Is this source credible or biased?

[xholicwriter]

Hi everyone,

As I was doing some research on nuclear energy moratorium, I came across the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Journal . After reading some of their articles, I realized that they have a very negative view on nuclear energy. I do not completely trust the source but I would like to know if the journal is credible.

The attach is one of the articles.

Thank you,
xholic

 

[mathman]

The Journal is credible. However they are sometimes pessimistic (they would say realistic) about various implications of the atomic age.

 

[xholicwriter]

I see.
Thank you.
Now I'm confused of how good nuclear energy is. I'm 100% pro nuclear energy, but the more I do research, the more I face so many negative opinions about nuclear energy. If their arguments are valid, I wonder how I am able to defend my faith in nuclear energy?

 

[Astronuc]

One has to replace 'faith' with 'informed opinion'.

There are folks who disparage nuclear energy, and then hype 'green' or 'renewable' energy. Those who lack objectivity should be viewed skeptically.

Instead, learn the facts, and then one can dispute the fiction with facts.

 

[xholicwriter]

Thank you for your wise words, sir.
It is true that I do not have a complete knowledge to make an informed opinion. Therefore, I decide to do research on nuclear energy. However, there is one problem. As I do the research, I found out that most of the journal articles are not in favor nuclear energy. Their arguments seem to be reasonable but I notice that they never include science in their arguments ~.~.
I would like to ask whether somebody could provide me some informational sources about nuclear energy, such as the NRC.gov?

Also, is the nei.org credible? Their cover picture looks somehow fishy.

 

[Astronuc]

Thank you for your wise words, sir.
It is true that I do not have a complete knowledge to make an informed opinion. Therefore, I decide to do research on nuclear energy. However, there is one problem. As I do the research, I found out that most of the journal articles are not in favor nuclear energy. Their arguments seem to be reasonable but I notice that they never include science in their arguments ~.~.
I would like to ask whether somebody could provide me some informational sources about nuclear energy, such as the NRC.gov?

Also, is the nei.org credible? Their cover picture looks somehow fishy.

NEI is an industry lobbying organization, and they are rather pro-nuclear as expected. I prefer more objective sources of information.

ANS has some useful information, but they also overboard on the pro-nuclear spin.

IAEA has a lot of good resources as does World Nuclear Association.
http://www-pub.iaea.org/books/
http://www-pub.iaea.org/books/IAEABooks/Series/134/IAEA-Nuclear-Energy-Series
http://www-pub.iaea.org/books/IAEABooks/Series/34/IAEA-TECDOC

http://world-nuclear.org/Information-Library/ (some information is a bit dated, but it's reasonably good and objective)

 

[ZoomStreak]

Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is credible (because people take it seriously) and biased. First and foremost, its purpose has always been to campaign against nuclear weapons. This isn't a necessarily a bad goal, but it's worth considering any of their publications in this context.

 

[xholicwriter]

Thank you very much for all the info.