Sentences with phrase «concerns about nuclear power»

«R&D on advanced technologies, including thorium reactors with the potential to ameliorate remaining concerns about nuclear power, was stifled, seemingly because it was too promising.

Public concerns about nuclear power have traditionally centered on two issues: the risk of widespread radioactive fallout from an accident and the hazards of nuclear waste.

Braman says a similar effect reveals itself amongst progressives when it comes to concerns about nuclear power, for instance.

Not exact matches

Meanwhile, according to today's Siena poll, Nearly three - quarters of voters say they are «concerned» about the safety of New York's nuclear power plants and a majority opposes building new nuclear power plants in the state.

Lawmakers will also dig into a proposal to close Indian Point nuclear power plant, a plan that delights critics of the aging facility and worries others concerned about lost jobs and power.

«New York City and the surrounding area is the number - one terrorist target in the world with Indian Point sitting right here, a nuclear power plant, and having these vessels that are going to be coming in from the Atlantic and from wherever right up the shoreline to dock here, that is something that we should all be concerned about,» says Astorino.

, a vocal opponent of nuclear power, saw Jaczko's statement as a welcome response to his concerns about the ability of the AP1000 to survive a major earthquake, hurricane or earthquake strike, and as evidence of NRC's closer scrutiny of safety issues following the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident.

The investigation was requested by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which is concerned about the potential impact tsunamis might have on new and existing nuclear power plants, especially in light of the devastating tsunami in Japan in March that sparked the greatest nuclear disaster inNuclear Regulatory Commission, which is concerned about the potential impact tsunamis might have on new and existing nuclear power plants, especially in light of the devastating tsunami in Japan in March that sparked the greatest nuclear disaster innuclear power plants, especially in light of the devastating tsunami in Japan in March that sparked the greatest nuclear disaster innuclear disaster in years.

Perhaps the most serious concern about increasing our reliance on nuclear power is whether it might lead to an international proliferation of atomic bombs.

Concerns about global warming and oil's imminent demise have caused scientists and policy - makers to look for solutions in both the future and the past: to new technologies such as nuclear fusion, multijunction photovoltaics, and fuel cells — and to traditional energy sources such as water power, wind power, and (sustainable) biomass cultivation (coupled with clean and energy - efficient combustion).

It has also grown tremendously in the past twenty years, in line with increasing concerns about scientific and technical issues of every kind, from nuclear power to global environmental change.

«We've been worried since 9/11 about how to protect against bad guys hijacking an aircraft and crashing it into a nuclear power plant upwind of a heavily populated area,» says David Lochbaum, director of the Union of Concerned Scientists's Nuclear Safety Project, a group that monitors the performance of nuclear plants and the NRC, which regulatenuclear power plant upwind of a heavily populated area,» says David Lochbaum, director of the Union of Concerned Scientists's Nuclear Safety Project, a group that monitors the performance of nuclear plants and the NRC, which regulateNuclear Safety Project, a group that monitors the performance of nuclear plants and the NRC, which regulatenuclear plants and the NRC, which regulates them.

I have studied this issue carefully, mindful of how important nuclear power is to Connecticut, and of how concerned Connecticut families are about the health and safety effects of storing nuclear waste on site.

Nuclear power faces persistent concerns about safety, nuclear waste, and potential weapons proliferation, despite past contributions to mortality prevention and climate change mitigationNuclear power faces persistent concerns about safety, nuclear waste, and potential weapons proliferation, despite past contributions to mortality prevention and climate change mitigationnuclear waste, and potential weapons proliferation, despite past contributions to mortality prevention and climate change mitigation [232].

So those of us who are concerned about climate change, we've got to recognize that nuclear power, if it's safe, can make a significant contribution to the climate change question.

Of course, the barriers to a fast expansion of the world's nuclear power plants, whether for electricity or fuel manufacturing, remain daunting — including everything from the lack of permanent waste - disposal options to tough financing and persistent public concerns about safety.

Congress has stymied such proposals, and until that changes it is difficult to see what will drive growth in nuclear power, regardless of concerns about carbon or the variability of solar and wind power.

I'm convinced that the United States will be better off keeping existing nuclear power stations running, where their management can be demonstrated to be reliable, rather than initiating a decades - long decommissioning process that would not resolve community concerns about spent fuel and many other sources of risk.

Paul Fisher, a Dot Earth reader from New Jersey who recently expressed cogent concerns here about dealing with the risks in a complex engineered system — nuclear power plants — has offered similar observations about a complex biogeophysical system in a comment on my post on Arctic climate change, past and future.

Tanaka said concerns about the safety of nuclear energy, if they derailed nuclear power projects, would also hurt efforts to limit carbon emissions and contain global warming.

Surely, if we are to be actively concerned about the impacts of nuclear power, or even nuclear accidents, then shouldn't we be going through the roof about the impacts of fossil fuel burning?

This has led to an internecine dispute among those who claim the mantle of «environmentalist,» who are legitimately concerned about climate, but who split on their positions around the pros and cons of nuclear power.

The nation's current energy portfolio has raised concerns about the adverse environmental effects of energy generation — particularly greenhouse gas emissions from coal - fired and oil - fired power plants and the long - term storage of spent nuclear fuel.

There are already many excellent volumes that capably expose the fraudulent theories about ozone depletion, global warming, pollution, pesticides, cancer risks, nuclear power, PCBs, asbestos, acid rain, deforestation, carbon dioxide, biodiversity, soil depletion, etc. 2 Rather, we hope to demonstrate convincingly that concerns about the environment (some overblown, others completely fabricated) are being cynically exploited by influential individuals and organizations whose goal includes building a global tyranny.

Serious concerns about the safety, cost, and waste issues associated with nuclear power remain, and demand continuing scrutiny.

Nuclear powered reactors are capable of producing vast amounts of electricity with no greenhouse gas emissions, which is clearly a great benefit given current concerns about climate change.

Regarding the earlier point on nuclear power - in your opinion why don't a very high percentage of those who are concerned about CO2 damaging the environment favor nuclear power?

This is particularly important for those countries that pose the greatest risk: countries that are starting down the nuclear power road and have concerns about the reliability of a Western - dominated supply chain.

Electricity generation from nuclear power worldwide increases from 2.6 trillion kilowatthours in 2010 to 5.5 trillion kilowatthours in 2040, as concerns about energy security and greenhouse gas emissions support the development of new nuclear generating capacity.

Concerns about the grid are linked to the fast - changing mix of electricity sources, particularly the loss of our most reliable and resilient sources of electricity, such as coal and nuclear power.

Nuclear power faces persistent concerns about safety, nuclear waste, and potential weapons proliferation, despite past contributions to mortality prevention and climate change mitigationNuclear power faces persistent concerns about safety, nuclear waste, and potential weapons proliferation, despite past contributions to mortality prevention and climate change mitigationnuclear waste, and potential weapons proliferation, despite past contributions to mortality prevention and climate change mitigation [232].

The Scientific Alliance is either (using Stott's own «words of magic») «an organisation that promotes concern about the environment through rational science; while accepting climate change as a reality, the Alliance is critical of current methods proposed to manage climate change and energy production» or (using the New Statesmans «words of magic»), «an anti-environmentalist campaign group that denies climate change; opposes organic agriculture and promotes genetically modified foods and nuclear power»

These are not corporate stooges of the nuclear industry; to a person, their embrace of nuclear power is motivated by a deep concern about climate change and the conviction that no other carbon - free source of energy is sufficient (and safe) enough to replace coal and gas.

... The document shows Trump advisers contemplating ways to keep aging U.S. nuclear power plants on line, including by addressing concerns about the long - term storage of spent radioactive material.

Given the evident concern about nuclear waste, it will be interesting to see if there is any reactions from young people to the governments recent admission that, on current NDA plans, the proposed Geological Disposal Facility (GDF) is not expected to be available to take spent fuel from new nuclear power stations until around 2130, which they note «is approximately 50 years after the likely end of electricity generation for the first new nuclear power station».

If you want to learn more about the Union of Concerned Scientists» nuclear power work, visit our main nuclear power page.

This post presents reasons why those concerned about climate change should support nuclear power.

Lekalakala and McDaid were deeply concerned about the environmental and health impacts of massively scaling up South Africa's uranium mining, nuclear power generation, and the production of nuclear waste.

Concerns about pollution, climate change, and the finite nature of fossil fuel and nuclear power resources have led to demand for and development of energy from renewable resources.

I'm not particularly concerned about the safety of nuclear power.

I still don't know why I not allowed to express my concern about hundreds of nuclear power plants when society turns into chaos and are left to melt and emit pesky harmful radiation.

I am aware of people making the argument that the big push by the nuclear industry for enormous government subsidies to find a massive expansion of nuclear power on the basis that nuclear power is «THE ANSWER» to global warming is a fraud that dishonestly and cynically takes advantage of growing concern about the very real problem of global warming, and I make that argument myself (because even a quite large expansion of nuclear electricity generation would have little effect on overall GHG emissions, at great cost, taking too long to achieve even that little effect, while misdirecting resources that could more effectively be applied elsewhere).