This question is somewhat vague, but I’ll try to answer it. I think the approach has to be more of a long term solution. Nuclear energy, while very prominent in our world today, is extremely risky. Terrorism and/or war could lead to a catastrophic disaster if the wrong people were to obtain control of or attack a nuclear facility. In addition, natural disasters, such as the recent earthquake in Japan, are significant threats to nuclear facilities. Do we really need another Chernobyl to realize this? It seems that the best choice would be to gradually move away from nuclear energy in favor of more environmentally friendly alternatives with less risk.
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