i don't agree with that part! Just look at fukishima to see that nuclear is not safe or clean
Nuclear powerplants don't have any CO2 emissions.
It's safer than pretty much everything out there, even including solar and wind.
There are more deaths even by those than by nuclear power plants.
It's a cold hard statistics thing, if you saw the video I linked you'd know. It took one of the strongest EARTHQUAKES in human history AND a TSUNAMI to destabilize the FUKUSHIMA powerplant. An eartquake that moved the entirety of japan 2.5 meters to the est, and the earth's axis moved 10 centimeters. As a result, there is just 1 dude who got cancer that MIGHT have been caused by FUKUSHIMA. COAL claims 1000s each year.
Then there is the fact that FUKUSHIMA was a 50 year old powerplant.... 50 year old Nuclear tech that withstands one of THE biggest earthquakes (9 on scale of richter) in recent history AND a 14 meters high tsunami that killed 19 000 people and you argue Nuclear Energy is unsafe because 1 guy died of lung cancer that measured radiation values just after the fact.... Really ?
Chernobyl has an estimate of 62 deaths, and the increase of the chance of cancer has it up to a potential 4000 people over the next few years according to the World Health Organisation...
Those are the 2 DEADLIEST accidents in nuclear energy.
Lets compare those with others.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_accidents
Well shit. We're well and truly fucked. Hydro, Wind and Solar are deadlier than Nuclear based on my search results on google and wikipedia.
https://www.solarpowerportal.co.uk/...ikely_cause_of_fire_in_latest_safety_incident
Nuclear waste storage. Freaky right ? actually one big warehouse with the right safety specifications to satisfy the paranoid, can store the nuclear waste of 1 cubic meter a year for a single nuclear power plant. 1 cubic meter a year.... Oh gosh we cannot do this to our children, to the next generation! What would they think of us ;p? Absolutely fucking nothing.
Think about it? what's worse? Increased death rates, increasingly polluted air, deaths of flora and fauna OR 1 cubic meter a year.
I know what your thinking. "BUT NUCLEAR IS BAD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT!"
Heres Chernobyl now.
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160421-the-chernobyl-exclusion-zone-is-arguably-a-nature-reserve
Ofcourse, you're now worried that the BBC is a fake piece of news broadcasting agency owned by the corporate elite.
So lets check what National Geographic has to say about it:
Wait so shit, nuclear disaster worst in history, and wildlife thrives? Why? Because humans are gone....
I think it's absolutely ABSURD that an entire energy source got summarily dismissed because people don't understand it and therefore find it freaky.
I would like to see arguments that proof that Nuclear energy is not clean, or safe, especially compared to other energy sources YOU DO believe are safe.
Currently, windmill parks are a fad, 600 windmills the size of the eifel Tower with mils, produce the same energy as one nuclear powerplant.
Heres the thing, there are several ongoing investigations surrounding these offshore windmill parks for their effects on ocean life.
https://www.dw.com/en/how-do-offshore-wind-farms-affect-ocean-ecosystems/a-40969339
We'd all like the cleanest, safest energy to be used, the one most in tune with nature to meet our energy needs. Thing is, we cannot even hope to meet our energy needs without going nuclear, we simply cannot produce energy sources at the required rate without going nuclear and none of the ones we do have the technology for can currently match what we can achieve with nuclear energy, both in safety, production, energy, CO2 reduction, health and nature considerations.
So sure, its not safe or clean. But can you point out something safer or cleaner that can actually meet our energy needs ? Especially since Wind, Solar and Hydro each actually cause more deaths than nuclear energy ever did in its worst accidents? Once more. Fukushima build in 1960's (IT WAS AN OLD POWERPLANT!), Earthquake of 9 on the richter scale, 14 meter high tsunami = 1 death.... `
The IPPC, the climate experts of the UN, have an increase in nuclear energy in all its most effective models for reducing our CO2 emissions AND meeting our energy needs....
So here is the thing. Facts and numbers prove your fears regarding Nuclear energy are not founded...
I bet most people don't even realize just how much they crippled the biggest, safest energy source humanity has and thereby stunted our technological growth... Quite frankly, its do or die where Nuclear energy is concerned. We owe it to future generations to always choose the most feasible cleanest option. Nuclear is it. Solar, Wind and Hydro cannot meet the demand in even our wettest dreams when it comes to production and safety...yet.