Hi,

The nuclear power plant stands on the border between humanity's greatest hopes and its deepest fears for the future.

On one hand, atomic energy offers a clean energy alternative that frees us from the shackles of fossil fuel dependence. On the other, it summons images of disaster: quake-ruptured Japanese power plants belching radioactive steam, the dead zone surrounding Chernobyl's concrete sarcophagus.

Why simply not stopping all those nuclear plants, CO2 huge makers, ... and using SOLAR ENERGY?

"EDF is London 2012 Sustainability Partner". Thank you EDF. You will kill us all.

SOLAR ENERGY IS OUR FUTURE. However intellectuals will never have power. Money rules the world, and changes to Solar are simply not possible.

We'll simply ruin our planet.

Solar energy is barely practical as a tiny part of total energy, heavily subsidized by other forms of energy. If the fraction of energy from solar went up significantly, there would be no place to get the subsidies and it could no longer operate.

I hope nuclear energy is our future, because the alternative is the collapse of civilization.

It isn't as dead as you think - there are animals and it is recovering. Check youtube.

As far as I know, solar energy requires chemicals (acid) for accumulator batteries and production of solar panels also isn't very friendly to environment. Some people even claim that that burning coal is more "eco-friendly" than using solar panels. Another problem is that they won't work well in winter regions, require sun, and may be fragile. You can research subject further on the internet.

It isn't future in its current state. Low energy output, plus it requires accumulators.

Well, if there'll be bioengineering, it might be possible to convert some plant into natural energy generator.

well, but nimby for sure... or who wants to live near a nuclear plant?

I hope nuclear energy is never our future, and we work with the alternative energy sources, cause if not, then it will actually be the collapse of civilization.

Nuclear waste lasts for thousands of years, and nuclear accidents consecuences are still really scary for humans and the environment.

It is still used because is cheap (in terms of money, not environmental issues) and generates big amounts of energy.

Yes. It's so simple! Lets all manufacture all at once, on fossil fuels, all our clean energy needs which take other ingredients that damage our environment! (mining for metal, minerals, and other things that go into the wind turbines and solar cells)

It's like trying to think buying an electric car for everybody right now would solve our problems. You really think all that Lithium mining wouldn't cause a dent? what about the disposal of the Lithium after the batteries are end of life in 5 years. Which is also the problem with solar for storage as well.

Honestly, the only solution is population reduction. There are too many people and our current system simply can not handle more population increases and the increasing demand for limited and valuable resources (food, water, shelter, energy). Even if 2/3rds of the population of the world was made sterile, there would still be major issues. Economies would collapse and so many people would realize the pointlessness of life if not to pass on their genetic diversity.

What's the solution? There isn't one. Ride out the rest of your life because the world isn't going to collapse for another 50 years. By that time, you'll be too old to care.

Well, for a start, somebody could start researching better batteries/accumulators.
Also, people concentrate on electricity and modern technology (like "solar panels") too much when there are other means of extracting energy from the sun. If you can boil water with sunlight, then you can power a generator with it - without solar panels...

In a certain way, solar energy is also nuclear
I can hardly imagine less efficient way to get energy then by using solar panels, maybe except for burning fossil fuels. I think we (and the environment) are much better off using nuclear power.

I live within 12 km from a nuclear plant. I don't complain. The last time I checked, I had 10 fingers and one head...
I know a few people that live near a wind plant and they would all gladly change with me.

I think you don't have to worry about that... the world supplies of nuclear fuel will be depleted in a few years.

I believe the best bet for the future are the nuclear fusion powerplants, if someone finally figures out how to buid them.
I think people are too afraid of nuclear power. Sure there were some accidents, like the Chernobyl (but that was in the 80's, the reactors are much safer these days).

the batteries/accumulators are already at their limits, and progresses are now rather slow. So in 10 years, they will be better but still rather moderated.

Sahara solar plant is a good idea. Let's cover our planet with solar panels in deserts...

Personally, I am against Nuclear. There are solutions, not cheap, not easy, but they will surely not lead to drama like in Japan.

Do not forget that those recent drama are likely to occur again. You saw the movie "Tornado". The humans are responsible of these climate changes. It must end, a way or another. Renewable solutions such as solar or wind are the only possible alternatives.

Nuclear can make us collapse all. A genetic change/mutation can kill us all as well. Definitely Nuclear is the worst solution, and we should/must/ought to ban it of our world.

We are intelligent. - So let's take the best solutions, which is certainly not nuclear. The life of your childrens depends on your choices today. Time is running, and we do waste our time. By the end in 100-200 years, we will have to quit nuclear anyhow because of the wastes and disasters.

Yeah... or we can build *HUGE* dynamoes at the poles that will generate electricity as the earth rotates. That will also slowly make the days longer. Imagine all those things you allways wanted to do but never had time for!

IMHO, the nuclear power is the only source of energy that has the potential to satisfy the needs of mankind in the future, unless we go back to the caves.

Genetic mutation? Do you mean because of the radiation produced by the nuclear plants? There are many things that produce ionizing radiation. Sun is a source of radiation. Space is. Earth is. You are a source of radiation as well. Everything in the universe is radioactive. Do you fly by the plane? You get a decent dose of radiation if you spend some time at high altitudes. If you think of everything that irradiates you during your life, the nuclear powerplants will be way down the list.

I admit, though, that Japan is not the most suitable place to build a nuclear plant.

I'll tell you why. It's because they want to change your mind, and they want to maximize their profits. They have to kill nuclear energy to make way only for their products. Sorry, but progress is paid for in blood. It's just a fact, whether you accept it or not. They had to prove it to you.

Humans build nuclear power plants because of two factors :

GREED :

They want to feed ever inefficient industrial processes to keep their economy... Economy could be kept at the same leves of production while spending less, if some basic laws of thermodynamics and heat transfer would be accounted for.

POLITICS :

They want to keep "strategic independence" from other countries in terms of energy carriers like coal, hydro-Power, os Solar/wind/geothermal/sea power, which are all localization specific :

A person from Australia will have a hard time trying to convince a Russian of the benefits of Solar power over Nuclear Energy or Natural Gas - Solid Oxide Fuel Cells/ Thermo combined Cycle...

This is why Nuclear power is Attractive, cost effectiveness, and independence...

honestly i'm not sure why so many people think nuclear power is this big bad wolf, in the history of nuclear power there have only been a small handful of serious nuclear disasters, the most recent one in Japan took a 9.x magnitude earthquake followed by a tsunami to cause the plant to fail so catastrophically, Chernobyl was poorly built without much thought for safety combined with human error, and 3 mile island wasn't as horrible as it was made out to be. Statistically nuclear power is safer than people make it out to be.

This is exactly right. People are scared of something they shouldn't be. Yes, so big accidents happen, but it's bound to happen at some point anyway, and it's fairly few and far between with nuclear.

As for the reason solar energy isn't being more heavily invested in: it's simply not efficient enough. You would need a massive array of solar panels to put out the same kind of power as a nuclear plant.

I also believe this is true with our current system and something needs to be done quickly because we can't sustain our current levels of population and consumption (and not just power, as mentioned above). I personally think investing in space colonization would relieve this problem, but I don't think we can pull it off in time (to the scale that we need it). We don't necessarily need to kill people, but more of just let people die naturally and stop artificially extending the lifespan (ie. (old) people that are only being kept alive by tons of medication or machines)

Safe? It may be doubtful.

Please find below a link stating that accidents or disasters may however occurs (in one world's leader nuclear "expert")
- Numerous accidents occurs:
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_d...ucl%C3%A9aires
(I am sorry that it is in French, with google translate you may convert it to english)

There are numerous nuclear reactors are under concretes because they cannot fix them (at least in Europe).

We had better build lots of rockets to dump all Of The nuclear waste already generated because there is absolutely no safe place on this planet to get rid off all of it. 20 Years from now Japan's nuclear mishap will have put Russia's to shame!!