RA: Nuclear Aging

http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2004/Palo-Verde-Aging11apr04.htm

Audience: Although this article is posted on a "politically informative" website which denounces liberals and conservatives, the piece was originally written in a Phoenix newspaper. Therefore, the audience would initially be the Phoenix residents who are most directly affected by Palo Verde.

Enthymeme: The plant is aging, and the employees' culture of safety is diminishing, thus increasing safety concerns and risks.

Implicit assumption: Whatever compromises the security and safety of the Palo Verde Plant will negatively affect the environment and residents in the Phoenix area.

Ethos/logos/pathos: The article cites a lot of history, like the building of nuclear power plants in the United States. Almost immediately the writer recalls the history of the Three Mile Island which suffered a major safety breach in 1979, though not many people were affected in the end. This tactic appeals to the reader's fear, that is, fear of a greater nuclear incident in a populous area. The writer also talks about "broken relationships" between the employees and their bosses. This also appeals to the reader, as he/she is most likely an employee of some company and may have seen the negative results of sour employee-employer relations.
He cites the example of the Davis-Bessie plant, how employee sentiment dropped there and resulted in reduced protection and safety. I do not know anything about this incident, so I should probably do more reading.
He sounds scholarly enough, acting as a warning voice of sorts for the curious and concerned reader. However, he does not quote many solid facts or give actual examples of "broken relationships" or what happened at Davis-Bessie. This lack of supporting information results in a weak argument.

S- This is not a sufficient argument. It gives few direct quotes from any authoritative voice. It lacks all published references. While the reader does bring up interesting points which seem logical regarding an aging nuclear facility, with no conspicuous factual background, the argument lacks.

T- The argument seems typical enough. It is natural for something that ages to start losing its efficacy and safety, especially in the realm of power and energy.

A- I have no basis from the actual article to decide if it is accurate. If he linked some sources to the claims, they would be more than credible. Therefore, although the facts may be accurate in and of themselves, the website does not present them in an organized, empirical, testable manner.

R- For the aforementioned reasons, I do not completely consider this work reliable. The website does appeal to the "third part voter" or the citizens who do not like Democrat or Republican agendas.

Effective: I do not think this article is effective at this time. While some may be considering shutting down the plant or completely revamping the entire system, the information to back those claims up is not present.