If these communities have not oil, methane, coal, hydroelectric power the nuclear energy is very important to produce electricity or heat.
Nuclear produced electricity just goes into the common grid distribution system, so no community relies on nuclear energy alone.
Nuclear energy sources can be found in nuclear power plants where nuclear reactions are harnessed to generate electricity. These power plants are strategically located in various regions around the world to provide energy to communities and industries.
Nuclear plants feed into large national power grid distribution systems, rather than community systems.
They should start to look at alternative energy because it is good to the communities and saves energy.
It does not produce CO2.
Solar energy is generally considered a better source than nuclear energy due to its lower environmental impact, reliance on renewable resources, and greater accessibility to individuals and communities. Solar energy also has lower operating costs and does not pose the same risk of catastrophic accidents as nuclear power plants.
I do not know what the word "good" means in this context. Nuclear energy is a natural phenomena and natural phenomena have no morality, they just are. What has morality is mankind and how/if he choses to use the phenomena nature has given us.
No, nuclear energy is not good for the environment because after they get the energy there is nuclear waste which is radioactive and is NOT good for the environment.It can be if well controlled, as no carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases are produced. However if things go wrong as in Japan now (March 2011) then it is definitely not good for the environment or the people who live in it.
Mainly that no good solution has been found to dispose of the nuclear wastes.
It is the cheapest form of energy and produces no carbon emissions.
Yes it is because it helps us with cancer.
They provide energy.