Yes, and I think they always have. And in an ideal world, I'm all for nuclear power. But this isn't a perfect world, and I fear the type of people who will work at the plants will be of the Homer Simpson variety, and while I might be a tad to jaded and untrusting of my fellow man, it is a large responsabilty tearing apart the fabric of the universe for energy.

I am by no means a Coalie, but I see the energy supply running dry for a few years before they crank up the old generators, if they don't have to be scrapped altogether due to them effects of time on the machinery. I'd like to see us switch to LEDs for all sources of light first. Though, if we switch to nukes early, we'll probably avoid the second depression.

My opinions, since you asked.

I love that blue glow. It is truly eerie to see in person. Nuclear power is not going away. I think the energy market would crash if it went to all solar tomorrow. And it would be more expensive. Making solar panels is expensive and not exactly friendly for the environment either. If we stop the once through method of fuel and reprocess, there would be less waste and more energy. Maybe we should put nuke plants in space and beam down the energy, just dump the waste into space, towards the sun.

Just to clarify my position a little on nuclear energy-

I think alternative forms such as solar, wind, wave, biofuel etc. should be used and developed as much as possible for specific locations- with the end goal of creating a society that does not exceed the energy capacity of a geographical area (much like the rest of life on earth). I'm a fan of thorium because it is potentially a 'better' technology then existing nuclear power facilities- Ideally we would not need any nuclear power for normal operations- but I don't see that happening anytime soon, and thorium offers considerable benefits to coal, or other fossil fuels, that will help us during the transition without leaving us with a long-term problem.

Lastly, there are places where alternative energy is harder to develop- say on Mars or in space. Thorium powered spacecraft sounds better to me then Uranium powered spacecraft- as the waste products are easier to maintain and even utilize. (we do have nuclear powered submarines already- none of them use thorium yet as far as I know).

I completely agree with Tim's comments.

Nuclear power is vital. We are just scared by its potential. I think a lot has to do with soviet disregard for safety and doing things right. I am somewhere between #3 and #5. At this moment, it is a necessary evil, but I have hope for the future. Also, the only realistic means of long distance space travel (interplanetary, even intersolar) is with a reactor. Solar panels and rockets work, but only to the extent that fuel and oxidizers last, and the sun's rays stretch.

What a wonderful site. I am teaching a grade twelve Energy and Mines course to 12 very environmentally conscience students. A majority of our course will be dedicated to the study of uranium as a source of energy for the future. Living in northern Saskatchewan, Canada we are within arms length of the world's richest ore deposit (17%) at the McCarthur River mine site. My class and I will be flying up to Key Lake courtesy of CAMECO corporation to see first hand how uranium is mined and to check out the companies environmental safety policies.
Based upon the tremendous growth in exploration company activity this winter and from the reports that even more uranium deposits have been found I can say that this form of energy will be around for another 250 - 300 years. So let's hope that engineers and scientists can determine how to better utilize the 95% of this energy that is still not tapped through the fission process.

We environmentalists must rethink our opposition to nuclear power. Those who have opposed the building of new nuclear power plants in the U.S. over the past twenty years have actually forced the use of a filthy alternative--coal combustion--that releases millions of tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

Meanwhile, here in Europe, countries like France have forged ahead with the construction of nuclear plants using modern and safe technology developed by the Americans.

Worried about radiation? Then help us to do something to shut down the source of energy that is releasing tons of radioactive materials--mainly, uranium and thorium--into the atmosphere every years. Nuclear plants? No, coal-fired plants. You can read about it here:
http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html

Nuclear energy is simply a step closer to cleaner energy. It is much cleaner than fossil fuels - especially to the atmosphere.

We are going to produce power from a wide variety of cleaner solutions, and for the next 20-40 years, nuclear will be essential. Japan and China, as well as India, are banking on it to help with their rapiidly groing demand. It is simply not realisitc to tackle Global Warming, at this present time, without nuclear in the picture.

Every dollar we spend on nuclear is wasted money we could have used to build more wind farms, solar power, cfl lightbulb factories, etc.

Wow, environmental racist within the environmental community. Those of you who think nuclear power is the way to go, or make comments like, "only in the mining" like it some how doesn't matter, probably don't even realize how devastated indiginous, poor, and other communities of color are impacted by this nuclear stuff on the front and back ends of the fuel cycle. Or, maybe you just don't care as long as you get what you want and the devastation to people, the earth, water, and sky are not in your back yards. Amazing. Another generation of elitist trying to play like they really care about people and the environment.

How about 'First Do No Harm'.

Peace & One Love
Dianne

Hi,

With regard to the spent amount on this nuke powered plants and usage of the product if we limit it to making only one programme which is useful to the mankind in the coming decades and centuries then we will see a good turnout of events. A best example is use this power in changing sea water as highly enriched higenic drinking water. Ofcourse now there is such procedures like desalination but I think adopt this nuke power in its place and no other place except this.

I tell you, you greenies make me laugh. With your better than thou statements. Your are against coal,oil,natural gas,nuclear, and hydro. Yet when companies and individuals try to bring alternatives on line you fight their implamintation at every step. Wind wont work it kills birds and ruineds the veiw, niodeisel wont work it causes deforestation. What do you want? Do you think living in the 16th century was so great? I hear from many of you we have to get our population under control, so you advocate abortion. Hey iI have an idea how about volunteering for population control youselves.

PS. even wood isnt liked by alot of you, cause too much partical polution. GIVE ME A BREAK.

"you greenies make me laugh. With your better than thou statements."
"implamintation"
"Do you think living in the 16th century was so great?"
"you advocate abortion"
"how about volunteering for population control youselves"
"partical polution"

~~~~~

It can't be said enough - make sure your children get a good education. Look what can happen.

I find it ironic that the environmentalists who opposed building nuclear power plants (and successfully ended the industry till now) are now being found guilty of destroying the environment and CAUSING nuclear radiation being released into the environment!!!

Now most people the world over know that nuclear power will save the earth and us. Let us all keep reminding everyone that.

Not that solar, wind, and water power (hydro and from the waves) aren't a very important part of the picture. They're all needed. But nuclear is the only one that can do the bulk of the job. The others just fill in the gaps and help out.