Chernobyl was the worst possible case for a badly engineered nuclear plant, and it didn't hurt that many people. Plants and animals still grow in the area that was cordoned off.
If you want power, there are trade offs. Even "free" energy costs a lot of money and environmental damage to create the extraction devices, such as solar panels or windmills. Just look at everything it cost to build Hoover Dam to collect "free" hydroelectric power. Men died in constructing that thing. A river was redirected. Fish died.
For the amount of power generated compared to all of the costs, I think nuclear is the way to go for now. Fusion energy will be better, but that's in the future.
I think fusion energy and nanotechnology will solve a lot of our problems, other than the ones that more trials, convictions, and executions of the guilty will fix.
Chernobyl was the worst possible case for a badly engineered nuclear plant, and it didn't hurt that many people. Plants and animals still grow in the area that was cordoned off.
If you want power, there are trade offs. Even "free" energy costs a lot of money and environmental damage to create the extraction devices, such as solar panels or windmills. Just look at everything it cost to build Hoover Dam to collect "free" hydroelectric power. Men died in constructing that thing. A river was redirected. Fish died.
For the amount of power generated compared to all of the costs, I think nuclear is the way to go for now. Fusion energy will be better, but that's in the future.
I think fusion energy and nanotechnology will solve a lot of our problems, other than the ones that more trials, convictions, and executions of the guilty will fix.