2007-09-12 11:25:01 · 6 answers · asked by Buttrefly-Beauty 2 in Environment ➔ Green Living
Yes. The actual risk as measured more than one way, including any actual accidents is significantly less than deaths or injuries from any other energy source. It is the only economically viable source for the long term. Wind power is erratic and sun power expensive. France gets more than 80 percent of their electricity from nuclear power. And it will significantly reduce damage to the environment including the green house effect as well as dependence on foreign oil. Sooner or later we have to go there... or go dark. The only problem is... it's very, very scary
2007-09-12 11:32:23 · answer #1 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No means of a source of energy is justified by the Libs. No nuclear power, no coal fired power, no dams/hydraulic power, and no wind power (the blades kill birds of prey). None of these are acceptable. You can light your house with candles....I think that's still OK...... and power your TV with a hand cranked generator.
2007-09-12 12:18:50 · answer #2 · answered by Milepost 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Very good question. You know, Nuclear Powerplants were ABANDONED due to SAFETY concerns AND the unbelievably NASTY polution that these plants produce.
Now all the tree huggers out there are screaming for nuclear power. What gives?
2007-09-12 15:05:11 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes. Any risk is actually extremely low. The benefits are extremely high. NO carbon footprint.
2007-09-12 16:41:20 · answer #4 · answered by John himself 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i dont know, do you need to turn your computer on, or lights or a/c?
2007-09-12 14:43:39 · answer #5 · answered by Edmund G 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
um, hell yes
2007-09-12 13:13:18 · answer #6 · answered by PD 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋