Why are we still scared silly of nuclear power? The world (except the USSR / Russia) is safely using it.?

Who is afraid of nuclear power?

its amazing how fast people will become "envirowhackos" or "environuts" when someone wants to put a nucear power plant or a dump in their back yard.

If you look at the matter logically, you will notice, it isn't the risk that affects peoples' opinion, but the intensity of the affect, if something goes wrong.

if a nuclear power plant just blew up a half mile of real estate when they malfunctioned, people would be wiling to accept that risk for the benefit; however, they aren't willing to accept generations of higher cancer rates, sterility, or birth defects for it, even if the risk of a nuclear reactor malfuction isn't that great.

BTW the Russia(not USSR) may be "safely using it" as are many countries, whatever that means, but it would be a waste tobuidl new reactors unless they are badly needed prior to perfection of the Next Generiation Nuclear Plants that are estimated start being built in a decade.

NOBODY is safely using it.

The poisonous waste will still be there in millions of years, and uranium is also a non-renewable source of energy. With the Chinese and Indians buying into it, it will increase in price just the same as oil.

That's apart from the fact that it's the most dangerous thing on earth. The area around Chernobyl will be contaminated for thousands of years, and any life there is being damaged by radiation and will be so in the future.

Why can't you people understand that renewable energy is our only hope?

Study history and you will discover the partial core meltdown at the Three Mile Island nuclear reactor in Middleton PA (1979). It's rare, but it happens.

It's still very wasteful, and creates a waste that cannot be degraded by any means known to man. On top of that, it is not safe, and cases like Three Mile Island and Chernoble proved it wasnt safe.

On top of all of that, nuclear energy is very unstable, and causes mutations and illnesses to any exposed, almost always fatal.

it is no longer basically that the waste from this skill technology would be rather poisonous for thousands and thousands of years, the stations themselves will might desire to be designed to be incredibly dismantled in 50 years time in order that this waste remains contained. In 0.5 a million years this waste would be forgotten approximately, how will we tell the babies of the destiny approximately it in a language they might understand? 50% of its skill would be lost in transmission to properties, i'm of the theory that skill might desire to be domestically generated by skill of biomass, underground warmth pumps, wind turbines, recycling and the sunlight. greater powerful, lasts longer yet expenditures greater desirable than nuclear if applied national. Nuclear is far less costly, yet has poisonous gasoline and waste and desires careful upkeep. Chernobyl might desire to be remembered as how nuclear skill bites returned at us, an area as enormous because of the fact the west united states of america that's now very risky to us for tens of hundreds of years? sturdy success with your undertaking.

Right now it's only the environuts who are against nuclear power. In my state, SC, two more nuclear plants are going to be built, and I haven't heard of any opposition to it. Of course, in SC, there aren't a whole lot of environuts! We need more nuclear power, and to start drilling in Alaska and off the US coast! Pronto.

Three Mile Island.

The sound of that still terrifies people who remember it. It doesn't matter that the industry has advanced tremendously in the last thirty years, people are still knee-jerk against building a plant in their backyard.

We use it on a very limited basis but I believe if we were to commit to it, it would certainly ease the energy costs considerably. The greenies just don't want to let it happen though.

The waste created is the primary concern.

Because of Chernobyl, and that Jane Fonda movie. That's basically it. More people have died from being on Bill Clinton's bad side than from nuclear accidents.