Peer Review of Cyntalia's WA2

Dear Cyntalia,
About your post, I think you have succeeded in explaining your idea. Besides, you have somehow persuaded the audience that Very-high-temperature reactor (VHTR) is actually the greatest choice for people who want to preserve the environment by substitution of nuclear energy. You also gave us clear evidences and statistics to prove your arguments. I am very impressed by that. Moreover, you did state the disadvantages of your choice, the VHTR, thus make the audience have a more obvious sight about what you are trying to explain.
However, there are somethings I want to comment about your paper.
First is the style of one argumentative text, I think you can reverse the order of the opposing argument and the supporting one to make the essay more persuadable (also like the ideal model of argumentative text). Putting the opposing arguments below, and then argue about it sometimes make you repeat yourself.
Secondly, I think the introduction is quite too long. You can save the place for talking more about the part “safe” in your supporting idea, like comparing it with other reactors ( as you did with the first one). More statistical data is recommended, too.
That’s all. Generally, the whole essay is coherent and well-organized. Transitions are used logically and effectively as well. Although I don’t have a chance to read through the whole reading, your essay did give me a clear picture. Good one! 



P/s: Ah, I am very sorry about this late post. I totally forgot it. =(