How practical is nuclear power now and for the future?

Answer 1

It isn't. It never was. It is too volatile. There are in fact several alternatives rendering the internal combustion engine obsolete. These are not ' Hybrids.' Remember that the governments of the world today are not concerned with the benefit of the citizenry generally but it's control and exploitation.

Answer 2

Its very practical--but there's some things we need to think carefully about if we want to expand nuclear power as an energy source.

Currently there are 109 nuclear reactors producing power in the US--all at least 30 years old. So obviously the technology works.

The three questions that need to be answered are:
1) Can the cost be brought down? Currently nuclear power is more expensive than other alternatives. New technology might change that, though.
2) Safety. there has been only one really catastrophic accident world wide--Chernoble in the USSR in the 1980s. The only accident in this country--3 Mile Island--was not catastrophic. Not a bad track record--but the reason safety is so important is that the magnitude of a failure is potentially horrific. But, again, we have technology available that could make major improvements in a safety record that is very good. But is it safe enough? That's a serious question that should be properly studied--by quaalified scientists and engineers, not pro- or anti-nuclear activists.

3) Radioactive waste. This stuff doesn't go away for thousands or hundeds of thousands of years. We can store it safely--but we need to be sure it will stay where we put it for a VERY long time. There's facilities already, of course. The question of how much we can expand the nuclear industry depends partly on knowing if we will have a place to put that much more radioactive waste.

Personally, I think the key to the future will be solar, not nuclear. There's technical problems with large scale use--what to do about energy at night (i.e., how to store the energy for later use cost-effectively). Solar power itself works--and its cost is dropping dramatically. But don't rule out nuclear power--both solar and nuclear are among a whole slew of technologies that we can use--and probably no one of them will be the "whole" answer.

Answer 3

It's very practical. You hear everyday on the news what the price of oil is. And how little of there is (though I don't believe it). Nuclear power is a great alternative. Environmentalist's complain of global warming (don't believe that either, I think it's all about the earth's cycles), but if you even mention the word nuclear, they freak. The only thing released into the air is steam.
I know that there have been 2 incidences with Nuke power. 3 mile island and Chernobyl. But with the way technology has advanced, I think it's time to allow the govt. to build new nuke plants.

Answer 4

In what sense?

Right now we don't have fusion power, so I'll assume you mean fission power. Fission power is still slightly more expensive than coal power, however this cost could probably be brought down with additional research and geological exploration. Fission also creates far less pollution than fossil fuels, and runs off a type of material which can sustain human civilization for much longer than fossil fuels can. However, the small amount of pollution it does produce is more dangerous than an equal amount of fossil fuel pollution.

Personally, I would advocate switching from fossil fuels to fission for the time being. Although ideally we'd have fusion or, better, yet, ZPE power.

Answer 5

doesn t matter how arrogant a scientist or amateur-scientist someone could be, sooner or later all technologies has mistakes, errors and accidents. in a car die a few people, in a plane a few hundreds, in a nuclear power plant a few millions (directely or due to deceases)

but if a large community wants to take the risk and is large enough to put under risk other communities, it is their own risk

of course, that community should take care of wastes for at least 150 years, so, if you, your children and your grandchildren like nuclear power plants it is your own business

i prefer solar and wind, it produces today more electricity without any risk

Answer 6

I would say...hmm, well....
let me think about it. Nuclear power...nuclear power.
wellll

My answer is, Nuclear power is very practical, now, and in the future.

Answer 7

Gonna have to go to some type of alternative other than fossil as long as strict control is used where another Chernoble doesn't happen I don't think hundreds of thousnads of cases of throat and thyroid cancer was worth it to them even if they were Russian.

Answer 8

I suspect that it will become a necessary evil in the very near future.

Answer 9

Technically it is very practical, but politically it is impossible; at least right now. People just won't stand for it.