Should we fix our global warming and energy security needs by building loads of nuclear plants across the UK?

Question

if we built several hundred we would ensure our own energy needs, and have a massive surplus to sell to europe and beyond, we would just need to ensure no messy spills or meltdowns. We could choose one place like say essex and built a thousand all close to each other, so the techs can be on hand instead of spread all over the place

Answer 1

Wouldn't it be cheaper to build power windmills? I live in toronto, canada and we have a test windmill by the lake. It powers a lot of houses. I don't really understand why we don't have 100 of them by now. They're pretty too.

Answer 2

That is pretty much what France has done. But it would not take even one thousand nuclear plants. France has 59 nuclear reactors operated by Electricite de France (EdF) with total capacity of over 63 GWe, supplying over 426 billion kWh per year of electricity, 78% of the total generated there.

Answer 3

yes, absolutely. In the states, we have 30 nuclear plants and have no problems.

Answer 4

We don't need several hundred, only a handful would supply enough energy.

Answer 5

nuclear power plants are not the way to go to fix our global warming problem.  it just gives the terrorists more dangerous targets to hit if an attack does come.  plants like that are a risk more then a help if you ask me.

Answer 6

Gosh, no! That would be horrid! There are other more natural soloutions to Global Warming!

Answer 7

Sure nuclear waste is so much better than the green house effect.

Answer 8

Although it is said that nuclear power is the cleanest it is also the most dangerous.   If you want to know how dangerous I recommend that you read up on the nuclear explosions in the 70's in the US and the latest one is Chernobyl.  All it boils down to are you prepared to live in a country which will harbour lots of nuclear bombs on its surface. Further, the disposal of nuclear waste is no mean feat and a leak of any kind will not only kill all living things on land but the sea too.

Think carefully before you decide what you would prefer.

Answer 9

Go for it, but suggest the best place is close to government buildings like parliment and the homes of the rich and famous. Perhaps within spitting distance of your home as well?

The biggest danger from a nuclear powered world is that it requires enormous transport of nuclear materials around the world. Easy for it to get into the hands of terrorists. Dirty bombs are dead easy to make. No science degree required!

Also there are lots of other solutions, nuclear is not the single answer. There is no one simple answer. But not being overly fond of Brits, go right ahead with your plan.

Answer 10

Yeah , but unfortunately the lack of understanding on anything nuclear brings the anti brigade out, minority over majority , something that this government loves.

Answer 11

I dont think they will build that many power stations.Reading in the Telegraph yesterday,one of the main concerns is safety insurance and how the government would have to foot the bill for any accidents.I wouldn't have thought people in Essex would be to overjoyed at your idea either! lol

Answer 12

Yes here in the states have blocked us from doing that ,they are always against anything.

Answer 13

It's probably the only option available, as solar panels and wind turbines are too expensive and don't produce enough energy.

I don't know what the people of Essex might make of your choice of location for several hundred nuclear power stations though.

Answer 14

i wont go that route in the UK . the place is so small if just one was to have a leak you would all be done in .

i think you need to have trains that go all over . electric cars and trucks .  and a total ban on emigration .