| PS360ForTheWin said: it depends, if you want a green enviroment and a low risk of radiation posioning and cheap power then you pick renewables, if you want a dangerous power source that could kill people and will cost taxpayers and consumers a fortune so big companies can make loads of profits you go nuclear, essentially renewables are the logical intelligent choice, but as politicians are greedy money grabbing scum they go nuclear |
You really (REALLY) need to stop reading one sided environmentalist propaganda and think that you’re really getting a clear picture.
People assume that nuclear reactors produce a lot of dangerous waste materials, and are at high risk of meltdowns, because of the nuclear reactor designs that became popular within the United States, Britan and Russia; and these designs were choosen primarily because they could be shrunk down to be put onto a Nuclear submarine.
For a wide variety of reasons, Canadians adopted a very different design in the 1950s and 1960s when they designed the CANDU reactor which is far safer both because it is far less likely to melt down and because it uses natural fuel (rather than enriched uranium) which isn't that much different from how uranium is found in the environment.
In my opinion we may eventually be in a place where we can produce enough energy from renewable resources that we don't need Nuclear energy or energy produce by fossil fuels, but this is still a very long way off ... A worthwhile goal would be to aim for 10% to 20% of energy to be produce from renewable resources to encourage investment in the technologies.
