It depends on who you ask. If the choice is really between nuclear power and coal, especially dirty coal, then you might be inclined to say nuclear is the better option, and you couldn’t be faulted for your choice. But every energy source comes with its risks, and the events at Fukushima this week have once again taught us a lesson that we have failed to learn a number of times on expecting the unexpected.
Silversoul above me here makes a going to bring up the economics of nuclear power. In addition to pointing out the shortcomings of nuclear power in terms of up-front capital costs and time-adjusted return on investment, Lovins and the Rocky Mountain Institute have published a number of papers of a microgeneration approach and some of the economic, as well as environmental, benefits that could be achieved if society set about the efficiency and microenergy path. One need only compare the past decade’s worth of performance for the nuclear power industry to investment in the global renewable energy sector to see which way the tides are turning…
Click here to cancel reply.
Sorry,At this time user registration is disabled. We will open registration soon!
Don't have an account? Click Here to Signup
© Copyright GreenAnswers.com LLC