Yes, although it is only temporary; sooner or later the waste has to be dealt with and the fuel used will also run out.
Another option for nuclear power is thorium, a naturally occurring element that is far more abundant than uranium. It's more efficient, can't be used to develop nuclear weapons and the waste is radioactive for a much shorter amount of time than uranium.
No. Nuclear energy produces dangerous wastes (that might be around for thousand of years) that no one knows how to get rid of. The same material that can be used to power nuclear plants, might be altered to make a weapon. If a person makes a mistake with a nuclear power plant, it might contaminate a large area for very long time.
All nuclear power really does is to boil water and make steam. There are far better ways to boil water and make steam. Wind, solar, hydroelectric power are three better solutions to providing electricity.
Nuclear power does have its merits in the field of power generation. However, due to the negative side-effects mentioned above, other sources of electricity are likely to be more favourable in providing the world with power.
The parts of nuclear waste that last thousands of years can be handled by reprocessing the waste to extract them and reuse them as fuel. The other parts last no longer than a couple hundred years.
Power reactor material is very hard to use in weapons, Uranium is usually not enriched enough, and Plutonium produced in a power reactor usually has too high a Plutonium-241 content to avoid a "fizzle".
Yes, nuclear energy is the only energy option that can meet the world ever growing energy demand, with its merits of having enough uranium resources and proven technology.
This energy option could be supported by renewable energy sources (Solar, wind, biomass, etc..)
Yes. Nuclear energy is a solution to the energy crises. In fact, barring any sudden, amazing discovery, it is the only viable solution we have for the near and mid term.
All of the newer alternatives, such as wind, solar, geothermal, and tidal, are not ready for mainstream operation in the scale needed to support us.
Even though there are risks associated with nuclear energy, as evidenced by recent and ongoing events at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi facility, as well as other historical events such as Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, the fact remains that nuclear power is seen as the safest and most environmentally clean form of energy, when you carefully and objectively look at the big picture.
We are afraid of what we don't understand. That is natural. Unfortunately, there are many people that take advantage of that fear and blow things out of proportion, using scare tactics, to try to get us to avoid nuclear energy. Yes, we need to fix some things, such as improving safety and reliability, especially in the face of unexpected things like tsunamis that far exceed the design basis of a sea wall, but the biggest thing we need to fix is the misunderstanding and lack of perspective of the big picture.
Nuclear energy is what we need. Without it, we may as well go back to a pre industrial age and return to candles for light.
In terms of the big picture, one of the more important things that must happen is for us to stop driving automobiles that run on fossil fuel. Nuclear energy and electric automobiles are "made for each other". We must break our dependence on fossil fuel, and me must rise up as citizens of this fragile planet and take responsibility for ensuring its future.
Nuclear power isn't a solution it is just another method of producing energy, the reason it is not a solution is because it has a big disadvantage which is the disposal of nuclear waste. On the other hand more countries are building nuclear power plants because of the amount of energy that you get out of a nuclear power plant and the length of time the fuel will last in a nuclear reactor.
Yes, nuclear energy is a solution to the energy crises.
Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it!
If it is stored in the nucleus, it must be nuclear energy.
Yes, nuclear energy is energy.
Nuclear energy and renewable energy are not related. Renewable energy does not use nuclear energy.
What is the question
It can be if plants are designed inherently safe and operated responsibly.
Yes, if there is a crisis.
Because:Nuclear energy based on nuclear fusion relies on almost unlimited energy primary sources (mainly tritium and deuterium in water).Nuclear energy based on nuclear fission relies on almost unlimited energy primary sources of uranium and thorium; especially when breeders are used.
He threatened to use Nuclear force.
Most certainly, nuclear energy can be part of the solution to our energy needs. What the world wants to get away from is nuclear power that relies on fission, or breaking apart the atoms, of radioactive/unstable elements such as uranium. Helium-3 is an isotope of helium that is not radioactive/unstable. Researchers at the University of Wisconsin, Fusion Technology institute have succeeded in fusing helium-3 atoms, demonstrating that nuclear power, with no radiation whatsoever is not only possible, but it is ready to be fully developed and used.
Go nuclear or go home.
It is an alternative, but nuclear power plants are not 100% safe and are prone to radiation leaks (especially during man made or natural calamities). It is a solution as long as it works, but can be a problem of immeasurable proportions if a disaster happens. Radioactivity from malfunctioning and damaged plants can stay around for years and years. And there is the question of disposing spent fuel. Until we know to harness nuclear energy safely, it should be one of the last choices.
Mainly that no good solution has been found to dispose of the nuclear wastes.
Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it!
S. E. Hunt has written: 'Nuclear physics for engineers and scientists' -- subject(s): Nuclear physics 'Fission, fusion, and the energy crisis' -- subject(s): Nuclear energy
good governance is the solution of all crisis
Nuclear fusion has not yet been achieved on Earth but it is the process by which the un and stars are believed to gain their energy. At the moment nuclear reactors use nuclear fission, which is the splitting of radioactive nucleii. Nuclear fussion is the combining, or the fusion, of atoms which would release much much more energy. Many scientists believe that this is the way we need to go to solve the energy crisis.