Included in the 2023 recap edition of the publication Nuclear News was the 2024 Energy Quiz – a general knowledge test to check readers’ energy issues literacy. The 20-question quiz included themes of 2050 decarbonization goals, health effects of different forms of energy generation, and energy requirements for different demographics, among other topics. Readers with zero to five correct answers were encouraged by the article to read up to improve their understanding of energy issues, while a score of 16-20 meant, “you should be advising Congress.” 

The goal of the rhetoric, as stated by the article, is to get readers to pay attention to energy issues. However, seeing as the article was published by a strongly pro-nuclear magazine, a subtler purpose of the rhetoric is to get readers to pay attention to the safety of and need for nuclear energy. This can be seen with specific questions such as, “According to the recent UN Economic Commission for Europe report, which energy source has the lowest life cycle impact on human health and the environment?” the answer to which was “nuclear,” and “When did the earliest known fission reactor (not just fission reactions) begin operation?” the answer to which was, “2,000,000,000 BC, the natural reactors at Oklo in Africa.” Such questions highlight the safety of nuclear energy in a way that one might not expect in an energy quiz published in say, an environmental advocacy magazine. While the statistics used to support the safety nuclear energy are true, in my opinion it does skew the quiz away from focusing on “energy issues” and more towards focusing on “nuclear energy issues.” 

However, if the goal of the rhetoric is to improve knowledge of nuclear energy, I do not think that it was all too effective. While it did get me to think about different facets of energy issues and nuclear technology, I think a shortcoming of this quiz was its delivery. The quiz was published in Nuclear News, which is a magazine with a rather niche demographic of nuclear energy enthusiasts. A large majority of readers are already familiar with the benefits of nuclear energy, and thus don’t gain much by completing the quiz. The rhetoric would be a lot more effective were it published for a more diverse demographic, one that would include a larger proportion of readers against or neutral towards nuclear energy. Unfortunately, while the quiz was made available online, it was only available for magazine subscribers, not the public. While this rhetoric does have the good intentions to educate the public on the benefit of nuclear energy, it falls a bit short in its purpose since it does not reach an optimal audience.