Which is better to use for electrical power generation, nuclear power or fossil fuels?

Answer 1

Nuclear by far, not simply because it produces no CO2, it is cheaper than fossil fuel as well and produces less pollution.

Billions of dollars will be spent this year on scrubbers to try and make coal cleaner and cleaner (which it is much cleaner than it used to be). If that money was spent on nuclear, we would have the benefit of less pollution and, for those that think it is important, no CO2.

Answer 2

Wind and water power have been used for decades to generate electricity; add to that, solar power and there is no need to use fossil fuels at all.
Between fossil fuels and nuclear power, nuclear power is the better option.

Answer 3

The present day's need is to think how to minimise usage of electricity in order to optimise generation requirements. It may sound impractical. But you may agree with this argument when you realise that power generation by fossil fuel or nuclear power both are evil. You are asking which is evil is lesser evil! Probably fossil fuel route is lesser evil if you look at the life cycle analysis looking at acquiring raw materials for both the routes you had mentioned.

Answer 4

Nuclear power produces radioactive waste, for which there is no recycling program available now. So fossil fuels are a better alternative to nuclear power, currently.

Answer 5

Nuclear by far. (I know someone already said that).

Because of global warming.

We can make safe nuclear plants that are safe from terrorists. We're good at that stuff. We know how to dispose of the waste, it's just a political problem designating a site.

Answer 6

Nuclear by far

Answer 7

nuclear, once a feasible plan is found to deal with the waste.