How will we able to provide for the world's increasing needs for energy?

Question

is nuclear energy a viable alternative? WHY? give reasons....

Answer 1

Efficiency is cheapest and easiest.    Conservation comes next.    Nuclear is a viable alternative in a socialist country, but isn't safe where the contract is given to the lowest bidder.   Nothing too bad has happened yet, but it will eventually when you chose companies that cut the most corners.

Answer 2

It's not the only answer but its the fastest to build for the amount of power you get from it...and there really not that dangerous, just a one off dose of radiation rarely kills anyone its the prelonged exposure to it (like that russian guy who was fed a isotope).

personally i think the whole problem is the not in my back yard thing that everyone has goin now days they want windturbines but not near them they want solar pannels but not near them.

the other problem people have with nuclear is the desposal off the waste! which considering the waste from our current coal fired power stations is co2 most people think out of sight out of mind when the co2 is doing far more damage to our heath via the ozone than a little bit of radioactive elements which can be almost contained in a giant lump of concreate!

so yea nuclear is the way to go! but we should also use the sea more and running water it can all be turned into energy.

high five to the guy above as well!

Answer 3

I'm a big old bunny hugger and used to be anti nuke until I read about how there's a huge wildlife park around Chernobyl and how it is being used to raise endangered Mongolian ponies and how wildlife has rebounded without people living in the area. (Same as the DMZ between North and South Korea - no people, lots of wildlife.)

That said, nuke power, when run by competent people can work. I think a really good solution that no one wants to try is to use less energy.

Answer 4

Nuclear has been proven for MANY DECADES to be a fantastic solution.

The problem is, it has the word 'nuclear' in it's name, so liberals equate that with bombs, and won't accept it.

Even France gets most of their power by nuclear, but here in America, we've bowed down to the pressure from environmentalist for the last 30 years, and shut down all nuclear power plant building.

Totally stupid, and I'm sorry, but it's YOU ENVIRONMENTALISTS who killed nuclear power - the absolutely BEST solution to this problem.

Now the new thing is, you people are trying to tear down all the dams, and stop the building of all new dams.

Hydroelectric power is the other best energy power, but again, you people are killing it.

What could be "greener" than power generated from the gravity of falling water???

But no, "dams are evil".

So we continue to get 85% of all our power in the U.S. from the burning of COAL and GAS.

Real smart, people.

Answer 5

Nuclear energy is good and all but there are two types :

nuclear fission

nuclear fusion

Nuclear fission (current energy source)

It uses uranium 235 and then a neutron is fired and when the 235 breaks apart it produces 3 more (chain reaction) however this is flawed in the sense that it produces radio active matireal.

Nuclear fusion

Im not too upto date on this method but i know it creates less power and does not produce radioactive material. Its all todo with forcing molecules together.