Why You Should Fear Your Toaster more than Nuclear Power 11/3/2016

Taylor Pearson, in his essay, "Why You Should Fear Your Toaster more than Nuclear Power", explains that nuclear power plants don't pose as much danger to us as everyone thinks they do. In fact a toaster, which is a common household item, poses more danger to us than any nuclear plant can. He proves this by saying "Over three thousand people died from toaster accidents... and they still cause around fifty accident-related deaths every year in the United States." Pearson mainly uses logos throughout his essay to support his claim; we need nuclear energy. He uses real life incidents to sum up the amount of deaths caused by nuclear power plants and to prove that nuclear plants should not be everyone's main concern. "The actual number of deaths...have been few. Take the Chernobyl accident- the worst and most lethal nuclear incident to date. As tragic as it was, the incident has killed only eighty-two people." He uses logos to put in perspective that nuclear power is one of the least dangerous means of production in the United States. "According to the U.S. Department of Labor, coal mining currently causes about sixty-five deaths and eleven thousand injuries per year, while oil drilling is responsible for approximately 125 deaths per year in the United States." Compared to this, nuclear power is especially safe. Pearson goes on to describe radiation, which is another aspect of nuclear energy that everyone fears. He uses logos to state that a brick wall emits more radiation than a nuclear power plant. Pearson says "...a wall emits about 3.5 milligrams of radiation per year," while "a nuclear power plant gives off about .3 milligrams per year." 

I feel that Pearson was effective in writing his essay and revealing to his readers the common misconceptions about nuclear energy. He proves to us that we need nuclear energy, which was his purpose in writing the essay, by describing that nuclear power has the potential to save our plant. He proves to us that we have been mislead by fear and are missing the benefits of such a safe and clean resource. But I also believe that people will still fear nuclear power and Pearson's patronizing tone in his essay was insensitive and uncalled for. When trying to argue his point of view he should have been more focused on connecting himself to his audience rather than sounding like he's judging the fact that they ever believed that nuclear energy is so harmful. The essay was very interesting because it revealed things about nuclear power that I have never heard, especially about the toaster and brick wall. It was extremely insightful.