Menu schließen

Ist das richtig?

Frage: Ist das richtig?
(2 Antworten)

 
Hallo! :) Ich hoffe jemand von euch kann mir weiterhelfen...
Ich muss ein Comment schreiben...
Könnt ihr bitte einmal drüberschauen ob ihr Fehler enddeckt.

In the last ten years the attitude to nuclear power plants has change. However environmentalist were against to build new reactors. They bring forward the argument, that nuclear power plants are too dangerous. But lately they diagnose, that nuclear power plants are useful to save the environment.

On the one hand to build new reactors bring many advantages.
Firstly the UK wants to become independent of oil as soon as possible, as the oil reserves are declining. Furthermore to import cheap gas from Russia isn´t a solution, because the Russian goverment deploy the gas reserve as a political weapon.
In addition a nuclear reactor creates only a small amount of greenhouse gases and it saves the economy without destroying the environment.A positive side-effect is, if the goverment and the companies build new reactors, it will create 10.000 new jobs.

But on the other hand there are a lot of disadvantages. To build new reactors can be an extremly risk way of producing electricity, as the catastrophe at Chernobyl shows. The area arround the reactor is even today closed for people, because the flat is radioactive.
Secondly, a reactor produces tons of highly dangerous waste that has to be monitored for many thousands of years before it is safe. But why don´t they invest the money in alternative sectors? If the British goverment or the whole EU invest the money, that they want to take for building new reactors, in solar engineering in the Sahara, only 4% of the Saharas area will be enough flat in order to produce enough energy for the complete European Union.

In my view I would say that the British goverment and the whole Eu should invest in alternative sector. I know the most politicans would say that Afrika is too dangerous to build there solar engineering. But if they do, they will earn clean and enough energy for europa. Secondly it will create thousands of new jobs in Affrica. So the people will accept this solar- factory.
GAST stellte diese Frage am 16.05.2009 - 13:21

 
Antwort von GAST | 16.05.2009 - 18:40
In the last ten years, the attitude to nuclear power plants has changed. However, environmentalist were against building new reactors. They bring forward the argument kein komma that nuclear power plants were too dangerous. But lately, they diagnose kein komma that nuclear power plants were useful to save the environment.

On the one hand,
building
new reactors brings many advantages.
Firstly, the UK wants to become independent of oil as soon as possible, as the oil reserves are declining. Furthermore to import cheap gas from Russia is not a solution, because the Russian government deploys the gas reserve as a political weapon.
In addition a nuclear reactor creates only a small amount of greenhouse gases and it saves the economy without destroying the environment. A positive side-effect is, if the goverment and the companies build new reactors, it will create 10.000 new jobs.

But on the other hand, there are a lot of disadvantages. To build new reactors can be an extremly risky way of producing electricity, as the catastrophe at Chernobyl shows. The area around the reactor is closed for people even today, because the flat is radioactive.
Secondly, a reactor produces tons of highly dangerous waste that has to be monitored for many thousands of years before it is safe. But why do they not invest the money in alternative sectors? If the British government or the whole EU invest the money, that they want to take for building new reactors, in solar engineering in the Sahara, only 4% of the area of the Sahara will be enough flattened (bin mir nicht sicher, was du meinst in order to produce enough energy for the complete European Union.

In my view I would say that the British goverment and the whole Eu should invest in alternative sectors. I know, (kein "the") most politicians would say that Afrika was too dangerous to build solar engineering there. But if they do so, they will earn clean and enough energy for europe. Secondly, it will create thousands of new jobs in Africa. Thereby (klingt besser^^) kein "the" people will accept this solar- factory.

 
Antwort von GAST | 16.05.2009 - 19:02
danke für deine mühe... :)

Verstoß melden
Hast Du eine eigene Frage an unsere Englisch-Experten?

> Du befindest dich hier: Support-Forum - Englisch
ÄHNLICHE FRAGEN:
BELIEBTE DOWNLOADS: