do the negatives of nuclear power outweight the good?
nuclear energy has both benefits and dangers. But it seems throughout history more has gone wrong with nuclear power than right. Should we even use nuclear power? Shouldn’t we instead put forth efforts to find alternate powersources?
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
July 12th, 2010 at 8:15 am
Nuclear Power is one of the alternate energy sources. Also, Nuclear energy is very safe. In the past 60 years, there have been only two nuclear meltdowns, 1) 3 mile island in the US and 2) Chernobyl in USSR. Furthermore, today’s IAEA safeguards are leaps and bounds ahead of those used in the past making nuclear power even more safe. We have to use more nuclear power because it is economically sound. A good mix of nuclear power in a nation’s energy repertoire will protect that nation and its economy from the damages of fluctuating oil prices. Look at France (and I never say this since I am not a fan of the French), 80% of their electricity production comes from Nuclear Power and they have had no significant nuclear mishaps. During the Tsunami, the nuclear power plants in Chennai were under threat but due to the existing safeguards, they were immediately shut off and there was no damage done. So the way I see it, the benifits of nuclear power clearly outweigh the risks and more naitons should be encouraged to used albeit in a responsible and safe manner under the auspecies of IAEA safeguards.