Nuclear or clean energy?

Question

What is the best in your point of view. Why do you think that?

Answer 1

Clean energy. The renewable energy potential in this world is so huge, we don't even need nuclear. Investment in wind and solar installations is skyrocketing, the costs are coming down.

In fiscal terms, nuclear plants are a non-starter. If the government didn't heavily subsidize them, your electricity bill would be a whole lot higher. Yes, most clean energy sources receive some subsidy as well, but the bigger the industry gets the less we need those. For those who say nukes are the way to go, consider that there aren't enough trained nuke engineers to run the plants we already have, let alone anyone to build new ones. It takes a decade or more to get a new nuke plant permitted, designed and built. Then you have to find somewhere for the waste and you have to make sure there is plenty of uranium around. In terms of dollars spent and resources used, we would have done better over the last 30 years if we had burned wood for energy instead of putting a trillion bucks into nuclear plants (no, that number is not an exageration).

Contrast that with wind power. Free fuel, no waste and no uranium (which also means no uranium mining, which is a notoriously desctructive activity). Right now there are landowners in west Texas who can't WAIT to have someone plop a wind trubine down on their land. Do you know anyone who REALLY wants a nuclear reactor anywhere on their property? Why would we want to go nuclear?

Answer 2

Nuclear energy is good, but there is still the problem of what to do with all the waste. Politically, there's also the problem that the stuff that goes into a nuclear power plant is pretty much the same stuff that goes into making bombs.

Clean energy is better, because there is little or no waste. I also think it's better because it doesn't require a lot of know-how to put a wind turbine in your backyard (compared to building a nuclear power plant!). New technology for solar panels is also reducing the amount of harmful chemicals that go into building them.

Answer 3

Environmentally, I believe that clean energy is best.

Nuclear energy is very dangerous to work with and in some cases is still unstable. Nuclear waste also takes an extremely long time to degrade making it hazardous for the environment.

Clean energy might not be the quick easy inexpensive fix for all our power/energy problems, but I believe that with a little extra research it could be made even more efficient than it already is.

Answer 4

Compared to burning fossil fuel, nuclear IS clean.

Until we get more efficient with our solar and wind energy generation, nuclear is the way to go.

I've got a great solution to the nuclear waste problem too.

Instead of building a fence along the Mexican border, we could line it with the spent nuclear fuel now residing at our nation's reactor sites. That solves the illegal immigration problem too.

Answer 5

For quantity it is nuclear power.

For cleanest it would be; solar, wind or tidal. Wind power kill bats and birds. Solar is super expensive and could cover a lot of ground surface and effect plant life. Tidal you have to be close to a major body of water.

The most effective and clean would be direct solar collection from a geosynchronous orbital platform in space and microwave the energy back to earth. The problem there is if the beam strays off course it could fry somebody (or make a great weapon).

Answer 6

mmm thats a hard one I mean both have down sides and up sides. I would have a to say Nuclear yah it could be dangerest but you don't have to worry about if there wind and/or sun to get power.

Answer 7

nuclear IS the cleanest energy available right now.
what's cleaner than nuclear?

Answer 8

NUCLEAR

Answer 9

What is the difference? Why do you think there is a difference?