Nuclear energy comprises 8% of all energy production.
I don’t disagree that nuclear energy is an “alternative” form of energy– in that it is an alternative to burning a fossil fuel. However, I am extremely skeptical to industry efforts to promote nuclear energy as a solution we should focus on going forward. The downside of an accident and the logistics and safety of dealing with the waste are just way to great, in my mind, to justify building new nuclear plants.
Also, “alternative” energy and “renewable” energy are often used synonymously, yet I’m not sure anyone would consider nuclear power to be “renewable”. Or would they?
Yes I couldn’t agree more about using nuclear energy as the only alternative source we should focus on to move away from fossil fuels. The answer I provided was only appropriate since the person asked “alternative” energy and not only “renewable” energy. But I totally agree with you that nuclear energy is only a short term solution to our energy problem. Nuclear energy is definitely not renewable since uranium is a finite source. Also, “alternative” and “renewable” are not the same. There are some energy sources, like solar, wind, and wave, that fall under both.
Wind energy also is used in many regions, and is gaining in popularity.
Should we also count bio-mechanical power — as in using your legs to pedal on your bicycle that you take to work each day? — we are strong, intelligent and capable… I don’t see why we always think we need to rely solely on machines and technology!
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