"We already have an energy source that is relatively cheap to use and that produces less environmental and public health impact than fossil fuels. That source is nuclear energy."
In the following viewpoint, Mario Salazar argues that the dangers of nuclear power have been greatly exaggerated while those of other energy sources have been downplayed. Using a gas leak accident in Bhopal, India, as an example, he maintains that far fewer people have been harmed by the nuclear industry than by other industries and energy sources. Disaster scenarios, he says, do not acknowledge that, like all other energy sources, nuclear power is relatively safe and environmentally viable, given its low carbon emissions. In addition, Salazar contends that using breeder reactors rather than traditional reactors is a potential solution to the problem of nuclear waste disposal. Salazar is an environmental engineer and a former employee of the Environmental Protection Agency.
As you read, consider the following questions:

What does the author refer to when he claims that every energy source has built-in dangers?
According to the author, why is the 9/11 terrorist attack an argument in favor of the relative safety of nuclear power?
According to the author, what will happen in six hundred years?
We keep talking about the evils of fossil fuel and the promise of renewable energy, but we ignore the obvious. We already have an energy source that is relatively cheap to use and that produces less environmental and public health impact than fossil fuels. That source is nuclear energy. Until we are able to develop renewable sources of energy that are more efficient, it will remain the best alternative to coal and