Previous   Next

Should the U.S. rely more on nuclear power?

Browse the archives

“I think it’s probably a good idea. It seems like a fairly clean source of energy if they can find a way to dispose of the waste.”

“No, because I think there are safer types of energy without the problems of waste storage and other major problems.”

“I’m positively glowing with the idea, but you know, solar power is great, too.”

“Eventually I think we might have to, but I always like to think there’s a better alternative.”


theBike45 7 years, 10 months ago

I'm astounded that there are still those who have hysterical fears about a power generation technology that has been operating continuously for 50 years and supplying 20% of our electrical energy. Three Mile island was the worst accident and yet not one single person was injured - a better record than the stoplight down the street. Nuclear power costs 5 times less than wind on the basis of kilowatts produced per dollar of construction, and nuclear fuel is dirt cheap - less than 1/2 cent per kilowatt, making nuclear the cheapest at 1.72 cents per kilowatt - cheaper than coal and five times cheaper than wind power and solar photovoltaic, which has no ability to meet peak demand and cannot replace any fossil burning plants. Nuclear waste is no technological problem - the Scandanavians already have two storage facilities operating right now. And MIT analasis demonstrated recently that there isn't even any reason to worry about permanent storage for at least 30 years. Those "environmentalists" who have blocked nuclear power for the past 30 years are the ones most responsible for global warming - those nuclear plants by now would have been producing 50% of our power carbon free. Their opposition to nuclear power is a monument to shortsighted ignorance and emotional irrationality. Non-dispatchable, uncontrollable and unpredictable wind and solar photovoltaic combined produce less than 1% of the kilowatthours that power our country. Only solar thermal will emerge from the plethora of primitive alternative energy technologies as a major source of energy. Unfortunately, the sun doesn't always sun every day or shine enough, and nuclear power must be the backbone of our grid. Nothing else even begins to make logical sense. The anti-nukes don't base their arguments on logic - they are based on hysterical fear mongering over accidents that never happen and unnamed fears of nuclear waste that has been stored locally just fine for the past 50 years. They are manufacturing doomsday scenarios for a gullible public. But the world is going nuclear - other countries base their decisions on logic, not childish emotions and over 300 new nuclear plants will be built over the next 5 years, 32 of them here in the U.S. The anti-nuclear morons have failed in their deceptions and still don't take responsibility for their large part in creating global warming. They even manage to deceive themselves (not a difficult task).

Commenting has been disabled for this item.