why don't US use the nuclear energy instead of gas energy?

Question

have you heared about any new investigations to replace on oil.

Answer 1

Why "DOESN'T"....spell correctly and more people will take you seriously.

Answer 2

Big Oil, Big Oil, Big Oil.The oil companies have a lock on the legislative and executive Branch's of our government Both of these branches are filled with corrupt politicians.Our leaders seem not to care the least little bit about anything other than lining their own pockets and protecting those who are doing the lining.There are some new sources of energy being explored such as Bio Diesel, hydrogen fuel cells,coal liquefaction and I have even heard some rumblings of refining oil from the shale rocks in the west this last technology has been around for many years but only now with gas at $3 plus per gallon this is almost to the point where it can be done for a profit but unless our elected officials actually put some Federal dollars and resources behind these technology's it will be decades before they can actually relieve our dependence on foreign oil from unstable, undependable middle eastern & south american countries

Answer 3

A new kind of fuel is Ethanol. It is made from common things like corn and sugar cane. It is really big in the Midwest a lot of people are buying it. Also people are using grease from kitchens too and it works. People will try anything now with the rising prices. Also try solar power.

Also the reason nuclear energy is declining is because there is no proper way to dispose of it. they usually just put it underground. Short-lived waste is buried, but long-lived waste is disposed of deep underground. And seriously who wants to walk around with radioactive suits on all the time?

Answer 4

Three Mile Island, for one. We also saw what happened with Chernobyl.

Some power plants here are nuclear, though. And some power plants are converting to other forms of cleaner-burning fuel.

Answer 5

Three Mile Island

Answer 6

i agree i think nuclear energy was given up on a little early..
i mean a nuclear powered car would never need to be refueled.
if it blew up it would blow up the city but perhaps with some precautions and some inginuity it might be worth trying.

Answer 7

Anti-matter might be the solution. It's the most powerful energy source know to man. And it leaves no dangerous residue.

Just be very careful producing it and handling it!

Answer 8

USA does use nuclear energy because they have too many countries mad at them. Simply not safe to do it!!! They make Nuclear stuff yes, yes,yes, but not use it in a postive way. Why??? Not the USA way of thinking is it.
*********************************************************************
What do think would happen if there was nuclear stuff in USA when 9, 11 happen???
*********************************************************************
From Wikipedia: (just some of it there a ton of info on it)
Main article: Nuclear power
**********************************************************************
The average nuclear power station produces 20-30 tonnes of spent fuel each year
**********************************************************************
the United States had accumulated about 49,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel from nuclear reactors. Unlike other countries, U.S. policy forbids recycling of used fuel and it is all treated as waste. After 10,000 years of radioactive decay, according to United States Environmental Protection Agency standards, the spent nuclear fuel will no longer pose a threat to public health and safety.

The safe storage and disposal of nuclear waste is a difficult challenge. Because of potential harm from radiation, spent nuclear fuel must be stored in shielded basins of water, or in dry storage vaults or dry cask storage until its radioactivity decreases naturally ("decays") to safe levels. This can take days or thousands of years, depending on the type of fuel. Most waste is currently stored in temporary storage sites, requiring constant maintenance, while suitable permanent disposal methods are discussed. Underground storage at Yucca Mountain in U.S. has been proposed as permanent storage. See the article on the nuclear fuel cycle for more information.
********************************************************************
After a period of decline following the 1979 Three Mile Island accident and the 1986 incident at Chernobyl, there is a recently renewed interest in nuclear energy because it could partially address both dwindling oil reserves and global warming with far fewer emissions of greenhouse gases than fossil fuel.

The use of nuclear power is controversial because of the problem of storing radioactive waste for indefinite periods, the potential for possibly severe radioactive contamination by accident or sabotage, and the possibility that its use could in some countries lead to the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Proponents, including some national governments, claim that these risks are small and can be lessened with new technology. They note that France and all of the industrialised economies of Asia [1] see nuclear power as a key economic strategy, that the safety record is already good when compared to other energy forms, that it releases much less radioactive waste than coal power, and that nuclear power is a sustainable energy source. Many environmental groups claim nuclear power is an uneconomic, unsound and potentially dangerous energy source, especially compared to renewable energy, and dispute whether the costs and risks can be reduced through new technology.
*********************************************************************
Opponents of nuclear power claim that any of the environmental benefits are outweighed by safety compromises and by the costs related to construction and operation of nuclear power plants, including costs for spent-fuel disposition and plant retirement. Proponents of nuclear power state that nuclear energy is the only power source which explicitly factors the estimated costs for waste containment and plant decommissioning into its overall cost, and that the quoted cost of fossil fuel plants is deceptively low for this reason. The cost of many renewables would be increased too if they included necessary back-up due to their intermittent nature.
**********************************************************************

I truly hope that answer your question or sent you down the path to made your own view on it.

Answer 9

Americans get REALLY touchy about having a nuclear power plant built in their neighborhood.

Answer 10

Hippies.

Answer 11

Because our presidents have all been tied to oil profits!!