|
the2real4mafol said: We can't and shouldn't rely on nuclear only, that makes no damn sense. Nuclear is a key option of the future but if we rely on it, then we are idiots. Look at consequences of Fukushima on Japan, it crippled it's economy even more since it accounts for 1/3 of their energy, even now and for a long time (the environmental impacts are huge too). And your country should know better, the Chernobyl disasters made the place uninhabitable for humans for a very long time. I'm unsure if nuclear technology is that much safer nearly 30 years later. And whether you like it or not, renewable energy must be developed and put into place quickly. The disaster from failing to do this before conventional energy becomes cripplingly expensive will be very damaging to the global economy, it is quite a scary prospect. The point of pushing forward with renewable energy is to allow for countries to become self-sufficient (how is that a bad thing?) and so countries like yours can no longer push their weight around. |
I sense that radiophobia runs strong in you, young padawan. Chernobyl et el is not an excuse for passing on oportunity to develop more eco-friendly tech for energy production, it's a reason to ramp up security measures. Would have TEPCO learned a lesson from Chernobyl, Fukushima might have done far less damage than it did. Yes, we won't rely solely on nuclear energy, but that's goes without saying, as if now we're relying solely on hydrocarbonates.
Besides the biggest portion of renewables is hydro, and it's not exactly eco-friendly, plus hardly a universal solution.
