Research paper on topic: Will there be benefits from a nuclear power station in Kazakhstan?

The nuclear power plants

Will there be benefits from a nuclear power station in Kazakhstan?

3400

Authenticity Declaration

I declare that the work in this research project is my own and is authentic. All resources and sources are acknowledged and cited, where sources and resources of other people have been used.

__________________________

__________________________

Introduction

Nuclear energy remains hotly debated not only in Kazakhstan, but also in other countries. and every one because of the very fact that energy solves the matter of exhaustion of natural organic energy sources (coal, gas, oil) and removes the difficulties of moving large quantities of traditional fuel over considerable distances and in foreign places. Miniature nuclear energy plants are very efficient and convenient sources of energy for submarines and enormous surface ships. Electricity generated by nuclear energy plants is among the most cost effective. However, if technical safety isn't respected, an explosion of all units in an exceedingly nuclear energy plant may occur, and subsequently, this may result in irreparable harm to the environment.

Due to my personal concern, I have got always been curious about this issue in step with several reasons. one amongst them is that this subject is one amongst the foremost important issue in Kazakhstan. additionally, i used to be even more motivated after a chemistry lesson when an educator said that the atomic power plant doesn't have a nasty effect on nature.

The problem of atomic power plants became more really debatable today. the bulk of individuals strongly believe that we don't must start atomic power stations, while other individuals think differently.

Even if we live in the 21st century, few people know that nuclear power plants can turn salt water into drinking water. For example, NPP in Japan “Fukusima-1” used as a water filter. According to Hannah Ritchie and Max Roser (2019) 666 million (9% of the world) does not have get to to an made strides water source, of which more than 1.25 million people suffer from this problem in Kazakhstan. Therefore, nuclear power stations could solve this problem.

However, don't forget that Kazakhstanis suffered from atomic energy for nearly 40 years. Although atomic energy and nuclear bombs were used for various purposes, they both used nuclear chemical elements. Thus, the people of Kazakhstan left an unpleasant “aftertaste” and fear. What added fuel to the hearth was the very fact that in 2011 there was an explosion at the Fukushima-1 and Fukushima-2 atomic energy plants in Japan. This has greatly affected the residents of Kazakhstan.

In spite of this, I accept that atomic control has more points of interest than drawbacks. I may be one-sided approximately this issue, but I will attempt to consider all conceivable viewpoints of this issue and profoundly talk about each portion.

Context

In Verkhoturov’s (2018) article, he mentioned about nuclear power plants in Kazakhstan. At the beginning, he said that there was still talk about a nuclear power plant, and that’s more than 20 years. Kazakhstan's Minister of Education and Science, Vladimir Shkolnik, first shared the concept of the need for the structure of atomic force stations in 1997. Around then, he had as a top priority the event of another atomic force plant to supplant the BN-350 unit of measurement of the Mangistau atomic power Plant (MAEK). Several stages of debate have since passed on proposals to build nuclear power plants. The first one began in 2006, when Russia proposed to install a VBER-300 reactor based on a boat reactor for project 949A Antei submarine missile cruisers at the MAEK. The research was adjourned in 2009 (Dmitry Verkhoturov, 2018).

After that, in 2014, negotiations began with foreign companies. But these negotiations also did not lead to anything, and in November 2016, Minister of Energy Kanat Bozumbayev announced that the republic would not build nuclear power plants for at least seven years, due to excess electricity (Verkhoturov, 2018).

The present stage is along these lines the third in succession. We are now discussing a Russian reactor with a capacity of 300 to 1200 MW (most likely, VVER-1000 or VVER-1200).

In the article it is composed that the most grounded contention for an atomic force plant is that Kazakhstan has colossal uranium holds. Proven reserves exceed 800 thousand tons, and total resources - 1.4 million tons. The report of the Kazakhstan Center for the Implementation of New Environmentally Sound Technologies (CINEST) "Cornered in Coal" (2017) gives an intriguing correlation of the stores of different sorts of vitality assets decreased to a solitary oil identical. Uranium represents 10.3 billion tons of oil proportional (hereinafter alluded to as toe), coal to 15.9 billion toe, and oil to 5.2 billion toe. Uranium accounts for 29% of Kazakhstan’s energy reserves (Verkhoturov, 2018).

Global Business Reports (2015) also mentioned that Kazakhstan has huge amount of uranium. "Kazakhstan contains 12% of the world's uranium assets and a growing mining part, delivering around 22,830 Mega ton in 2014, and making arrangements for additional expansion before 2018. In 2009, it turned into the world's driving uranium maker, with practically 28% of world creation, at that point 33% in 2010, 36% in 2011, 36.5% in 2012, and 38% in 2013” (World Nuclear Association, 2015).

Azhar Kadrzhanova (2013) drew the table where she showed the number of power generation and power consuming in billion kilo Watt per hour among Kazakhs people (p.2). It can be seen that power generation is directly proportional to the power consuming. It means that by increasing the number of powers producing the amount of power consuming also rises. That’s why nuclear power plants are needed to Kazakhstan. Azhar Kadrzhanova (2013) also mentioned that Kazakhstani government is still considering the development of a modern atomic plant by 2020. As of now, Aktau Atomic Control Plants (NPP) is conducting the achievability think about for the VBER-300 reactor. The sort of the reactor has been chosen; it's going to be a pressurized water reactor of 300 Mw (Kadrzhanova, 2013, p.7-8). “Concurring to the Green Economy Concept, atomic power will account for 7%-8% of Kazakhstan's add up to power era in 2030-2050. Serve of Environment Nurlan Kapparov, at an appointment in Astana in June 2013, displayed the 2050-concept of "green economy". It is anticipated that the overall introduced capacity of Kazakhstan's atomic power plants will reach 1.5 GW in 2030 and 2 GW by 2050” (Kadrzhanova, 2013).

Although nuclear power plant will bring great profits to Kazakhstan, there are disadvantages of NPP to all countries. Those disadvantages were shown by “10 Reasons to oppose nuclear energy”. In this article it was said that nuclear power stations have 10 worst aspects. It is written that nuclear waste remains radioactive for a long time to come. Currently, there are no long-term storage options for radioactive waste and most of them are stored in temporary above ground installations (“10 Reasons to oppose nuclear energy”). In addition, human error and natural disasters may result in dangerous and expensive accidents. The Chernobyl disaster in Ukraine in 1986 resulted within the death of 30 workers within the initial explosion and has had variety of negative health effects on thousands across Russia and Eastern Europe. In 2011, a large tsunami overcame the protection mechanisms of several power plants, causing three nuclear meltdowns at an influence plant in Fukushima, Japan, leading to the discharge of radioactive materials into the encompassing area. In both disasters, hundreds of thousands have been displaced, millions of dollars spent, and radiation-related deaths have been assessed to this day (“10 Reasons to oppose nuclear energy”). NPP could also cause another disaster cancer. Studies also show an increased risk for those living near an atomic power plant, particularly childhood cancers like leukemia. Nuclear staff also is exposed to beyond normal levels of radiation, leading to a high risk of cancer mortality at a rate almost like that of Japanese nuclear bomb survivors (“10 Reasons to oppose nuclear energy”).

Aims

Research question: Will there be benefits from a nuclear power station in Kazakhstan?

The purposes of this research are to define advantages and disadvantages of nuclear power plants for Kazakhstan, and by analyzing both sides to determine whether there will be more benefit than harm. This investigation is going to answer to these questions:

1. What are the benefits and drawbacks of nuclear power plants?

2. Is it important to launch a nuclear power plant for Kazakhstan?

3. What risks does a nuclear power plant have (for the environment, air)?

4. Is Kazakhstan ready to restart nuclear power plants?

By interviewing people who have basic knowledge and who know more than many about nuclear power plants.

  Anticipated results are to discover benefits of NPP for Kazakhstan and disclosure to persuade standard individuals that atomic control has more focal points, and in arrange to the improvement of Kazakhstan assist we require atomic control.

Methods

This research has plenty of different methods. All information and data were collected by primary and secondary sources in order to reduce the possible level of inaccuracy and supplement each other. However, only a qualitative method was used and there is couple of reasons for not conducting other methods:

• Only people who have knowledge about nuclear power plants are needed;

• Quantative methods, such as questionnaires have always been a fast way of collecting information but people do not take them seriously and answer randomly this bring big errors.

Foundation data was arranged to begin with, since it is included common information around the subject. In spite of the fact that atomic control plant in Kazakhstan is one of the foremost questionable issues, there was exceptionally small data with respect to this issue. Besides, numerous dependable data is obsolete. In arrange to dodge these issues all foundations was taken from the scholarly articles and inquires about of universally recognized organizations. For occurrence, Worldwide Business Reports and U.S. Office of Commerce were the foremost supportive and solid sources, they too were utilized in “Context”.

Interview

The strategy of this inquire about was meet in arrange to urge subjective data from the group of onlookers. Target populace was individuals who have progressed information of atomic control plants, instructors and understudies, who select chemistry as a specialized subject (they think about chemistry in profundity, subsequently, they have more information with respect to this issue). The reason of the interview as a overview was to memorize almost the benefits of NPP for Kazakhstan and to discover out the suppositions of individuals who have more information and involvement in chemistry.

Interviews were taken from 5 individuals. There are: one individual, who works at chemstry circle, 2 chemistry instructors and 2 understudies who select chemistry as a specialized subject. Each meet kept going for 2-3 minutes and I utilized open-ended questions in arrange to urge broad answers almost their demeanor towards this issue.

Utilizing auxiliary sources, I made a list of questions to conduct an meet, since by this way I seem make my inquire about more significant. I have made up 5 questions. 3 questions were almost benefits and disadvantages of atomic control stations to Kazakhstan, 1 address was around impact of NPP on Kazakhstan and 1 address was almost their individual state of mind with respect to this issue. I chosen to select precisely these individuals since:

• They have accurate information;

• They have studied about nuclear power station’s advantages and disadvantages to the country. For example, they have studied about all NPP explosions and their consequences to the world.

In any case, the use of this technique was associated with a number of inconveniences. For starters, it was hard to find an ace in chemistry. Moreover, in fact, when I found an ace, he did not talk about almost many events, for example, how much their company is extracting minerals due to mysterious information. In addition, a number of teachers did not want to answer questions, because of some reasons, so it took a little time. In addition, it was a little difficult to characterize the questions that would answer the questions that I noted in the “goal”. Despite this, I adapted to these inconveniences.

Interviews were conducted in informal atmosphere therefore the participant felt relaxed and answered all questions widely. So, it improved the quality of gathered data. The conversation was recorded by interviewee’s approving and he signed the agreement (appendix #1).

Results

The Internet research was very essential as all the information found was relevant and useful. The main findings have been already described in the Context section.

Interviewees shared their personal information and experience about this problem. To the first question almost all of them answered that nuclear power plants are incredible energy source. However, one individual was against the nuclear power plants. It’s natural that they said why they think so.

To the second question, 2 people answered that one in every of the benefits of NPP is recieving more fuel from less energy, while other 2 individuals said that atomic power plant works very long and one person quoth that nuclear power stations can converts radioactive elements into the mandatory energy and it'd be one of the most effective energy.

To the third question, nearly all people answered that Kazakhstan incorporates a large reserve of uranium that's essential for the operation of atomic energy plants, the expert even made some arguments, like statistics. However, one person found it difficult to answer this question, since initially it absolutely was against atomic energy plants.

To the fourth question, 4 interviewees answered that atomic power stations don't cause ecological problem, also, they mentioned that it's safe for the environment, if the station is staffed by qualified personnel and frequently monitored to forestall accidents. However, I didn’t ask this question to the one person because this individual replied that atomic power plants are harmful to the environment within the first and third questions. Therefore, I immediately went on to the subsequent question.

The data of Question 5 shows that every one interviewees thought almost the identical way. They were agree that nuclear energy plants are beneficial to beneficial for Kazakhstan's GDP, but reported differently. The expert told statistics, while others gave different examples. in keeping with their answers, Kazakhstan can save plenty of cash, if we launch the nuclear energy plant, thereby increasing the gross domestic product.

To the ultimate question, all interviewers answered the identical way - Kazakhstan isn't able to launch atomic energy plants. Accroding to their point of view, Kazakhstan isn't ready because firstly, Kazakhstan lacks specialists, secondly, Kazakh people don't seem to be ready yet, finally, not enough money to implement this concept.

By and large, the investigation of interviews appeared that the respondents have nearly the indistinguishable thoughts and thus the lion's share of them accept that nuclear control plants are advantageous to Kazakhstan. In any case, a number of the respondents different views on this issue. this could be since one among them is an master, whereas others basically know more almost atomic plants than others. When I wrapped up meeting all respondents, i spotted that they display their considerations in critical elective ways. To demonstrate, the ace cited thoughts as a case, whereas others looked at this issue remotely, but be that as it may, the in general thought was clearly caught on.

Conclusion

According to each of the research question it's possible to create the subsequent conclusions.

• What are the benefits and drawbacks of nuclear power plants?

There are several benefits of atomic power stations to Kazakhstan. First of all, receives more energy from lesser fuels, thereby saving resources. Furthermore, they work for a long time. Finally, nuclear power plants can converts radioactive elements into the mandatory energy and it'd be one of the most effective energy. However, it also has drawbacks, according interviwees, it may have some ecological issues and can open “old wounds” of Kazakh people.

• Is it important to launch a nuclear power plant for Kazakhstan?

By interviewing people, i've got found answer to the current question. NPP is basically important for Kazakhstan because it directly affects the country's economy. GDP may rise, thereby improving people's lives. Also, Kazakhstan has 20% of the world's uranium reserves, additionally to the current, in 2019 Kazakhstan had 210 million a lot of oil and 1.6 million a lot of uranium, which is cherish 350 grams of uranium and 350 kg of oil, given these data, I learned that atomic power plants are vital object for our country.

• What risks does a nuclear power plant have (for the environment, air)?

According to their answers, I learned that NPP is ecological friendly. But whether or not this can be the case, it's necessary to constantly do inspections, observe safety rules and hire only qualified workers, then there'll be no accidents that might cause an environmental accident. as an example, on April 26th, 1986 an accident occurred because of staff negligence, in line with some reports, this happened because of a technical malfunction (“Low safety culture of the whole system is the cause of the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant”, 2019).

• Is Kazakhstan ready to restart nuclear power plants?

According to the answers, Kazakhstan definetely doesn't ready for this essential project because Kazakhstan lacks experienced and trained personnel, also, the Kazakh people are still terrified of energy, so whether or not a atomic energy plant and a nuclear bomb are completely various things, they're against this concept. Finally, whether or not we start a atomic energy plant, we don’t understand how to process uranium, so it'll be pointless to begin this project until we learn the way to process not only uranium, but also other minerals.

In my point of view, the atomic energy plant is helpful to Kazakhstan, therefore, kazakhs should overcome their fear and realize this idea to enhance life not just for themselves but also for the following generation. i'm sure that these days, although it'll not come now, but within the near future will certainly come. after all at the start of starting atomic energy plants we are going to probably face with an enormous number of various problems. However, finally we will succeed and improve the economy of our country.

Overall, following research paper was successful and also the main question was answered. the information found from Internet sources was very helpful because it was taken only from reliable sources with high level of credibility and sufficient knowledge. Conclusions to the study were easily made using interviews conducted with people that knew more about nuclear energy plants. If more time was available more interviews could be conducted to strengthen the results.

References

Global Business Reports (2015). Key minerals’ companies and projects. Engineering & Mining Journal, 80. Retrieved from

http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=274a3be2-16f9-4f11-92d1-8c907dd29127%40sessionmgr101

Green America (n.d.). 10 reasons to oppose nuclear energy. Retrieved from

https://www.greenamerica.org/fight-dirty-energy/amazon-build-cleaner-cloud/10-reasons-oppose-nuclear-energy

Ritchie and Roser (2019). Clean Water. Retrieved from

https://ourworldindata.org/water-access

Kadrzhanova, A. (2003). Kazakhstan: power generation and distribution industry. Retrieved from http://www.iberglobal.com/files/kazajstan_power.pdf

Ukrainian nuclear community (2019). Low safety culture of the whole system is the cause of the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. Retrieved from

https://ukrns.org/publikatsii/item/1247-nizkaya-kultura-bezopasnosti-vsej-sistemy-prichina-avarii-na-chernobylskoj-aes

Verkhoturov, D. (2018). Nuclear Power against a radiation accident: pros and cons of a nuclear power plant in Kazakhstan. Retrieved from

https://ru.sputniknews.kz/columnists/20181225/8612958/argumenty-aehs-npp-kazakhstan.html

APPENDIX: 1 INFORMED CONSENT FORM FOR TO PARTICIPATE IN THE STUDY

2. Interview

Primary questions:

1. What is your personal attitude towards NPP?

2. Can you name any advantages of nuclear power plants?

3. Is it beneficial for Kazakhstan to restart the nuclear power plant?

4. What risks does a nuclear power plant have (for the environment, air)?

5. How does a nuclear power plant affect a country's gdp?

6. In your opinion, to what extent is Kazakhstan ready to restart the NPP?

The first respondent: Chemistry teacher

A: АЭС-ке деген жеке көзқарасыңыз қандай?

B: Менің жеке көзқарасым – негізі мен қарсымын атомның электр станциясына.

A: Атом электр станцияларының қандай артықшылықтарын атай аласыз?

B: Негізгі артықшылығы – мысалы, Қазақстанда уранның қоры өте көп қо, сондықтан ураннан жаңағы атом энергиясын алып, оны ары қарай түрлендіруге болады да, электр энергиясына, осындай артықшылықтары бар. Қазіргі таңда енді біз ну, баламалы отын көзі да.

A: АЭС-ті қайта іске қосудың Қазақстанға пайдасы бар?

B: Пайдасы болу мүмкін, кхм... егер де, жаңа.. жаңа.. жаңа технологияларды пайдаланып, қайтадан іске қосса, пайдасы болуы мүмкін, бәрін мен де білмеймін.

A: Атом электр станциясының (қоршаған ортаға, ауаға) қандай қатері бар?

B: Егер де манағы айтып кеткендей, Жапонияның технологиясын пайдаланып, осындай атом электр станциясын құратын болсақ, онда қатері болмайды негізі.

A: Атом электр станциясы елдің жалпы ішкі өніміне қалай әсер етеді?

B: Ішкі өніміне негізі ойлаймын... ол.. қондырсақ онда атом электр станциясын, тікелей жоғары әсер етеді, потому что, не жаңа айтып кеткендей, баламалы энергия көзі ғо, сондықтан ол кәдімгідей біздің экономикамызды... қарқындатып жібереді да жақсы жағынан.

A: Сіздің ойыңызша, Қазақстан АЭС-ті қайта бастауға қаншалықты дайын?

B: Менің ойымша, дайын емес, өйткені біздерде ондай экологтар, сапалы экологтар жоқ әлі.. және технология жетіспейді. Ең бастысы – экологтар жоқ бізде

A: Рахмет.

The second respondent: Another chemistry teacher

A: АЭС-ке деген жеке көзқарасыңыз қандай?

B: Жақсы, ол болашақтағы ең... ең маңызды энергия көзі деп ойлаймын.

A: Атом электр станцияларының қандай артықшылықтарын атай аласыз?

B: Ол деген аз мөлшерді отыннан көп мөлшердегі энергия алу.

A: АЭС-ті қайта іске қосудың Қазақстанға пайдасы бар?

B: Өте үлкен пайдасы, өте үлкен. Бізде, Қазақстанда ең көп өндіру бойынша ураннан бірінші орында тұрмыз.

A: Атом электр станциясының (қоршаған ортаға, ауаға) қандай қатері бар?

B: Эээ... егер де технологияны дұрыс пайдаланса, ешқандай да зияны жоқ оның.

A: Атом электр станциясы елдің жалпы ішкі өніміне қалай әсер етеді?

B: Жақсы әсер етеді, енді, қанша ЖЭС-ке қанша кетеді...ал атомдық электр станцияға аз кетеді.

A: Сіздің ойыңызша, Қазақстан АЭС-ті қайта бастауға қаншалықты дайын?

B: Ммм... мен ондай информацияны ... білмеймін қаншалықты специалисттер бар екенін.

A: Рахмет.

The third respondent: Student who chooses chemistry as the main subject

A: АЭС-ке деген жеке көзқарасыңыз қандай?

B: Менің ойымша, АЭС … салуды ыыы... екі жақты көзқараспен қарастыруға болады, мысалға оның елге деген экономикалық пайдасы болғанымен, оның ыы.. экологияға деген іі.. зиянды әсері бар.

A: Атом электр станцияларының қандай артықшылықтарын атай аласыз?

B: Ыы.. ол елдің экономикасын дамытады және де ол ыы.. ммм... атом... электр станциясы басқа электр станцияларына қарағанда тиімдірек және де іі.. көп қаржыны ыы.. қажет етпейді, және де ыы.. ұзақ жұмыс істей алады.

A: АЭС-ті қайта іске қосудың Қазақстанға пайдасы бар ма?

B: Ыы.. менің ойымша, пайдасы бар, себебі біздің Қазақстанда іі.. уранның қоры іі.. мол әлемде іі.. үш, екінші орынға ие, сондықтан іі.. ең бастысы – ол экономикаға әсер етеді, ал әә.. экологияға зияны көп... секілді.

A: Атом электр станциясы елдің жалпы ішкі өніміне қалай әсер етеді?

B: Айтып өткендей ол экономикаға іі... оң әсер ететін болса, ішкі өнімге де оң жақты әсер етеді, яғни ыы.. елдің экономикасы жақсы болған сайын, халықтың ыы.. тұрмыс жағдайы да жақсы болады.

A: Сіздің ойыңызша, Қазақстан АЭС-ті қайта бастауға қаншалықты дайын?

B: Менің ойымша, Қазақстан дайын емес секілді, себебі ыы.. АЭС-ті салу үшін халықты дайындау қажет, және екіншіден қаржы болу керек, үшіншіден, іі.. ол арнайы орындарды қарастыру қажет.

A: Рахмет.

The fourth respondent: Another student who chooses chemistry as the main subject

A: АЭС-ке деген жеке көзқарасыңыз қандай?

B: АЭС керемет көзі деп есептеймін, себебі АЭС табиғатқа зияны жоқ және көп энергия береді

A: Атом электр станцияларының қандай артықшылықтарын атай аласыз?

B: Атом электр станциялары экологиялық таза және олар ... ұзақ уақыт жұмыс жасайды.

A: АЭС-ті қайта іске қосудың Қазақстанға пайдасы бар?

B: Қазақстанға пайдасы.. негізінен Қазақстанға пайдасы бар, себебі Қазақстанда үлкен радиоактивті атомдар.. көзі бар және оны қолдануға болатын арнайы орындар бар.

A: Атом электр станциясының (қоршаған ортаға, ауаға) қандай қатері бар?

B: Атом электр станциясының қоршаған ортаға қатері өте төмен, тек радиоактивті атомдардың бөлшектері ғана бар.

A: Атом электр станциясы елдің жалпы ішкі өніміне қалай әсер етеді?

B: Атом электр станциясы үлкен энергия көзін береді және бұл энергия болашақта сатылу арқылы мемлекетке үлкен пайда әкеледі.

A: Сіздің ойыңызша, Қазақстан АЭС-ті қайта бастауға қаншалықты дайын?

B: Қазақстанның дайындығы.. Қазақстан толығымен дайын деп есептей алмаймын, себебі Қазақстанға жақсы мамандар жетіспейді және бұл болашақта үлкен қатер әкелуі мүмкін.

A: Рахмет.

The fifth respondent: Leading specialist in chemistry and physics

A: АЭС-ке деген жеке көзқарасыңыз қандай?

B: АЭС-ке деп отырғаныңыз.. жаңағы.. ол не ғой.. атом электр станциясы ғой сұрап отырғаныңыз да? Өте жақсы себебі, ол елге тигізер пайдасы мол... ол энергия көзі арзан болып келеді.

A: Атом электр станцияларының қандай артықшылықтарын атай аласыз?

B: ...Атом электр станцияларының.. олар дегеніміз – ол аз мөлшердегі отыннан, көп энергия алуға болады және табиғатқа зияны жоқ.

A: АЭС-ті қайта іске қосудың Қазақстанға пайдасы бар?

B: ...Конечно, бар. Пайдасы өте көп, себебі Қазақстанда бүкіл әлемнің 20% уран қоры бар, сонымен қоса 2019 жылдың мәліметі бойынша елімізде 210 миллион тонна мұнай болғанымен, 1,6 миллион тонна уран қоры бар, ал ол 4,5 грамм уран 350 кг мұнайға тең екенін есептесек, оның пайдасы өте көп екенін білеміз.

A: Атом электр станциясының (қоршаған ортаға, ауаға) қандай қатері бар?

B: ... Егер станцияда білікті мамандар істейтін болса және апаттық жағдай тудырмас үшін уақыт сайын тексеріс жүргізсе, табиғатқа зияны жоқ оның.

A: Атом электр станциясы елдің жалпы ішкі өніміне қалай әсер етеді?

B: Атом электр станциясы экономикалық тиімді болғандықтан, елдің де және.. жалпы ішкі өнімді көтереді. Мысалы, айтып отырғандай, 4,5 грамм уран 350 кг мұнайға тең, демек уран арқылы қыруар ақшаны үнемдеп алуға болады.

A: Сіздің ойыңызша, Қазақстан АЭС-ті қайта бастауға қаншалықты дайын?

B: Менің ойымша, Қазақстан осыған дайын емес, себебі біріншіден.. біріншіден кхм.., білікті маман жетіспейді, екіншіден, халықтың көбісі ядролық қарудан зардап шеккендіктен, бұл ойдан бас тартып жатыр, үшіншіден, уранды өңдей алмағандықтан, пайдасы өте төмен.

A: Интервьюыңызға рахмет, сау болыңыз!

B: Жақсы, сау болыңыз!