what alternative? why do you say yes or no to nuclear power?

I am a proponent for nuclear power, as long as they are not breeder reactors. I understand I am in a great minority, however. With this issue also comes a great NIMBY factory as well. We want energy, just not by us.

Nuclear power IS an alternative energy source. There is no other, perhaps hydrogen could be used, but that's expensive and still in the R&D phase. Nuclear power guarantees efficiency and power output. If stored and controlled properly there is no risk of nuclear meltdown. What happened in Chernobyl was a result of poor management, bad Soviet technology and lack of caring. All nuclear waste needs to be stored properly yes, but a few slabs of concrete and lead easily prevents radiation leakage. With current nuclear reactions, only a small percentage of the total energy is harnessed (only the heat energy), the rest cannot be controlled and is lost (Kinetic energy of the molecules). If a fusion type reactor could be made stable it would promise bigger output of energy and producitivity.

Is nuclear ability risk-free? particular, all of us comprehend a thank you to construct and function nuclear ability plant life in a secure way. in actuality all of us comprehend a thank you to construct powers which will close without delay (with out human interplay and with out out pc interplay) long earlier any risky subject could take place. those close down mechanisms are in basic terms the effect of the guidelines of physics no longer something greater. So if the human beings who layout and run a nuclear ability plant have protection as their significant precedence, then there is little to rigidity approximately so a techniques as injuries are in touch. Now you ask approximately nuclear waste. First you're able to comprehend that the quantity of nuclear waste is plenty smaller than the waste produced via coal or different "custom" ability plant life, inspite of the incontrovertible fact that it is likewise greater risky. yet nuclear engineers comprehend a thank you to cut back the quantity, and existence of this waste dramatically. Over ninety 5% of this waste could be positioned lower back right into a reactor and burned; lots of something could be destroyed in accelerators. What continues to be is an fairly small fraction of the waste and has a a million/2 existence~30 years while in comparison with a hundred,000 years. yet government regulations presently ward off us from reprocessing and reusing this spent gasoline. Now permit’s seem at coal ability. Coal ability plant life produce 1000's of greater than a number of waste each and every 365 days. the place a nuclear ability plant produces basically some greater than a number of waste a 365 days. additionally coal ability plant life launch greater (particular I suggested greater) radiation to their ecosystem than nuclear ability plant life do. Is nuclear ability risk-free? that's that if we are mature in employing it. Is it sparkling? particular if we reprocess. a brilliant variety of persons are against nuclear because of the fact they suspect it to injury our surroundings. they suspect it to be risky. And that's. yet while somewhat of protesting nuclear ability all at the same time, we start up annoying greater moderen greater secure reactors and we start up annoying reprocessing of spent nuclear gasoline, then we could have a secure sparkling power source.

And you're asking this is the MILITARY forum, why?

Since this is the MILITARY forum I'll answer in terms of the military. Yes, the US and UK should renew their power stations since the majority of them are on Carriers (US) and Submarines. These platforms are vital assets to our respective and combined national defenses.

NUCLEAR POWER IS NOT ALTERNATIVE FUEL. Solar, Wind, Tidal, and conservation are. Nuclear power creates toxic byproducts that don't break down even in my great-great grandchildren's lifetime (I have toddlers) and off gas and leak into water. Air and water can't be stored in one place. They all mix together at some point.

Too many cancer cases. Too many chemicals in our environments.