close
    Nuclear Power Vs. Coal Power

    Nuclear and coal fired power plants generate 91% of the electricity consumed in the United States. They are likely to continue to produce the bulk of the country's power for many years to come. Deciding which to build more of is not a simple equation.

    +3  Views: 1224 Answers: 9 Posted: 7 years ago

    9 Answers

    Coal-fired plants contribute 70% of all our electricity. They are naturally dirty. They emit 2.5 gigatons of carbon dioxide every year, as well as other toxins, including nitrous oxide and sulfur dioxide. These emissions are a major contributor to the greenhouse effect, and the global warming that has come in its wake.


    In contrast to regular coal-fired plants, nuclear plants are clean in operation. In contrast to coal-fired plants fitted with carbon capture and storage technology, the amount of toxic waste that they produce (in the form of spent fuel rods) is small and compact, and, nuclear proponents would argue, relatively easy to store safely over the long term. In their entire history of operation in the United States, nuclear power plants have been responsible for no deaths

    IamPamela313

    @Raider8763 - Thank you, my friend!!!

    Raider_retired 3_29_

    Thumbs up, luv.

    France has "many, many", nuclear plants and haven't had any incidents that I am aware of.


    I Believe that Nuclear Plants are the cleanest way to go until we find something cleaner, BUT ONLY if they are built to the highest of standards. For instance:


    Able to withstand magnitude 9.9 earth quake or higher, handle the largest tsunami, and built in cement mixers in case the worst ever occurred. Maybe even building them underground like NORAD?


    If they were built to the highest standards possible, maybe people wouldn't mind having them relatively close to their towns.


    We don't need to repeat the mistakes of the past, like the levy construction by the Army Corps of Engineers only built the levy's to withstand a cat. 3 hurricane and New Orleans got a cat. 4..


    Make sure they are plane crash and weapon proof. Coal is just still to dirty, unless cleaner technologies are developed, I wouldn't go with coal or fossil fuels. Just my opinion.

    Where I live the power company just spent over a billion dollars upgrading the power plant's emissions controls now what comes up the smoke stack is mostly water vapor and very very little green house gases the down side to this upgrade was my electric bill tripled

    leeroy

    That bites, hope all this save the environment stuff is worth it? Not that I don't think we should leave the Earth in a better condition than we we got here. Just so darn expensive to be green.

    I believe smaller coal plants spread out over the country would be fine. The greenhouse effect, and the global warming is a farce. Local pollution from large coal plants can be a problem. With Coal Scrubbers the problem is minimal.
    I believe that Nuclear Plants are the cleanest way to go, other than solar but it will never be able to produce enough with technical knowledge we have now.

    I live next to a nuclear power plant (San Onofre - California) having some problems but I feel safe. I think it's the best (in all regards) form of energy we have to use if we all become realistic and admit to we will continue to use energy more rather than less. Yes, I read a lot about all nuclear disasters. Just FYI click on these two sites about latest on Chernobil...


    http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/science/Chernobyl--My-Primeval--Teeming--Irradiated-Eden.htmlhttp://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/tag/chernobyl/ - 50k -


    http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/tag/chernobyl/ - 50k – Choose “Full episode”

    I don't know if anyone has seen the HBO special about what the effects of Hydro drilling does to the the water supply? They were lighting peoples kitchen tap water on fire, it was disheartening.
    Fort Worth TX has many of these small natural gas wells in the area. I never knew that the government owns the mineral rights to anyone's land.

    Headless Man

    They don't.

    Technology is there just cost to darn much

    dont leave natural gas out of the picture it is a fine alt.

    it still astounds me that we still rely on the same fuel source's as we have done for well over century!


    http://www.waterpoweredcar.com/


    a water powered car! if the oil and power companies really cared about the planet and the people on it, this technology would be available now!



    Top contributors in Uncategorized category

     
    ROMOS
    Answers: 18355 / Questions: 154
    Karma: 1093K
     
    Colleen
    Answers: 47520 / Questions: 115
    Karma: 953K
     
    country bumpkin
    Answers: 10973 / Questions: 160
    Karma: 800K
     
    jhharlan
    Answers: 9876 / Questions: 1092
    Karma: 733K
    > Top contributors chart

    Unanswered Questions

    441794
    questions
    709902
    answers
    512707
    users