Nuclear Power

[Redefeatbush04]

I favour nuclear power. I think it's better than the alternatives and that we can keep it safe.

I would prefer that we shift to more environment-friendly energy sources.

[Gabu]

I favour nuclear power. I think it's better than the alternatives and that we can keep it safe.

I would prefer that we shift to more environment-friendly energy sources.

Nuclear power is a lot more environmentally friendly than coal, oil, or any other source that requires burning fossil fuels.

[The Man From G.O.P.]

nuclear power is by far the best choice for power production

[Platypus]

I quite like the 'hot rocks' power idea, i think it's called geothermal power, where heat energy from a lower strata of the earth is used.

[2952-0-0]

The problem with nuke power is that there is a lot of CO2 released from the refining and mining part of the uranium, and that would not make a difference from burning coal. I say we build a global electric network. Al Gore endorses this idea.

http://www.geni.org/

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The problem with nuke power is that there is a lot of CO2 released from the refining and mining part of the uranium, and that would not make a difference from burning coal.

In another nuclear power thread here I asked someone (it might have been you, I can't remember) who made this same claim about lots of CO2 resulting from the production of nuclear fuel to kindly provide a source for their claim.  No such source was ever provided.  Carbon is not present in uranium ores, while it most definitely is present in coal.  Uranium requires less to be mined and transported, so the only point in the process that uranium could possibly cause more CO2 to be produced than coal would be during its refining, and I can't see how that could be.  I really would appreciate a source for your claim.

[JohnG]

There is a very limited supply of uranium in the world. There is a lot less of it than coal. Coal at projected rates of consumption could last over 100 years. Not that much can necessarily be said about nuclear power.

Read these two articals

http://pearl1.lanl.gov/periodic/elements/92.html

http://w3.trib.com/~rdodell/ermsjulB.htm

[muon2]

The possibilities will open up further when thorium-fueled reactors become economically competitive. Thorium is three times as abundant as uranium and can be used as a breeder reactor fuel, and it doesn't produce plutonium.

See this article from American Scientist

[The Man From G.O.P.]

The problem with nuke power is that there is a lot of CO2 released from the refining and mining part of the uranium, and that would not make a difference from burning coal. I say we build a global electric network. Al Gore endorses this idea.

http://www.geni.org/

Algore is an idiot anything with "global" that has to do with sharing energy is stupid