You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Nuclear energy, fuel for the future or better left in the past?
Thank you for taking the time to reply and going through each of my points. The sad part is, so much of what you say is true. And we are in an immediate crisis--very little time left to address the effects of fossil fuels. But if we "dedicate" ourselves to uranium, if there's an easy out, where will the motive come from to invest in a better future?
Actually, meatless Mondays are becoming quite popular:)
I think the education you offer on the danger of fossil fuels is a service to the planet, but I can't endorse dedicating resources to a nuclear future. Just can't do it...
The motivation for green energy sources will always be there, because as you also mentioned, nuclear energy is not ideal. I am still a strong supporter of actual green energy sources and changes in habits to reduce energy demand. But if I had to choose between replacing fossil fuels with green energy over time, or changing nuclear energy with green energy over time, that's what I'll choose.
It feels indeed like choosing between pest and cholera. I think it all boils down to the question: Do we want a lot of slightly bad carbon waste that we cannot contain, or do we want a fraction of that waste (less then one millionth to be precise) but which is highly dangerous and lasts 100 times longer. And perhaps this will always be a personal choice.
You captured it...and you've made me think long and hard...