Should we use nuclear reactors to produce energy?

Question

Why is it better or not than other energy types? [wind, solar, fossil fuel etc.]

Answer 1

Yes, nuclear reactors don't emit pollution like fossil fuels. Nuclear also doesn't rely of wind or sun light both of which are subject to weather conditions, wind can actually be shut down by too much wind as well as not enough wind.

The US all but abandoned new nuclear power plants after the three mile island accident in which a reactor core partially melted down. But most people do not know this but in truth nobody was even send to the hospital in the worst nuclear accident in US history. The reactor designs in the US are much safer than say the Chernobyl design. The buildings here are designed to keep radiation inside in the event of an accident, not just to keep people out.

We need to find an alternative to oil and in all fairness we should use every alternative for fossil fuels including wind, solar, hydro, geothermal, and nuclear.

Answer 2

relies upon on the dimensions of the installation. Toshiba offered the Westinghouse Nuclear capacity branch, and they have a reactor that could want to in good structure on a common flatbed of a Semi tractor trailer blend. If to a number of acres of installation along with 3 Mile Island or Chernobyl. The latter contaminated really an significant section. as a lot because the propganda being pushed forth, they ignore concerning the reality the reactors can only be as secure as greed enables, and the waste presently sits outdoors in the watersheds of tens of millions of human beings's ingesting water resources. those casks gained't very last always, yet their waste interior of for all sensible applications does.

Answer 3

Having lived within sight of Three Mile Island for 5 years, and knowing the people who were most affected by that accident, I can tell you that nuclear power is pretty scary stuff, but not ultimately that dangerous in real every day life...plus, our electric bills were REALLY low! I had an entirely electric home (no gas hookup) and never had a bill over $300/month.

We are going to have to use every avenue of power generation we can as fossil fuels become both more expensive and of lesser quality (higher sulfur coal produces the most pollution).

Answer 4

Yes, we need to further develop nuclear.

The latest designs use a powdered form of the nuclear fuel that can be recycled and used again. This greatly reduces the amount of waste fuel and the danger. In fact it is almost impossible to melt down because they fuel is not as concentrated.

The link below is a project to use recycled nuclear fuel.

Answer 5

yes. people are going to need more energy as the world gets bigger and more advanced. wind solar is better and safe,
but does not have enough power for at the moment at least.

Fossil Fuel is worse of the group. its the lazy, messy and distructive way to make power.

Answer 6

We DO produce energy with nuclear reactors. There's one about 5 miles away from where I am sitting right now.

The problem with building MORE nuclear power plants have to do with environmental activism. These guys oppose oil drilling, they oppose coal mining, and they oppose the construction of nuclear plants. When you have to deal with years of regulatory hurdles, protests, and legal challenges at every turn, most businesses simply decide its easier to build a coal-fired or gas-burning power plant.

Its just the way it is.

Answer 7

the problem with nuclear energy is simple one but it's also a BIG one -- WASTE

Many say that nuclear power is cheap, but they never factor in having to keep the extremely dangerous waste from power plants around and in a safe place for thousands of years. By safe I mean:

Away from pregnant women-- Radiation can cause serious birth defects

Away from people in general - Radiation causes many many different kinds of cancer and kills you in a really horrible way if you get close to it.

Away from terrorist - If terrorist blew up a nuclear plant it would be just as bad as setting off o nuclear bomb (in a different kind of way) and no one would be able to live in that place safely for thousands of years

Answer 8

Nuclear power:
pro:
it's the cheapest way of producing energy (per megawatt)
no direct pollution of air
contro:
you have to dispose of highly radioactive waste (that will remain radioactive for millennia)

solar:
no pollution
highly expensive

wind:
no pollution
expensive

fossil:
cheap production
high pollution