 39.1 (2010): 26-30. Web. 6 March 2016.
This peer-reviewed article published in the AMBIO journal highlights how nuclear energy
is effective, but must be altered in some way in order to address certain issues and be
used successfully and efficiently. The authors describe changes that must be made, such
as adding new generation reactors to promote sustainability and address the waste and
material issues that are present with the current fission reactors. The article also describes
how fusion reactors (combining radioactive isotopes), as opposed to fission reactors
(splitting radioactive isotopes), need to be researched and developed more in order to be
introduced. The authors argue that these fusion reactors would be much more effective,
both on costs and waste, yet the technology surrounding this idea has yet to be developed.
Overall, the authors describe nuclear energy as somewhat safe and effective, given that
this form of power has almost no carbon footprint, but steps must be taken to truly deem
nuclear power reliable and safe. The authors of this article are extremely credible:
Grandin is director of the Center for History of Science, Jagers is professor of
mathematical studies at Chalmers University of Technology, and Kullander is a professor
of high-energy physics, as well as vice president of the European Academics Science
Advisory Council. Thus, the information presented is reliable because the authors are
qualified in the field of energy and mathematical analysis. The references provided at the
end of the article include reports from the World Nuclear Association and the
International Atomic Energy Agency, which are the two largest groups relating to the
field of nuclear energy. The AMBIO Journal is a peer-reviewed journal published

Liptak 3

multiple times per year and it focuses on the human environment, with an emphasis on
research. The journal is certainly reliable, as the authors of each article include scientists
or other researches and the articles are also peer-reviewed. I will definitely make use of
this article in my project, as the authors provide a broad scope of the issue surrounding
the safety and effectiveness of nuclear energy on an international scale. The authors put a
strong emphasis on the safety of nuclear waste and the reactors themselves, which
directly relates to my inquiry question. Therefore, this source will prove to be extremely
important in my project.
Safety of Nuclear Power Reactors. World Nuclear Association. WNA, 12 Aug. 2015. Web. 3
March 2016.
This online report compiled by members of the World Nuclear Association highlights
how safe nuclear energy is compared to other forms of producing power. The authors of
the article also include detailed information and statistics about the number and severity
of incidents pertaining to nuclear power in the history of its existence. The article also
discusses where the safety procedures and regulations are derived and how they are
enforced, as well as detailed accident management procedures for a variety of disasters,
whether they are of natural causes (flood, earthquake, etc.) or man-made errors that result
in action needing to be taken. The last thing the article entails is what nuclear
organizations have learned from previous accidents, especially at Chernobyl, Three Mile
Island, and Fukushima, which have all altered the way the general public and nuclear
organizations look at nuclear power. This report is extremely reliable because it is
updated every few years and it comes from the WNA, which is the leading organization
behind the international nuclear energy perspective. There is no bias, as all of the

Liptak 4

information included in this report is solely statistics and detailed analysis of past and
current situations regarding nuclear energy; no opinions of the authors are present. The
article is separated into different sections, and each section addresses different concerns
that are presented by those who oppose nuclear power. Overall, I think this is a fantastic
source to use when researching about the safety of this form of power because it truly
provides a great understanding of what the organizations in charge of nuclear power are
doing to encourage safety as well as what they have learned from past disasters. I highly
believe I will use this report in my final project and it will prove most beneficial to me.
Warmflash, David. Thorium Power is the Safer Future of Nuclear Energy. Discover Magazine.
16 Jan. 2015. 56-60. Web. 2 March 2016.
This article published in Discover Magazine discusses the potential of the safety of
nuclear energy coming from new technologies, such as the use of thorium instead of
uranium or plutonium. The author argues that nuclear power is highly unstable mainly
due to the use of the current elements, but thorium is a different story. Thorium would
produce even less carbon emissions than current technologies and would greatly decrease
the probability of a nuclear meltdown or another fatal disaster. The author only displays
one negative to thorium use, and that is that current thorium reactors produce more
neutron leak, which would require workers to wear more protection in the plants.
However, Warmflash discusses the safety of thorium due to its inability to be produced
into a nuclear weapon. Unlike uranium and plutonium, thorium is not fissile by itself, and
thus cannot easily be produced into a bomb. The author also discusses how thorium
reactors work and how similar the process is compared to producing energy with other
reactors. Overall, I think the author is quite credible and reliable given that he has

Liptak 5

statistical data and facts to go along with his opinion, as well as the fact that he had his
article published in a large-scale magazine. Discover Magazine is a scientific news and
technology magazine with articles mainly concerning new technologies or discoveries.
The magazine is a widely-spread media outlet and is therefore reliable. The author
presents the viewpoint that nuclear power has the potential to be safe, but will only
become so if steps are taken to adjust its process. This source is extremely useful to me,
as it offers one side of the argument for nuclear power and has good points to go along
with it. The author gives good information that is published in a scientific magazine and I
believe it will be of use in my project.
Wilcox, Jeremy. Anti-Nuclear Arguments Are Outdated. Modern Power Systems 1 Aug. 2015:
10-13. Web. 3 March 2016.
This article in the Modern Power Systems magazine highlights how nuclear energy is as
safe as its ever been. Wilcox describes the incidents at Fukushima, Chernobyl, and Three
Mile Island as necessary events that were vital in the development of a safe nuclear
power program. He also displays great knowledge of the fact that a large number of
countries in Europe and other parts of the world are safely using nuclear energy and have
learned from the past mistakes that have occurred. Wilcox introduces and refutes the
argument of Austrian chancellor Werner Faymann that claims nuclear power is outdated,
expensive, and dangerous; Faymann has great reluctance to introducing a nuclear
program in his country despite a majority of countries in Europe already having programs
in place. Wilcox also discusses the cost effectiveness and environmental benefits of
nuclear power, as well as its safety due to learned lessons from previous disasters. At the
end of the article, author Jeremy Wilcox is proclaimed as the managing director of a

Liptak 6

Thailand-based energy and environment consulting firm, which shows that he is certainly
qualified in his field; this description also introduces the fact that he might be biased due
to the fact that he is currently working in the industry. His point of view is certainly
reliable when it comes to the cost and environmental safety of nuclear power, because the
company he works for is focused on these aspects of technology. However, Wilcox is also
unreliable because he discusses the safety of nuclear power for humans, even though he
does not present any data or statistical significance of organizations and corporations
instilling new safety procedures. He simply argues a point and does not acknowledge the
constant risk of disaster; this is where his bias truly comes into play. Overall, Wilcoxs
article is extremely useful for understanding one side of the argument for the safety of
nuclear power. He is qualified to make some statements, but he might be reaching too far
with others. This article and magazine may prove to be functional for use in the project
because they present very good arguments for one side of the issue, but at the same time
it might be difficult to use, mainly because it only discusses the one side that the author
agrees with.