Comment on nuclear energy -> grammar and language help needed

0 Hello, I'm new to this place and it seems to be exactly what I have been searching for. I'm supposed to write a comment on nuclear energy and I have to hand it in on wednesday. It would be very kind of you and really appreciated if you could take the time to read through it and correct mistakes as I really need it to be perfect. 01u01b00Thank you in advance.02b02u02br
02br
00Note: It would be great if you could put my mistakes in brackets and underline the corrected form, so I can actually see what I did wrong.01blockquote

02br
12br
11b10Nuclear Energy – the future energy source?12br
12br
10 The worlds demand for energy is enormous. The amount of energy we consume in Germany is the equivalent of a train full of coal 75000km long, which is long enough to go around the world twice. So the question is, what can we do about it? Is nuclear energy really a solution or just another workaround that will become a problem in future? To find an answer to this question I am going to analyze and comment on this topic in the following.12br
10 One thing is for certain, something has to change. The gigantic energy needs worldwide are mainly covered by coal and other fossil fuels like crude oil and natural gas. Unfortunately, this way of achieving energy has a deep impact on our environment as it produces greenhouse gasses, which damage the ozone layer. Scientists predict that soon all our resources will be depleted and our climate will change in a very drastic way. In 2100 the average temperature is going to be six degrees Celsius higher than today, which will ultimately lead to the melting of the polar caps, as well as floods, tornados and droughts. Thus, it does not matter whether the resources are going to be depleted soon or in several hundred years, we cannot afford to keep on obtaining energy like this and destroying our environment. Furthermore, we cannot even guarantee that fossil fuels will be able to cover our energy needs in future. The population explosion in developing countries and the technological progress worldwide will soon increase our need for energy greatly. A rather clean alternative to this would be the use of nuclear energy. It surely has the capability to cover all energy needs nowadays and even in future. Additionally, it does not produce any greenhouse gasses in its process of achieving energy, and it is cheap. Many people claim that it is dangerous because a nuclear power plant could be a target of terrorism. In fact, a nuclear power plant is properly secured and can hardly be damaged, so it is rather unlikely that this could become a problem. There are only two kinds of problems that a nuclear power plant causes. First, the water used for cooling the reactor is too warm when it is led back in the natural water circulation, which leads to mass extinction of fish and plants. Second, nuclear power plants produce radioactive residues that damage the local environment. These radioactive residues have to be stored somewhere to prevent this damage. However, these two problems can be fixed. The water can be cooled down by pumping it through a second circling system, and the radioactive residues can be stocked in former salt domes, as it is believed that their unique structure can seal off the radiation. Another possibility to achieve energy is the use of renewable energy sources such as wind, sun, water and terrestrial heat. These are indeed the most environmental friendly ways to achieve energy but they cost a lot and are not competitive yet. For example, the whole desert Sarah would have to be covered with solar cells to achieve enough energy for the whole planet. Of course nobody lives there and therefore nobody would mind them being installed there, but constructing and maintaining so many cells seems to be impossible, not mentioning political affairs and economical dependence. In my opinion, renewable energy sources still need time to develop, but once they are competitive, all our problems will be solved as there is more than enough wind, sun and water.12br
10 All in all, taking everything into account, I have come to the conclusion that nuclear energy is indeed the energy source of the future, but only of the near future. Once the methods to achieve energy with renewable sources are well-engineered and fully developed they will be the best and only energy source. Until then nothing is better than nuclear energy. The only problem is that it would take some years until nuclear power plants could acquire the job of coal-fired power stations as there are not enough yet. Until nuclear power plants can provide us with enough energy, we have to help our environment by saving energy.12b12br
12blockquote

10 0-