Nuclear energy remains controversial, therefore we cannot know exactly what kind of future it will have. Many people support it, because it is a source of power that does not release greenhouse gases and therefore does not contribute to global warming. Many other people oppose it because of the possibility of very destructive accidents such as the one at Chernobyl, and because we still do not have a good method of disposing of nuclear waste. The debate continues.
After searching for an answer to this question I can only find information on nuclear power generation in power station. I would assume that this complete lack of any information in relation to home nuclear power generation means it will not be a possibility in the near future.
See www.world-nuclear.org for country by country information:INFORMATION PAPERSNUCLEAR BASICSOutline History of Nuclear Energy The Nuclear Debate GlossaryFACTS AND FIGURESWorld Nuclear Power Reactors 2008-09 and Uranium Requirements Nuclear share figures, 1998-2008 - May 2009 Uranium production figures, 1998-2008 - June 2009COUNTRY AND REGIONAL BRIEFINGSUranium in Africa Nuclear Power in Argentina Nuclear Power in Armenia Australia's Uranium Nuclear Energy Prospects in Australia Nuclear Power in Belgium Nuclear Power in Brazil Nuclear Power in Bulgaria California's Electricity Nuclear Power in Canada Nuclear Power in Canada Appendix 1: Ontario Energy Policy Nuclear Power in Canada Appendix 2: Alberta Tar Sands Uranium in Canada Uranium in Canada Appendix 1: Brief History of Uranium Mining in Canada Uranium in Central Asia Nuclear Power in China Nuclear Power in China Appendix 1: Government Structure and Ownership China's Nuclear Fuel Cycle Nuclear Power in Czech Republic Nuclear Energy in Denmark Nuclear Power in Finland Nuclear Power in France Nuclear Power in Germany Nuclear Power in Hungary Nuclear Power in India Nuclear Energy in Iran Nuclear Power in Italy Nuclear Power in Japan Uranium and Nuclear Power in Kazakhstan Nuclear Power in Korea Nuclear Power in Lithuania Nuclear Power in Mexico Uranium in Namibia Nuclear Energy Prospects in New Zealand Nuclear Power in the Netherlands Uranium in Niger Nuclear Power in Pakistan Nuclear Power in Romania Nuclear Power in Russia Nuclear Power in Slovakia Nuclear Power in Slovenia Nuclear Power in South Africa Nuclear Power in Spain Nuclear Power in Sweden Nuclear Power in Sweden Appendix 1: Barsebäck Closure Nuclear Power in Switzerland Nuclear Power in Taiwan Nuclear Power in the United Kingdom Nuclear Power in Ukraine Nuclear Power in United Arab Emirates Nuclear Power in the USA Nuclear Power in the USA Appendix 1: US Operating Nuclear Reactors Nuclear Power in the USA Appendix 2 Power Plant Purchases: Nuclear Power in the USA Appendix 3: COL Applications US Nuclear Fuel Cycle US Nuclear Fuel Cycle Appendix 1: US Uranium Mining and Exploration US Nuclear Power Policy Emerging Nuclear Energy Countries
I chose 'Nuclear Powers Secondary Loop' because of nuclear energy up and comming behavior, and that in nuclear power a Secondary Loop absorbs heat and generates the electricity.
Two common sources of nuclear energy are nuclear fission, where atoms are split to release energy, and nuclear fusion, where atoms are combined to release energy. Nuclear power plants use nuclear fission to generate electricity, while nuclear fusion is a process being researched as a potential future source of clean energy.
No, Sydney does not have a nuclear power station. Australia does not have any operational nuclear power plants.
Contesting the Future of Nuclear Power was created in 2011.
Contesting the Future of Nuclear Power has 296 pages.
The nuke
Certainly yes
The source of nuclear power is the nucleus of an atom; any atom. As long as there is mass in the universe there will be a source of nuclear power. Even if in the future we run out of the radioactive material we currently use to fuel nuclear power plants, it would be foolish to assume that we will never again be able to harness nuclear energy in another way.
Hey, I have a video about Nuclear Power, If you want to watch it you can find that video on my channel: @SpaceWarpYT
In none of the back to the future movies have they ever created nuclear power. In the first one they used lighting to generate 1.21 gw of energy, and then the professer fixed it in the beggining of the second movie so you don't need nuclear power to go back.
Thorium will be probable in the future very important as fertile material in nuclear breeder power reactors.
After searching for an answer to this question I can only find information on nuclear power generation in power station. I would assume that this complete lack of any information in relation to home nuclear power generation means it will not be a possibility in the near future.
There is very little similarity between present day power plants which use nuclear fission, and any possible nuclear fusion plant of the future
We should not have nuclear power in the future because so many things can happen; for example people can get skin cancer and can cause high level radioactive waste/and it is very expensive and also nuclear power can cause small accidents. the nuclear power looks like a dick with wee coming out (that is a very true fact) i am very picc or i dont want skin cancer
Only if you don't consider the cost to the future.