please give a short answer on why
2007-11-07 08:54:01 · 7 answers · asked by Torisama K 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Yes.
We need to find alternatives to oil.
Nulcear power is the safest source for the enviorment.
2007-11-07 08:57:36 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'd say no, at least now. I have two reasons.
The reason we haven't built any new plants in 30 years is that the ones we did build were unsafe, under code, and had enormous cost overruns. Our govt. doesn't do a good job of keeping nuclear industries within their regulations, and that's partly because the regulating agencies are under the control of the corporations they're supposed to be regulating. The last nuclear plant we built here in California, after running 300% over cost and several years over schedule, it ended up we couldn't even use it because it was built wrong.
The other reason is nuclear waste. We have never found a solution for what to do with it. Every solution we do have is very temporary. The industry and our government both assure us it's safe, and then years later we find the containers are leaking nuclear waste into our water supply. This stuff lasts tens of thousands of years, but govt. and corporations only care about the next election or the next quarterly report.
Taking both of these things together, I'd say, sadly, that we are not mature enough to handle something as dangerous as nuclear power.
2007-11-07 17:02:59 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
YES!
I believe Global Warming is a bunch of bull, but here our goals agree. We need to ween the US off of unstable foreign energy supplies and become more self-sufficient, for our own economic security. Nuclear power has an incredible energy density ratio and is far cleaner than coal, and cheaper than solar and wind.
Two quick facts. Burning coal releases minute quantities of radioactive Thorium. Given you have to burn a lot of coal, it actually releases quite a bit of radioactivity, plus soot and all sorts of other nasty stuff, not to mention the slag that's left over. It releases far more radioactivity than domestic nuclear power ever has.
All the hi-level nuclear power waste generated by the US to date, could fit quite comfortably within two highschool gymnasiums. I can't believe out of the entire continental USA, we can't find an area that size to put it all.
2007-11-07 17:05:18 · answer #3 · answered by Uncle Pennybags 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, because too many people already have cancer. I would be terrified to live anywhere close to a nuclear plant.
They should invest in something cleaner like solar power, not nuclear power.
2007-11-07 17:29:18 · answer #4 · answered by Your Highness 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, b/c we've gotta do something, and nuclear seems to be the best alternative that we've got at the moment
2007-11-07 17:01:29 · answer #5 · answered by tuberk768 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes. I think the 30 year break we've taken has been quite sufficient.
2007-11-07 16:57:26 · answer #6 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. Until they have found a real way to get rid of the nuclear waste they have no right to build such things.
2007-11-07 16:59:42 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋