How do environmentalists feel about Nuclear Power ? Many nations including France have switched from fossil fuel power plants to nuclear. The nucular plants produce zero carbon emissions and can provide cheap electricity that could be used to economically power electric cars, and thus even further reducing our dependence on carbon producing fossil fuels.

Additional Details

3 months ago

I think to write off Nuclear simply because of the wate it produces is sort of ridedeclus. It%26#039;s a problem no doubt but I%26#039;m sure a nation that puts robots on mars could possibly come up with a solution to that.

Also when you talk about the carbon that would be produced mining the uranium, Hows that different than the carbon being produced drilling for oil and coal and the carbon thats produced transporting the fossil fuels ?



The output of new solar factories is projected to increase to 5GW in 5 years meaning that solar power will install the equivalent of several new nuclear power plant each year and (in a near future) at a lower cost.


A nuclear power plant regarding its lifetime and comissioning would if started now have its half operating time in 2038. That means that FOR SURE it will be an ECONOMIC SUBOPTIMAL OPTION WHEN COMPARED TO SOLAR.



--------------------%26gt;
I REPEAT: a nuclear power plant started now will cost more during its whole lifetime than solar energy (almost for sure).
--------------------%26gt; Nuclear makes perhaps sense in countrie with skyrocketing demand for power and very limited potential for renewable energies:
It is the case in China, but NOT in the US.

The main problem right now is that wind turbine manufacturers are so successful that they can not even supply the market. More production capacity is needed in clean energies. 0% 0 Votes

Although it is an efficient form of energy, nuclear energy isn%26#039;t very efficient after the fact, that is, they still don%26#039;t know what to do with the spent radioactive material that has been used up and now must be somehow stored. Nuclear energy may seem like a quick fix, but it also isn%26#039;t a form of energy we want to become dependent on, since the spent radioactive fuel could pollute our world and make our world uninhabitable sometime far into the future. NOT GOOD. And I don%26#039;t consider myself that much of a %26quot;tree hugger%26quot;. It also allows foreign countries to potentially develop nuclear weapons under the guise of %26quot;peaceful nuclear energy production%26quot; and thus allows for the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), and that could eventually spell the end...

Let%26#039;s hear it for wind, solar, hydro, and any other forms of nonexhaustible sources of energy that might be invented hopefully soon!!!! 0% 0 Votes

you are only looking at the end product for nuclear power as far as carbon costs.. what about the carbon released mining and refining the Uranium... add in the cost of retiring old reactors and it becomes drastically different ...

this is NOT to say nuclear power isn%26#039;t a good interim measure.. but nuclear power is a non-renewable form of energy so don%26#039;t become dependent upon it.. and ensure you know ALL of the risks involved...

one of the problems is that different cultures have different levels of acceptable risk... in three mile island.. there was a marginal release of radioactive materials.. and it permanently damaged Americas image of nuclear power... Russia blew up a plant releasing enough fission products in the atmosphere to set off alarms all over the world.. but they don%26#039;t%26#039; care.

due to this.. ecologists view nuclear power with a VERY jaded vision.. after all how many plants would Iran have to destroy before they considered changing how they run them? 0% 0 Votes

Nuclear power is a mixed bag at best. The waste and security problems are enormous. However, if we can’t accept limits on growth, it may be our only option. Take the words of the answerer above, one of the top scientific contributors on this forum. We can leapfrog right over nuclear and go with solar. It’s a no-brainer.


Nuclear power is another boondoggle designed to keep the means of production in the hands of the few. With a solar cell, solar flat plate, windmill, passive building design, smart grid connection and demand management for every household and business we could end the need for foreign oil, fossil fuels in general and dependence on centralized power generation once and for all.

How come this doesn’t happen and who’s fault is it? It certainly isn’t the greens who have been pressing for such solutions for over 40 years. 33% 1 Vote

They think its EVIIIIIILLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Even though its clean, safe, cheap, and efficient.

Kinda weird huh? Even one of the founders of Green Peace endorsed nuclear power, yet environmentalists still hate it.. 0% 0 Votes

Nuclear powered cars!!! That%26#039;s cool. 0% 0 Votes

It is bad, really bad...

Now if you want to know how I feel.... ask again 0% 0 Votes

They pretty much feel the way about nuclear as they do about fossil fuel power plants. The funny thing is, nuclear energy is basically the cleanest fuel around and we could have much of our energy problems solved by building more of them. However, no matter how clean or efficient it is, radical environmentalists will oppose it. Take for example the state of Minnesota. The environmentalist wackos have gotten such a foothold in Minnesota, that it%26#039;s a state statute that no new nuclear facilities can be built, anywhere, and people there are paying out the nose for energy. This is because radical environmentalists care less that people can use a highly efficient energy source and live comfortably, and more about destroying modernized living. I will admit, not all environmentalists are crazy, but the ones that aren%26#039;t crazy, are very misguided with their cause. The core of the cause craves the destruction of technology, modernism, and liberty.