Its useful and the safest source of energy as well as having little pollutants beyond some waste which can just be put in death valley or some similar shit.
Just don't place it close enough to a population center so if in the extremely rare case of an accident it doesn't fuck everyone over like fukushima. deadly accidents are extremely rare, but considering how shit the accidents are they need to be a safe distance.
>A massive flood.
>en.wikipedia.org
>Killed 250 people
Which is more than Fukushima has killed, or is even projected to kill.
...
It's simply the most efficient source of energy.
>Oh becouse it doesn't follow your liberal ideology it's bad?
Is nuclear power a liberal conspiracy we must crush or something held back by liberals that we, as warriors of justice, must free? I'm not sure where I should direct my impotent rage at as Trump hasn't told me what to think yet.
this
More like 8.2 million deaths per year.
>Government pays for the construction of a plant
Wouldn't have to if government would just allow people to build the plants without getting blocked halfway through construction due to a change in government. No private investor has confidence because of this. I agree that it's a stupid system but it's stupid because of the government, not because of the industry.
That's more than 7x the amount of people that die in Japan each year.
Is this a bad meme?
>What is your opinion on nuclear power Veeky Forumsnners?
Mixed. On one hand, they're really safe on paper.
On the other hand, once you have a real power plant with idiots at the controls and management cutting corners on the maintenance, they become a whole lot less safe.