Do We Need Nuclear Energy?

in dpoll •  6 years ago 

Do We Need Nuclear Energy?


Bulb

Fukushima, Chernobyl… big nuclear catastrophes with many victims, huge devastated land mass. Coal plants or other fossil power plants also kill, but slowly, silently, causing lung (pulmonary) diseases and global warming, climate change. Renewable energies are clean but its energy can’t be stored for the night or other time frames when no sunshine or wind is available. A big dilemma, in my opinion.
Shall We Use Nuclear Energy?
(Photo: Pixabay.com)


  • Yes, it’s clean and cheap

  • No, it’s too dangerous

  • Yes, but put the plants on remote islands and build ten-fold hyper-security systems

  • I don’t need atomic plants, I have my electricity from the socket on the wall

  • We need more plutonium to build bombs

  • Other (please, comment)

Answer the question at dpoll.xyz.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

side note- can't wait to see the new Chernobyl series tho

Voted for

  • I don’t need atomic plants, I have my electricity from the socket on the wall

Voted for

  • Yes, it’s clean and cheap

Voted for

  • No, it’s too dangerous

and it's not clean and not cheap

Voted for

  • Yes, it’s clean and cheap

Voted for

  • I don’t need atomic plants, I have my electricity from the socket on the wall

Long term storage of nuclear waste is a huge problem. You might say: so is coal, and much more immediate.
My current bet would be on renewables and storage + gas peaked plants - and maybe even some base load coal.

Would be nice if we could store solar and wind energy, cheap and clean. Maybe in a decade or so?

The electricity grid will be quite something different in 10 years.

Posted using Partiko Android

Decentralized, maybe. Many small, local plants? Lots of renewable energy?

Distributed batteries to arbitrage electricity production in large and medium sized homes plus electric mobility.
I don't think vehicle to grid will be a thing - or necessary.

Posted using Partiko Android

Voted for

  • No, it’s too dangerous

Voted for

  • No, it’s too dangerous

Voted for

  • Yes, but put the plants on remote islands and build ten-fold hyper-security systems

Voted for

  • Yes, it’s clean and cheap

Voted for

  • Yes, but put the plants on remote islands and build ten-fold hyper-security systems

Voted for

  • No, it’s too dangerous

Voted for

  • Yes, it’s clean and cheap

Voted for

  • Yes, it’s clean and cheap

The risks of atomic energy are far less than other power plants in the long run. The other plants are literally poisoning you slowly.

If somebody could make a good solution to store renewable energy...

Voted for

  • Other (please, comment)

I'm not sure that it's cheap if you look at the costs of handling the waste over the next 1000 years, but we do need some kind of controllable power until energy storage technology gets better. In my country 40% of the power comes from renewables...except when the wind stops when it's close to 0%. If you want to keep the lights on, then you need to burn stuff (oil, coal, gas, biomass) or use nuclear.

Thanks for contributing to the dPoll content.

You have been upvoted from our community curation account (@dpoll.curation) in courtesy of This Guy... @bluerobo.

Come, join our community at dPoll discord server.


If you want to support dPoll curation, you can also delegate some steem power. Quick steem connect links to delegate:
50SP | 100SP | 250SP | 500SP

Voted for

  • Yes, but put the plants on remote islands and build ten-fold hyper-security systems

Still think it would end in a World ending scenario in the long run tho :)

Yes

Posted using Partiko Android

Voted for

  • Yes, but put the plants on remote islands and build ten-fold hyper-security systems