What are the pros of nuclear energy?

Question

i have asked what the reasonable cons are but for my debate i need to know more of what my opponent will say so i can make a rebuttal! plz helP! write anything u think is good about nuclear energy

Answer 1

It is easy to make!  Heck, even Homer Simpson can create it.  Nuclear energy is emission free, most of the time.

And now a reading from the Book of Homer...

# 'Single and Sassy' - Homer's bumper sticker.

# Internet! Is that thing still around?

# Ah, beer, my one weakness. My Achille's heel, if you will.

# Okay, whatever to take my mind off my life.

# I voted for Prell to go back to the old glass bottle. Then I became deeply cynical. ( about voting )

# To find Flanders, I have to think like Flanders.

# Rock stars ... is there anything they don't know?

# Well, maybe if he had had better arch support, they wouldn't have caught 'im. ( about Jesus wearing sandals ).

# Ah, the college roadtrip. What better way to spread beer-fueled mayhem?

# All right, brain. You don't like me and I don't like you, but let's just do this and I can get back to killing you with beer.

# All right, let's not panic. I'll make the money by selling one of my livers. I can get by with one.

Answer 2

When you speak of nuclear energy, you are actually referring to two different procedures. There is nuclear FISSION (the splitting of a large molecular structure, most often uranium) and then there is nuclear FUSION (the combining of two very small molecular structures, in experiments most often hydrogen or helium isotopes). The differences are of course vast and I will assume, as your question states, that you are aware of the cons, including the fact that nuclear Fusion is still only experimental. The most common benefits associated with our current fission reactors are often misleading, i.e. when nuclear fission was first proposed energy companies promised electricity that would be "too cheap to meter" which anyone who has paid an electric bill knows never came to fruition. The other benefits put forth by propoponents of nuclear fisson are simply that it is clean, safe, and efficient. None of which, in the case of fission, holds water. Putting aside the safety concerns that most of us should be aware of, nuclear fission has never been as clean or efficient as promised. The easiest way to explain it is simply by analysing the amount of energy used to create electricity from fission as compared, even to, coal, for instance: coal is often seen as the energy source with the highest amount of harmful emissions, i.e. Nox and Sox. But think of this this, to produce electricity from coal, you must first, of course, mine it (which of course with the equipment being used energy gas is expended). However after that the process, while not benign is relatively simple. Coal is mined, brought to a generator, burned, thus boiling water which turns a turbines and produces electricity. With uranium, it is first of all much harder to mine, then coal is actually burned to produce the power needed to process the uranium into fuel rods which can then be brought to the nuclear facility, where the reaction is pruduced which boils water which turns a turbine which produces electricity.  Most people, I find even if they are aware of the waste products and safety hazards are not aware of the sheer amount of resourses used in the manufacturing proess. The one promising aspect of nuclear power is that a lot of time and research has gone into nuclear fusion, which if succesful, would apparrently solve a good deal of our world's energy problems, something many of us have unfortunately heard before, but in this case it does hold some advantages. First of all, and here unfortunately I am more familiar which the earlier experiments using hydrogen, rather than the newer ones using helium which seem even more promising. Not only is hydrogen much more readily available than uranium but the reaction produces an enormous amount of energy with little waste, the primary by-product of the reaction is simply water. The problem with fusion is first of all how to contain a reaction so large and second of all how to maintain such a large reaction. Maybe the future will be brighter.

Answer 3

I can't tell you any.  Actually, wind and geo-thermal are the only ways to go.

Answer 4

It is a fuel that Canada produces.

It doesn't make pollution.

It is sustainable.

It doesn't use raw materials that can be used in the food chain like bio fuels.