Why nuclear energy?

Question

Why is nuclear energy such a hot topic these days, why is everyone discussing about it?

Answer 1

It doesn't give off CO2.

But it IS the alternative.

It's also a good way to find out if the AGW proponent in front of you is really concerned about CO2 or if he's just in favor of imposing a "back to nature" lifestyle and using AGW as a pretext.    Nuclear would allow us to live the same lifestyles we live now without emitting CO2.    Pro-nuclear AGW proponents are truly concerned about CO2.   Anti-nuclear AGW proponents, they will never accept any answer other than "we need to change our lifestyles" which means you need to change yours to make him happy, which is the antithesis of a free society.

Answer 2

I suspect the biggest reason it is being discussed so frequently is that the power companies have found a way to convince the public that every other energy source produces greenhouse gases ... and with our extreme need for energy they are trying hard to show how green nuclear is. Why? Because that is how they earn their living, selling nuclear power. Do not be decieved but be wary for certain.

It is true that it does not directly produce greenhouse gas but that is the extent of its green side. Perhaps the warm water from the cooling systems encourages green plants to grow in the required lake.

People usually have very strong feelings one way or the other about nuclear because there is such potential for a major disaster. Those problems wil be amplified greatly when many other countries build them and not every other country is our good friend. Some would like to blow us to another planet. How will we control their potential for building dirty bombs or if they use the marvelous breeder technology to reprocess the fuel how will we control the plutonium created by breeders? Energy production isn't the only problem. Terrorists are not likely to blow up solar panels but they surely are salivating at the prospect of hitting a nuclear plant ... but they'd wait till after we or some other country builds them. I have been following this industry for decades and truthfully, it scares me. It will never be free of legal and insurance battles, so why waste money on a continuously risky system before getting expert advice from solar, wind, biofuels, conservation, decentralized power sources, geothermal, maybe ethanol, nanotechnology ... all of which seem to be on the verge of making significant contributions.

Answer 3

Because, unlike many other energy sources, nuclear power doesn't emit CO2.

When people start to talk about global warming, and the effect of CO2 on global warming, they start to talk about ways to limit CO2 emissions.

Most (not all) of the ways that we currently generate electricity emit CO2, including coal and natural gas electric plants.  Hydroelectric (building dams) and nuclear are two relatively traditional, large scale, presumably cost-effective methods of producing large amounts of energy that do not emit CO2.

So lots of folks have begun to discuss nuclear as an alternative energy source that does not contribute to global warming.

Also, when you look at the ways to rapidly produce more electricity without increasing CO2 production (wind, solar, nuclear) then nuclear appears to be the most cost effective.

Let me note, before I get a gazillion thumbs down here, that I didn't say that nuclear was more environmental, or that it was the better choice.  Only that it currently seems to be more cost effective than the other non-CO2 producing alternatives.

That is why there is so much recent conversation about nuclear energy.

Great question.

Answer 4

The mayor of Chernobyl thought nuclear was a great idea and he talked all about it with every one.  As we can all see, the emperor's new clothes don't hold up.

Answer 5

I didn't realize it was a hot topic...but perhaps it is a hot topic because every one if afraid of global warming and are interested in the different ways society might obtain and utilize energy.