One of the most controversial topics

[Pigeon 3000]

Nuclear energy

Great explaining:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcOFV4y5z8c&t=21s
Why it is awesome:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVbLlnmxIbY&t=97s
Why it sucks:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEYbgyL5n1g&t=185s

[scozy]

[Xineoph]

I've always heard nuclear energy is the preferred method and that it was the uneducated "well-meaning" who basically stifled clean energy progress through the more aesthetically accepted ways.

Since I don't know the topic that well, but I agree that tends to fit the bill fairly well for modern-leftists, I'm willing to believe and thus vote for a lot more nuclear energy.

Voting by feelings is fun.

[scozy]

Nuclear energy creates such a radically different form of pollution than other thermic energy sources that I just don't know how one could possibly compare them in a meaningful way.

[Pigeon 3000]

The thing is that nuclear pollution is stored very deep underground where it will not escape for [At Least] hundreds of years (Probably tens of thousands) and Thermal pollution goes right into everybody's lungs and severely damages them. Burning fossil fuels has caused countless numbers of people to die of lung cancer. Plus people are working on ways to convert nuclear waste into super materials or reusing the uranium. And the last thing is that power plants only have to change their uranium every 3 years creating much less (in volume) waste.

[justavictim82]

Nuclear energy is for the most part very safe. I would prefer for it not to be in heavy seismic activity areas (Fukashima) but overall it takes a lot for a reactor to fail and have a major event. Like a lot lot. I am more neutral on the subject because on one hand, it is cheap sustainable energy but on the other... I do not want unstable states to have access because that would inherently lead to terrorists getting nuclear warheads

[Notblib]

Nucular. It's pronounced nucular.