France procudes about 80% of its electric energy by Nuclear, and sells excess power to other Euopean Union members, while the USA has about 18% currently. Are we ready to accept more Nuclear Energy facilities to free ourselves from the Carbon Cycle?
2007-06-08 08:59:01 · 8 answers · asked by Don 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Engineering
Although I am totally for Nuclear Energy, I'm afraid the American public is not. This is mainly due to their ignorance. Those who focus solely on the nuclear waste issue do not consider the vast amounts of waste and poisons expelled from fossil fueled plants each day. At least with spent fuel rods, it is capable of being reprocessed into new usable fuel thereby further reducing the amount of actual waste. Politics put an end to that. If you want to see a good model for nuclear energy look at France. The French educated their people and they accepted it.
2007-06-08 09:27:23 · answer #1 · answered by Jeff M 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nuclear energy is the safest & cleanest power source currently available, but scare tactics generated by the failures of some older nuclear power plants are still in effect, thus retarding development of nuclear power. Nuclear waste does currently present some long term storage problems, but it is likely that shooting the waste into the sun will soon become economical.
One need only look at the new nuclear power plants on Aircraft carriers & submarines to see the strides made in Nuclear power technology these last 30 yrs. The Aircraft carrier power plants can easily be used to supply medium sized cities with electrical power & they are now basically off the shelf technology.
As a previous posted indicated, France is now in the forefront of nuclear power pant construction & operation.
2007-06-08 09:32:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
In the past five years, a model of nuclear power reactor has been recognized to systemically prevent meltdown with significant providence. This means that the Chernobyl and Three Mile Island - types of catastrophe may not occur under any circumstances.
There is a technology which is coming on-line at Livermore Labs in Ca. which will permit the reprocessing of nuclear waste within the next ten years: all of the existing waste we have been stockpiling will be refined and reprocessed within the next thirty years, providing more fuel and reducing the final waste volume to about 4 percent of its current mass.
That is manageable for long-term storage.
Safety and waste management are the major stumbling blocks for the expansion of nuclear power. Politically, the fuel selections are the big issue: breeder reactors make plutonium and weapons-grade uranium from simple reactor fuel. They can also make the most efficient overall system.
2007-06-08 12:40:57 · answer #3 · answered by science_joe_2000 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nuclear energy has faced much opposition in both the States and countries abroad, such as in Japan. The reasons are numerous, but a few include fear of a nuclear meltdown and concerns about nuclear waste.
While it is true that nuclear energy is far cleaner than coal energy, nuclear waste is far more toxic than coal waste. This toxicity has many activist groups up in arms. While it is easier to handle nuclear waste than it is the coal pollution that is pumped into the atmosphere, many are still unsure what to do with the waste.
The political ramifications and protests have reduced the number of nuclear plants that are pursued in the country.
2007-06-08 09:10:21 · answer #4 · answered by J U 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Reserves expand dramatically when the price goes up. Breader reactors are very efficient and that would make the price of the Uranium extremely minor in comparison to the cost of generating energy from it. It still is a minor cost. The fact that France is socialists doesn't have anything to do with nuclear power being used. It isn't used simply because all the new plants have been successfully shut down by environmentalists.
2016-05-20 02:30:36 · answer #5 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You've really got to decide how to deal with the nuclear waste issue before deciding to go nuclear. Other issues of nuclear power safety are trivial compared to nuclear waste.
2007-06-08 09:15:06 · answer #6 · answered by dogsafire 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Fission Energy is the only viable option for carbon free energy.
Hopefully we can discover sustainable Fusion energy soon that would be even better.
2007-06-08 10:19:52 · answer #7 · answered by Phillip 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm ready.
I think every state should be required to build at least one nuke.
2007-06-08 10:53:54 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋