The Energy Crisis

Here is the link that prompted this post http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16029572

This i will always have an issue with. Complaining that nuclear power is unsafe and trying to prove this by breaking facilities. How does this prove that nuclear power as an energy solution is unsafe? Surely the only thing it possibly points out is whether or not security should be ramped up at these facilities. However, the security at EDF did say that they were monitoring the intruders the whole time and decided not to use force because they were not deemed as a real threat. Well i think that is reasonable. I can't see any sane person running into a nuclear reactor and trying to destroy the fuel rods or something to that extent. Especially the hypocritical Green peace groups out there today.

Now i can understand there are certain flaws with nuclear energy but what other cost effective solutions are there?

• Wind power - overly expensive and inefficient, also unreliable (what if the wind does not blow)
• Solar power - expensive and needs the sun to run

Now this is not to suggest that nuclear is the answer. But for now why can it not be part of the solution to the energy crisis? Why are so many people against it? Okay so there is occasionally a disaster attributed to a nuclear power station (no one mention Chernobyl), but personally I can not see that the UK can ever be run entirely on wind power and other renewable energy sources.

Personally, I believe that the best way to solve our energy crisis it to pump more money into research for better Geothermal plants and also for Nuclear Fusion. 

Now we have all seen some of the bad uses for nuclear fusion. But why not spend more money on trying to make this a viable source of energy. If we could this alone could solve the global energy crisis, and for all the greenies out there, it would be clean.

This Ridiculous World