Wind farms kill off hundreds of birds, many are chopped up by the spinning blades.
The question was who told vantexan thats a good idea
No, the point was you knee-jerk when you hear nuclear because of Hiroshima. We already have dozens of nuclear plants in the U.S. so why.the resistance to having enough of them to meet our needs? It's not like there would be one around every corner. You want clean energy. Can you point to something clean that would work as well as nuclear?
I stand corrected. After a long illustrious career as a nuclear scientist Ralph Nader should be listened to.
Who said I'm listening to Trump on this? I've read plenty of articles on the positive aspects, as well as the negative, of nuclear power for decades. The good outweighs the bad and our technology in that field has greatly advanced. Chernobyl was a result of poorly devised technology a long time ago. A good illustration is the nuclear plant on the coast of Japan being hit by that huge tsunami. Didn't meltdown. Was back online eventually. Plants built in the States are hardened against tornadoes and earthquakes and hurricanes. Do your due diligence before making claims about nuclear that don't hold up under scrutiny.
Articles from which journalists or papers?
Seriously? Do you write down all the names of the authors of all the articles that you read? Over the years I have read magazine and newspaper articles discussing nuclear power. Advances. Positives and negatives. You want clean energy but would rather squander trillions trying to make wind and solar work rather than invest billions in a proven technology that does work because of Hiroshima.
Surely I do. But I've lived all over the U.S. So this is a incomplete list. USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, the Albuquerque Journal, the Orlando Sentinel, the Denver Post, The Arizona Republic, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, the San Antonio Times, and the Kansas City Star. Oops, almost forgot the New York Times. Popular Mechanics and Popular Science have both had good articles about nuclear power over the years.
Thank you
Newspapers exist on advertising. Don't recall the nuclear industry advertising in them though. You think that because Nader and Hedges aren't supported by advertising that they're somehow pure? Ever consider that companies don't want their names associated with a couple of crackpots?
They do not lol
Sorry for your dad but has nothing to do with the viability of nuclear power. There are dozens of nuclear power plants in the U.S. that have been providing electricity for decades. I know the one about 50 miles from where I live has made electricity cheaper here now than before it was built.
Your sources of information has 100% to do with the viability of nuclear power
No they don't. The industry has been proven safe and reliable for decades. Writing about them doesn't make them any more or less viable.
The journalists can do propaganda for the govt or not
You love Europe so much but they use nuclear power far more than the US does.
Europe doesnt have a monopoly on truth just like us or the guys who wrote the bible
