Atomic Energy: Abundant, Clean, and Safe If you actually wis…

Atomic Energy: Abundant, Clean, and Safe
If you actually wish to conserve the planet from worldwide warming, there’s one energy source that can do it. It’s not gas, coal or oil, either. Michael Shellenberger, developer of Environmental Progress, has the reaction in this vital video.

FOLLOW us!
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/prageru.
Twitter: https://twitter.com/prageru.
Instagram: https://instagram.com/prageru/.

SUBSCRIBE so you never ever miss out on a new video! https://www.prageru.com/join/.

To see the script, sources, test, go to https://www.prageru.com/video/abundant-clean-and-safe.

Sign up with PragerU’s text list to have these videos, completely free product giveaways and breaking statements sent directly to your phone! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru.

Do you go shopping on Amazon? Click https://smile.amazon.com and a part of every Amazon purchase will be donated to PragerU.

STORE!
Love PragerU? Now you can utilize PragerU product!

Script:.

France gets 70% of its power from one carbon-free source. Sweden 40%. Switzerland 36%. The United States 20%.

For those who want to produce a world devoid of carbon emissions, France is clearly the good example.

That source of energy, by the approach, is not solar or wind. It’s not gas, oil or coal, either.

It’s nuclear.

Atomic energy is not simply cleaner than all other forms of energy. It’s likewise more economical to establish, safe and abundant.

Yes, safe.

So, if the world is going to end in a few years given that of worldwide warming due to rising CO2 levels, why aren’t we going all out to produce this plentiful, neat and safe type of energy? Why aren’t there lots of nuclear reactor in development all over the world?.

Well, all of us understand the action? Nuclear energy is simply too harmful … too harmful.

So, regardless of the reality that we’re informed we’re handling an “existential crisis”– which indicates individuals might cease to exist; despite the fact that we may all wither away in unbearable heat; or starve due to the reality that of global dry spells; or drown in increasing seas; or be killed in Mad Max-style riots– atomic energy is off the table … given that … it’s too darn dangerous.

Hmmm.

I want to make sure I have this. The goal is to conserve mankind … There’s a method to conserve mankind … And we will not take it. Given that we’re scared, there may be a bad accident … or something.

Does that make good sense to you? Due to the fact that it does not to me.

Nevertheless perhaps I’m not providing enough weight to the security argument, so let’s take a more detailed look at that considered that nobody, not even the most radical ecologist, disputes that nuclear power produces massive quantities of energy easily and effectively.

Deaths straight associated to nuclear power? Under 200– not annual however in the entire history of the nuclear power market.

What about those popular nuclear disasters we’ve all heard a lot about? Didn’t they poison untold thousands? Three Mile Island in 1979, Chernobyl in 1986 and Fukushima in 2011.

Okay, let’s deal with every one.

3 Mile Island:.

There was a mishap at the plant, yes, however the amount of radiation that leaked disappeared than one might get taking a chest x-ray. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission acknowledged as much 4 weeks after the preliminary media hysteria died down. “We goofed,” the commission informed Congress. “There was no hazard of any hydrogen explosion.” That didn’t get the headings.

Chernobyl:.

The accident became a disaster just due to the truth that of pitiful security treatments unique to the Soviet Union. Even so, initial reports of radiation leak turned out to be grossly overemphasized.

Fukushima:.

In 2011, as a result of an earthquake and tsunami, the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant was damaged, and nuclear radiation was released. Despite the media hysteria, not one person at the power plant passed away because of radiation leakages. The deaths that took place in the location were the result of the tsunami.

Well, what about hazardous waste? Undoubtedly that’s very damaging.

Actually, no. All the hazardous waste ever developed in the United States can fit on a single football field stacked less than seventy feet high. It’s rapidly and securely buried in steel containers enclosed in concrete.

For the total script check out https://www.prageru.com/video/abundant-clean-and-safe.

source

Deaths directly associated to nuclear power? What about those popular nuclear catastrophes we’ve all heard so much about? The Nuclear Regulatory Commission acknowledged as much 4 weeks after the initial media hysteria died down. In 2011, as an outcome of an earthquake and tsunami, the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant was harmed, and nuclear radiation was introduced. All the nuclear waste ever generated in the United States can fit on a single football field stacked less than seventy feet high.

Deaths straight associated to nuclear power? Under 200– not yearly but in the whole history of the nuclear power market.

In 2011, as an outcome of an earthquake and tsunami, the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant was destroyed, and nuclear radiation was released. Deaths directly related to nuclear power? In 2011, as an outcome of an earthquake and tsunami, the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant was harmed, and nuclear radiation was introduced.