English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

every one understands that wind power isnt anything near enough and water power will never support what we use. so why not build nuclear make it afordable and use more than 3 or 6% fuel 6% only last for 18 months 90% last for 5 years thats 3 times less you have to get rid of. coal and gas are polutants and every one is crying about that you know the sky is falling and all. (drama queens) its the same ones that want to get rid of coal and gas that dont want nuclear. what is the allterative?

2007-02-26 09:40:50 · 3 answers · asked by spiveyracing 5 in Environment

3 answers

Well, what you are talking about is a lot of different things:
energy density, distance between fuel and customer, peoples founded and unfounded fears, etcetc.

Since a one degree rise in the oceans temperature is the equivalent of 1.3 billion one MegaTon atomic bombs, my choice is to kill two birds with one stone and "mine the oceans" of their energy before that energy is expressed as more severe weather.

But governments are very reluctant to spend the money building the infrastructure to do that. People expect their cheap gas and cheap power to continue forever.

Until YOU (and I and everyone else) are willing to pay for it, it ain't gonna happen.

2007-02-26 10:05:02 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Because it is cheap!

And actually while nuclear is "clean" realize there is a payback time. It takes a long time to even out because these "pollutants" are used in the creation of the building of nuclear plants and fuel enrichment. I don't remember but I think on the order of 10-20 years which I was amazed at. Like it takes conventional fuel to build and enrich.

I agree though I don't know why nuclear seems so Taboo?
-Generates a lot of nasty waste (but at least this can be concentrated where it doesn't effect people).
-Safety Concerns
-Coal and Gas are Cheaper now

I think we should jump on it!

Alternative fuel too. Wind and Solar can definately add to a much higher percent than they do now. It just takes a commitment. But again relatively current fuel is way cheaper, but in the long run building these infrastructures will pay themselves off.

2007-02-26 18:13:04 · answer #2 · answered by bourgoise_10o 5 · 0 0

We would have many more nuclear plants but the environmentalist have blocked them.

2007-02-26 18:31:46 · answer #3 · answered by JOHNNIE B 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers