Nuclear Energy

       I don't think that nuclear energy is the solution to the upcoming energy crisis.  To begin with, the risks that surround it far outweigh any benefits that could come from using nuclear energy.  Accidents like Three Mile Island and Chernobyl may be rare occurrences, but the fact that a simple mistake could cause billions of dollars worth of cleanup and health concerns for many people. In addition, the mining for uranium and  the transport of all of the materials needed to run a plant take a shine off of the idea of nuclear energy being our clean solution.  While pollution and radiation is a scary thought, even more so is what could happen with the left over nuclear waste.  It could be used to make weapons that wipe out entire cities.  The threat of terrorism is a very strong proponent against the nuclear energy question.
      Instead of using nuclear energy, I think it would be a wiser solution to invest in other methods such as wind and solar powered energy. Unlike coal, there is a guarantee that we will have the resources to power these types of energy.  Unlike nuclear energy, there isn't any radioactive waste that could poison people's health or be used to make weapons. 

Oil Crisis?

After reading the two articles on whether on not there was an oil crisis that would change the way the world works, I was caught somewhere in the middle of the two views.  On one hand, I definitely agree that we have quite a bit of time before oil becomes a serious issue, but at the same time, I think that we need to be finding new energy sources that could replace it.  The time lag between where we are now and when oil becomes too expensive to become economically efficient should be used to explore and perfect the alternative energy sources we do have.  What concerns me the most is that people will wait until oil does become a serious problem and won't have another stable energy source to fall back on.
I don't believe that the world will ever be as extremely altered as either article predicted.  The image of empty highway and food only being from local sources seems highly improbably to me.  It might decrease as prices increase, but I don't think that it will ever reach the levels that the author predicted it will.  I do agree, however, that mass transport, such as trains, will become more and more popular, especially with the shipping industry and work commute.  The poor economic situation that has been persisting for the past few years has shown that when people will make the more cost effective choice when it comes to traveling.
Overall, I think that the views presented in each article were extremes.  Especially when they are placed right next to each other, it's easy to see how people are confused over whether they should be worried or not.  Despite the convincing evidence used to support each point of view, I think that what will really happen is a combination of the two, including more mass transport, but also an increased use of technology that will play a vital role in the world after oil becomes economically inefficient.