WindPower reliability proven: nuclear power fans were lying all along.... 1605

Sylvia Else

I don't know where you get that from. I just looked at a pile of Pro-nuclear sites and not even those sites claim nuclear is renewable. Breeder reactors allow you to use fuel again but not forever, you still need uranium to make uranium dioxide for breeder reactors.

For all the

Tell that to the people near Chernobyl. Anyway the jury is out on how much impact it has had - we've had nuclear power for 50 years, that leaves about 249,050 more years to wait until the plutonium stops being toxic.

No, we've already spent Billions on nuclear research. Prior to 1973 OECD countries spent $150 billion on research on nuclear power, between 1974 and 1992 another $168 billion was spent on nuclear energy research and only $22 billion on renewables. Hasn't solved the waste problem and hasn't made nuclear renewable either. Would have been much better spent on researching renewable energy and energy efficiency. Note these figures don't include EU nuclear promotion activities or the research of the former USSR, and the French don't give out figures on this, so in reality the cost of researching nuclear would be closer to a trillion. What is clear is that somewhere near a trillion dollars has been spent on nuclear power research and it still isn't the answer, time to spend the money more efficiently.

Our descendants are likely to be even more peeed off if the planet is a mess and there are places which are off limits for 250,000 years because nuclear waste leeched out of the storage. Especially given we could have moved to renewable energy sources.

DS