Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

NeoGreen

(4,031 posts)
Wed Jan 17, 2018, 04:51 PM Jan 2018

10 Reasons to Oppose Nuclear Energy

https://www.greenamerica.org/fight-dirty-energy/amazon-build-cleaner-cloud/10-reasons-oppose-nuclear-energy




10 Reasons to Oppose Nuclear Energy

Green America is active in addressing the climate crisis by transitioning the US electricity mix away from its heavy emphasis on coal-fired and natural gas power. But all of that work will be wasted if we transition from fossil fuels to an equally dangerous source – nuclear power. Nuclear power is not a climate solution. It may produce lower-carbon energy, but this energy comes with a great deal of risk.

Solar power, wind power, geothermal power, hybrid and electric cars, and aggressive energy efficiency are climate solutions that are safer, cheaper, faster, more secure, and less wasteful than nuclear power. Our country needs a massive influx of investment in these solutions if we are to avoid the worst consequences of climate change, enjoy energy security, jump-start our economy, create jobs, and work to lead the world in development of clean energy.

Currently there are 444 nuclear power plants in 30 countries worldwide, with another 63 plants under construction. Those plants should not be built for the following reasons:

1. Nuclear waste:
(snip)

2. Nuclear proliferation:
(snip)

3. National security
(snip)

4. Accidents
(snip)

5. Cancer risk
(snip)

6. Energy production
The 444 nuclear power plants currently in existence provide about 11% of the world’s energy (11). Studies show that in order to meet current and future energy needs, the nuclear sector would have to scale up to around 14,500 plants. Uranium, the fuel for nuclear reactors, is energy-intensive to mine, and deposits discovered in the future are likely to be harder to get to to. As a result, much of the net energy created would be offset by the energy input required to build and decommission plants and to mine and process uranium ore. The same is true for any reduction in greenhouse gas emissions brought about by switching from coal to nuclear.

7. Not enough sites
(snip)

8. Cost
(snip)

9. Competition with Renewables
(snip)

10. Energy dependence of poor countries
(snip)

1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
10 Reasons to Oppose Nuclear Energy (Original Post) NeoGreen Jan 2018 OP
How I became a shill for the natural gas industry... hunter Jan 2018 #1
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»10 Reasons to Oppose Nucl...