Nuclear Power debate.

[midgetbob]

We just need to add in more renewable energy sources.

Wind Turbines power 20% of Denmark's grid. Adding in hydropowered grids ( which is 20% of the WORLD'S grid) and solar powered grids you could take a large chunk of the worry out of the problem.

Can we fully nix coal / nuclear plants? No; not currently. Eventually however.

I'm just waiting for some 3rd World Nation scientist to stumble across cold fusion; then an interesting predicament would happen: Does (s)he use his discovery to free the world from fossil fuel dependency? Or does (s)he horde and become a new world power by selling power to countries creating a huge militant conglomerate to protect themselves?

[RamesesII]

We just need to add in more renewable energy sources.

Wind Turbines power 20% of Denmark's grid. Adding in hydropowered grids ( which is 20% of the WORLD'S grid) and solar powered grids you could take a large chunk of the worry out of the problem.

Can we fully nix coal / nuclear plants? No; not currently. Eventually however.

I'm just waiting for some 3rd World Nation scientist to stumble across cold fusion; then an interesting predicament would happen: Does (s)he use his discovery to free the world from fossil fuel dependency? Or does (s)he horde and become a new world power by selling power to countries creating a huge militant conglomerate to protect themselves?

Wind power is good but the amount of turbines you need and the area needed is ridiculous besides which what if you have no wind.

Nuclear power is one of the cheapest, safest (when done correctly), most efficient methods of electricity production known to exist today, and we're foolish for being too afraid to take advantage of it.

This I also know and acknowledge you are 100% correct it is more efficient than others and on a par par with fossil fuels if you looked at equal amounts nuclear power more for longer than fossil.