High Stakes Since the Industrial Revolution, the use of fossil fuels has increased so quickly that the supply will no longer meet the demand. Due to this dilemma, scientists have been able to discover new ways to obtain energy through methods such as geothermal, hydroelectricity, solar, wind, and nuclear. Of the above, the most controversial method is nuclear power. Despite its promising ability to produce large amounts of energy, it places our lives, wallets, and environment at stake. California should not have nuclear power plants built because the stake is placed way too high. On April 26, 1986, a nuclear power plant at Chernobyl exploded, resulting in huge releases of radioactive materials. This impacted the health of countless adults and children. According to the WHO’s article, many people have acquired thyroid cancer, ARS, and cataracts from the Chernobyl incident. Nobody should have to sacrifice their life for an accident that could have been easily prevented. Because of this, nuclear …show more content…
Alternatives Journal’s article says that the Fukushima Daiichi power plant meltdown costed an estimated amount of $250-billion USD in damages and could end up doubling. This amount is placed upon Japanese taxpayers. Their power plant meltdown will sooner or later burn a hole through the taxpayers’ wallets. On top of this, nuclear power has never been a profitable method after all costs are included. In fact, the cost of Canada’s Darlington reactors went 4.5 times over the budget, and that price will have to be paid by taxpayers. Because Californians are barely satisfied with their taxes now, they will not be satisfied when a “nuclear accident” or “nuclear construction” fee pops up on their bills. Some may say that the costs lower in the long run, but there are still hidden charges like the disposal of nuclear wastes, as well as whatever amount that is left from the time of