Should we rely on nuclear energy? [ENDS 24/04/2011]

Should we rely on nuclear energy?

ENDS: 24/04/2011

Nuclear energy has been back in the spotlight recently with the devastation at the ***ushima nuclear power plants. First question into call is safety, they are probably one of the riskiest energy sources we have at the moment, look at the recent panic in Japan and devastation in Chernobyl over such energy. The risk of human life and long term devastation is not worth it. It doesn't help when such plants age at an alarming rate. Also, we must be aware of the fact that it will run out, so why invest in a technology that is not ever-lasting, statistically uranium will run out in about 50 years. Many power-plants have to spend millions on maintenance, and the costs are just not worth it.

On the other side, people are debating with the view that a lot of the safety issues are marred by propaganda and media hype and that the reality is that nuclear power plants are built in such a way to withstand any major threats- with Chernobyl being said to be built incorrectly, with an unprotected reactor. Nuclear energy also has low fuel costs, 80% that of other fuel resources. Huge amounts of energy are allowed to be produced from a small amount of Uranium and substitutes for Uranium are currently being researched into. What's more positive is the fact that it is a much cleaner source of energy compared to resources such as oil. With nuclear energy being possible in any country, even those with a lack-luster amount of energy resources such as Japan some say this is the step forward.

Many countries are stepping up their programs, such as China and Russia; whilst others such as Germany are phasing them out. This shows one thing, that this debate has such a mirage of views that it is interesting to grip one's teeth into it.

In my opinion we shouldn't rely on it however we should use it.

***ushima & Chernobyl are 2 of 100s of nuclear plants...***ushima was damaged by a Tsunami, Chernobyl was poorly built. As long as they are correctly built and maintained there is no risk to the public from radiation.

Also - uranium is not the only element they can use in Nuclear energy. There are several other elements.

Whilst I support Nuclear as it is the only way to get clean energy easily at the moment, I believe we shouldn't rely on it and continue to develop new ways such as solar which could potentially be a lot cheaper and cleaner but we haven't quite got there yet.

I think that until the day comes that we can use nuclear fusion instead of fission, then we shouldn't rely on it too much. That said in general it's cheaper,cleaner,more efficient, better and for the mostpart safer than nearly all other energy sources.

I was very dissapointed when our government in Ireland gave into a few protesters when we were about to go nuclear a few years back. As Robbie said, there are other elements that can be used. It's just that uranium is the most economical at this point and time.

Much more people have died from other energy sources than nuclear. For example nearly 50 people have died from wind energy sources in the last 10 years yet nuclear is below 10 in the last 10 years.

No we shouldn't.
1. Danger to the environment- (I think)
2. If the nuclear power plant were to be damaged, and radiation leaked, like in japan, then it's a danger to people.
3. There are other sources of practically the same energy, which, in the long term, are cheaper and more effective and better for the environment.

We shouldn't rely on it as such, but we should use it, not as much and not everywhere, especially in areas where there is a possible threat of danger, if a natural disaster occurred like in japan.

I am strictly against the use of nuclear enegry for power since something that un-stable can destroy a island such as japan if something were to happen. And idk if this has anything to do with it but they are trying to make it so the can make there own miniuture sun to provide energy but if something wre to go wrong with the sun it would destroy the entire planet. i think the same applies with nuclear power

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thewillisfun

I am strictly against the use of nuclear enegry for power since something that un-stable can destroy a island such as japan if something were to happen. And idk if this has anything to do with it but they are trying to make it so the can make there own miniuture sub to provide energy but if something wre to go wrong with the sun it would destroy the entire planet. i think the same applies with nuclear power

---

Where the hell did you get that from?

Japan hasn't been destroyed. An area of about 15 miles is at risk from radiation, that's hardly the whole of japan. Plus, we can't help natural disasters. You know what would happen if it was a coal station? The power would've completely gone and most of the raw materials completely wasted.

And it's not un-stable. 2 crises out of several hundreds or thousands of power stations isn't much. It's like saying I refuse to take the bus in London because 1 got bombed.

i am not saying it has but if somethin were to go wrong that was even worse then was going on now japan as we knew it could be lost forever or atleast for a long time sorry if my wording didnt make sense

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thewillisfun

i am not saying it has but if somethin were to go wrong that was even worse then was going on now japan as we knew it could be lost forever or atleast for a long time sorry if my wording didnt make sense

---

you're not making much sense, 2 major nuclear disasters, and the whole world could end?? worst worst worst case scenario.

If you think about it though, they're not really that major.

I hate to phrase it like this but only 50-odd died in Chernobyl directly and no one has died as a result of the Japan mess. Admittedly it does raise cancer rates in regions but it's still nothing that great, it's said to be about 2000 in Chernobyl but about 4000 people die in car accidents in the UK each year. For instance, every few weeks there is a plane crash somewhere in the world and quite often hundreds lose their lives, but I don't see people forbidding air travel.

Even when nuclear power is shown to go very badly wrong, it's really not that bad when you put it in perspective and it's very very rare. It's just you hear a lot about it in the uneducated media because of the N-Word, Nuclear.

Good point, but we don't really need to rely on nuclear energy, we have other sources of energy, which does the same job, but safer?
Nobody has died from Japan's radiation mess, but aren't they still on edge about another explosion?