It’s too dangerous. It’s too expensive. There’s no solution to the waste problem. Anti-nuclear activists have thrown every excuse in the book when it comes to the reemergence of nuclear power in the United States, and they’ve all been dispelled. Today, with the costs of energy rising with no end in sight.
Joanne Von Alroth of Investor’s Business Daily says,
“Until recently, many shunned nuclear energy thanks to Chernobyl and Three Mile Island. That’s changing thanks to screaming oil prices. Nuclear energy has developed a new and improved image — it’s cheaper than fossil fuels. It’s also increasingly seen as a cleaner energy source than coal, which remains the most-used energy source in the world.”
Nuclear power has been integral in decreasing energy dependence and reducing reliance on importation of oil for a number of countries. One example is France. After the oil shock of the 1970s, France took an active approach to reduce its dependence and on oil and rapidly built nuclear plants. Presently, almost 80% of electricity in France comes from nuclear energy; in fact, France is the largest net exporter of electricity because of its vast quantity of nuclear energy.
As an island that is not rich in natural resources, Japan is another country that has been increasing its energy security by means of nuclear power. Nuclear already provides 30% of the country’s electricity; however, Japan is working to increase this to 37% by 2009 and 41% by 2017.
Since the U.S. is looking to increase its energy independence and at the same time reduce its carbon footprint, nuclear energy provides the means to doing both economically. Nuclear technology is a proven, safe, affordable, and environmentally friendly energy source that can generate massive quantities of electricity with almost no atmospheric emissions and can offset America’s growing dependence on foreign energy sources.
I know far more about the Cubs and the Bears than I do about the electricity I depend upon every day of my life.
Could someone in the media please explain to me the pros and cons of producing electricity from Nuclear Power versus coal?
I believe oil is a very important issue in the upcoming election.
I believe oil is a very important issue in the upcoming election.
We can continue to give money to the terrorists for more oil, or else we talk the nuclear option. In this case it does not involve destroying anything other than the OPEC cartel and market manipulators that have been reaping profits on the backs of all americans. We have great domestic supplies of nuclear fuel, if we need to look elsewhere for uranium, it is found in Canada and Australia, all stable like minded democracies.
BTW, coal power results in 24,000 deaths a year (according to the EPA). So all of the Greenpeace people who fought nuclear power have 24,000 deaths a year that they should carry as a burden of their short-sightedness.
How does nuclear-powered electricity take us off oil-powered transportation? Even France is still dependent on oil because all its cars, trucks, planes and ships run on oil.
If you want to get off oil you need to do one or both of two things:
1. Short term: Switch to bio-fuels that are not oil-based or necessitate much less gasoline
2. Long term: Switch all vehicles to electric or at least hybrid-electric power
Nothing else will do, not vehicle energy efficiency, not driving less, not drilling more, and definitely not anything that has to do with electricity (again, unless you're electrifying all vehicles).