Try the political quiz

395 Replies

 @9GG6Q9T from Connecticut agreed…5mos5MO

Top Agreement

Nuclear energy is clean, powerful, and reliable. It needs to be de-stigmatized in order for the general public to agree on this.

 @9G8T8WF from New York agreed…5mos5MO

There has been a significant amount of research in nuclear energy, especially thorium reactors. They're significantly safer due to the reaction not needing to be under heavy pressure, thorium is easier to process and three times more abundant than uranium, and it is impossible for it to undergo a meltdown since the thorium reaction is not self-sustained.

 @9G94XQ5 from Pennsylvania agreed…5mos5MO

Traditional uranium reactors make more sense compared to thorium reactors. Looking at current statistics for nuclear energy per ton of carbon compared to coal it makes sense to use nuclear energy. Coal against nuclear energy per unit make about 273 times more tones of emissions and around 1230 time more deaths. Deaths in nuclear energy really don't happen apart from 3 main meltdowns which have all be the cause of operator error or being hit by a tsunami. None of these problems really have to do with nuclear power in of itself. When looking at public perception of climate change against nuclear energy you will notice a negative association which makes absolutely no sense other than people being stupid. We need better education of nuclear energy in schools.

 @9G957PQ from Texas disagreed…5mos5MO

Nuclear power is created for the cause of destruction, most times against innocent lives, something that everyone should be against.

 @9KNGK9P from Utah disagreed…3wks3W

 @9GFNG2KProgressive  from Washington agreed…5mos5MO

Nuclear energy is a safe and compact alternative to coal and gas plants and should be implemented instead. It makes up for the weaknesses of solar and wind power that require huge energy storage solutions to function, because it functions all hours of the day and never stops producing energy.

 @R3volutionDovesGreenfrom Maine disagreed…5mos5MO

The Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters highlight the catastrophic consequences when things go wrong. Every day nuclear power plants produce radioactive waste, which remains hazardous for thousands of years and for which we still don't have a safe, long-term storage solution. The process of mining and refining uranium, which is used as fuel in nuclear reactors, also has significant environmental impacts.

 @9GFNG2KProgressive  from Washington commented…5mos5MO

Regarding the urgency of climate change, the best option we have now without development into new technology in nuclear. Renewable sources like wind and solar are plentiful, but require energy storage technology that we can't deploy on a large enough scale in time. Hydro-electric dams are a solution, but the negative impacts of dams on the environment limits us from deploying on a large enough scale once again. Nuclear plants can be built anywhere, can produce energy at all hours of the day, and are safer than what they were 12 years ago.

 @9GFQWT8Constitution from Texas agreed…5mos5MO

I definitely agree with Nuclear Energy because Solar and Green energy doesn't produce enough energy to be sustainable in the U.S. which requires a lot of energy. Nuclear energy is safer than most realize, the media has portrayed Nuclear energy as dangerous and cite disasters for proof but all those disasters are caused by human negligence.

 @9GFQYPW  from Washington agreed…5mos5MO

I completely agree. The general public has been scared away from nuclear energy and its potential because of Chernobyl and the widespread fear of anything nuclear that stemmed from the Cold War. We should be investing more in nuclear energy and destigmatizing it in the eyes of the public.

 @9H3JJK3Republican  from Idaho agreed…4mos4MO

Nuclear power is a powerful, versatile, clean energy source. The technology behind it is mature, and there are many promising new nuclear technologies designs in the pipeline that can be deployed in the coming years to bring down costs and meet a wider variety of societal needs, including small modular reactors and reactors that provide heat for industrial applications. The problems of nuclear waste are purely political, not technological, and are often greatly exaggerated by a public who does not understand nuclear science very well.

 @9H3QNFX from New York agreed…4mos4MO

This is true. Any problems with nuclear power are often signs of not only old reactors, but mismanagement and human error as well.

 @9GKGKQ2  from California agreed…5mos5MO

Nuclear energy is statistically safer than coal, solar, and wind power. Every nuclear disaster to date has been a result of bad public communication or simply negligence as a result of bad governmental oversight, meaning they were caused by people, not the tech itself. Also, nuclear power is significantly more energy-dense, allowing more land to be used for non-energy purposes.

 @9GKHPQ9Green from Michigan agreed…5mos5MO

Yes, nuclear energy is the far superior energy type. People dislike it simply because of one or two bad incidents (mostly Chernobyl) which was a complete failure due to the soviet government being stubborn.

 @9FT7MNK  from Virginia agreed…6mos6MO

Not only is nuclear energy the most powerful source of energy that we have it is a source that has almost zero carbon footprint. Most people probably think that's untrue because a anyone with the internet can tell you after a quick google search that nuclear plants are always producing large clouds of smog right? No, the "smog" is nothing more than water vapor, the stuff that clouds are made of. Nuclear plants are also the most reliable sources of energy with them working at 100% more than 92% of the time according the the department of energy more than double gas and coal and tipple wind and solar.

 @9FVBZ59 from Idaho agreed…6mos6MO

I adore this comment. Nuclear energy is literally proven to be the best and most reliable source of energy... I don't know what this issue is all about.

 @9FVBTCPPeace and Freedom from Montana agreed…6mos6MO

Yes, and it is important to note that less people have lost their lives due to nuclear meltdowns than infrastructure failure in "green" sources.

 @9FVXY3T from Maine agreed…6mos6MO

Nuclear is the most reliable energy source available. For example, nuclear power plants produce maximum power 92% of the time. For comparison, solar is only at max 24.9% of the time while wind is at around 35.4% of the time. Similarly, a typical nuclear reactor produces 1 gigawatt (GW) of electricity. You would need at least two coal power plants or 3-4 renewable plants (each 1 GW size) to generate the same electricity. Furthermore, if we can crack the fusion technical problem, we can eliminate the risk of meltdowns and make nuclear waste much more manageable. It's not even close; nuclear energy is the most reliable and clean source.

 @9FVYLK8 from Idaho agreed…6mos6MO

I agree with the use of Nuclear Energy. We just need to find a proper, safe, and clean method of disposing of radioactive waste.

 @9FYMSW7Republican  from South Carolina agreed…6mos6MO

nuclear energy causes less deaths per unit of energy produced than any other type of energy production. Modern regulations and science that ensure nuclear safety are over looked by illogical emotional fears caused by disasters decades ago with long outdated equipment and amplified by bad human error.

 @9FYPHH6 from Florida agreed…6mos6MO

I completely agree; people often have an aversion to nuclear energy because of this ingrained fear of radiation and its sources. Now that scientists are aware of nuclear energy’s extreme dangers, power plants are almost 100% safe, even in the event of a natural disaster, and certainly safer than they are made out to be.

 @9FSBMSV  from Iowa agreed…6mos6MO

It produces zero carbon emissions and doesn't produce other noxious greenhouse gases through its operation.

 @9FSDH25Democrat from California disagreed…6mos6MO

Nuclear energy sends low radiation levels into the environment, radioactive waste is not being dealt with properly, the cooling water system, and the nuclear power plants accidents and terrorism.

 @9FXJ9MX  from California agreed…6mos6MO

It produces no carbon emissions, pure water vapor and nuclear waste, which we have methods of preparing, unlike carbon emissions which is a current crisis.

 @99QB4RGLibertarian from Illinois commented…1yr1Y

Nuclear power is by far the cleanest and safest way to produce energy. Other renewable sources of energy harm the environment and take much more space than nuclear. Plus nuclear energy power plants can cheaply be formed from former coal or oil power plants.

 @9GS22QZ from California agreed…5mos5MO

Nuclear energy is only bad if we don't run it correctly. Many other countries have nuclear energy as their main source of energy and they haven't had any problems.

 @9GV2NVV from Illinois agreed…5mos5MO

The waste created in all of its existence is less than what we burn in co2 in a day. Additionally advancements like nuclear fusion have been achieved that will create brighter opportunities in the future.

 @9GV42JTDemocrat from Illinois agreed…5mos5MO

agree! Greenhouse gasses are incredibly harmful, especially when burning coal. Switching to nuclear energy solves some of these problems.

 @9GJZRDYfrom Maine agreed…5mos5MO

The total amount of nuclear waste ever produced in the world could fit inside the ash pile produced by a single coal power plant. The amount of radiation next to a coal power plant is actually higher than near a nuclear power plant because coal has trace amounts of uranium and thorium in it. Whilst nuclear power is more expensive than wind and solar currently, the reverse was true 10 years ago; nuclear power has the potential to be cheaper than wind or solar if we again invest in technological progress in this area.

 @9H26XB6 from Illinois agreed…4mos4MO

Nuclear energy has advantages over renewables in terms of reliability, GHG emissions, land use and waste

 @9GSTZMZ from South Carolina agreed…5mos5MO

It would take roughly 1.26 million wind turbines to power the U.S, While 14,000 nuclear plants could power the entire world.

 @9G8V7CH from Massachusetts agreed…5mos5MO

Nuclear energy is one of the most profitable energy sources and it will help the U.S progress, militarily ans economically.

 @9G9JQN3 from Nebraska agreed…5mos5MO

Nuclear energy produces no carbon emissions upon successful energy transfer and is plenty more efficient than fossil fuels.

 @9G7X773Libertarian from Virginia agreed…5mos5MO

Nuclear energy is a rather safe and reliable energy source, the perfect balance between the environment and energy, but only when under the control of the competent and trustworthy.

 @9GW99DF from Texas agreed…5mos5MO

Nuclear energy is clean, powerful, and reliable. It needs to be de-stigmatized in order for the general public to agree on this

 @9GL9H5C from Virginia agreed…5mos5MO

Nuclear Energy has been proven clean, efficient, safe, and sustainable. Media and businesses have falsely portrayed its dangers to scare the public and increase revenue for other energy sources. Thorium reactors are also more safe, cheap, and energy-producing than other kinds of reactors at the moment.

 @9GKXX2V from New York agreed…5mos5MO

Nuclear energy, when handled properly is better for the environment than fossil fuels and renewable energy while being very efficient. For example, Nuclear energy does not cause air pollution or carbon dioxide (4 times less than solar and 2 times less than hydro).

 @9GLSFP6 from Iowa agreed…5mos5MO

I agree, Nuclear energy technology and safe guards have improved tremendously since the very few nuclear meltdowns. Nuclear energy is much more reliable than renewables and isn't subject to the awful diminishing returns from other renewable sources(solar, wind, hydro). Most likely, nuclear energy is the only feasible direction to powering the entire world without fossil fuels.

 @9GGW79L from New York agreed…5mos5MO

Nuclear energy has exponentially greater power output than fossil fuels, and its reputation has only been tainted by a handful of disaster scenarios plagued with internal issues; virtually every nuclear disaster that has occurred could have been easily prevented with more oversight.

 @9GRL52J from Tennessee agreed…5mos5MO

Nuclear fission is nearly 8,000 times more efficient at producing energy than traditional fossil fuels, because nuclear energy is more efficient, it requires less fuel to power the plant and therefore creates less waste as well. But it isn't the most efficient, we should instead invest in all forms of energy and see which one works the cleanest, most efficient, and is cheaper. Then we should only invest in that option.

 @9GR68MX from Idaho agreed…5mos5MO

Nuclear power is far safer than many assume. Chernobyl is what many point to when opposing nuclear power. Nowadays, it is so much safer than the past plants, plus, Chernobyl had internal problems. Nuclear waste is the other problem, however, there are some use cases for nuclear waste.

 @9GQWFCF from California agreed…5mos5MO

There have been two accidents that have resulted in casualties, Chernobyl, which was caused by human failure of judgement, and Fukushima, which was caused by a massive tsunami and only had one death. Nuclear energy is very reliable and can be used to reinforce existing renewable power to prevent rolling blackouts.

 @9GJVBVF from Massachusetts agreed…5mos5MO

Energy is all calculable, we’re talking fundamental laws of physics. Even taking into account ideal vs real conditions, nuclear is just mathematically and practically the most efficient form of usable energy production.

 @9GRRK6T from South Dakota agreed…5mos5MO

Nuclear produces less waste, and with less risk for human or environmental health than any option we currently have.

 @9GQM62FProgressive from New Jersey agreed…5mos5MO

On average nuclear powerplants in the USA produce 1 gigawatt of power per plant. In contrast, solar plants produce only 1.5 kilowatts on average.

 @9GMG2CJ from Ohio agreed…5mos5MO

Nuclear energy has been proven to be the safest form of energy by far. The detrimental effects of the carbon released through fossil fuels are much more harmful than any nuclear energy.

 @9GJ8FR8from Maine agreed…5mos5MO

Nuclear energy is extremely cost effective once set up.
Very little carbon emissions.
New age reactors are very safe.
Extremely reliable.
Once nuclear energy gains more funding even more innovations can be made.

 @9GJ727D from New Mexico agreed…5mos5MO

Nuclear power has the lowest waste to power ratio of any consumable fuel source and is more practical than most renewable energies. Despite common concerns, it is also extremely safe with all the current technologies.

 @9H3WNXZ from Utah agreed…4mos4MO

Nuclear energy is very safe, especially with modern safety codes. No energy source available is more energy dense and easily usable than nuclear power.

 @9H3DSHZ from Utah agreed…4mos4MO

thorium is a common material used in nuclear energy that doesn't put out very much waste, easy to mine, can't be used in nuclear weapons, and is safer because it needs something else to make it radioactive which could be taken away in an instant to prevent a meltdown.

Engagement

The historical activity of users engaging with this answer.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...