@ISIDEWITHQuestionsscienceStarted 8yrs agoActive 4hrs ago

Do you support the use of nuclear energy?

As of August 2022, the UK has 9 operational nuclear reactors at five locations (8 advanced gas-cooled reactors (AGR) and one pressurised water reactor (PWR)), producing 5.9 GWe. It also has nuclear reprocessing plants at Sellafield and the Tails Management Facility (TMF) operated by Urenco in Capenhurst. In November 2022 French President Emmanuel Macron pledged to engage in “ambitious cooperation” with Prime Minister Rishi Sunak on nuclear energy amid fears that fuel imports from Russia will plummet this winter.

59%
Yes
41%
No
44%
Yes
28%
No
12%
Yes, temporarily while we increase investment into cleaner renewable alternatives
13%
No, we should invest in cleaner alternatives such as wind, hydroelectric, thorium, and geothermal
1%
Yes, as long as there is no public subsidy
1%
Yes, and nationalise the industry
0%
Yes, but with public subsidy

Historical Results

See how support for each position on “Nuclear Energy” has changed over time for 2.2m UK voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

See how importance of “Nuclear Energy” has changed over time for 2.2m UK voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from UK users whose views extended beyond the provided choices.

 @93WNHXKanswered…2yrs2Y

Yes, as long as there is strict training of nuclear power plant workers and thorough, regular monitoring and review of equipment functionality, energy release and measures to mitigate potential hazards.

 @93RBYNCanswered…2yrs2Y

As long as the waste is handled correctly for the environment

 @9G9JYN5answered…7mos7MO

Not conventional nuclear power station but yes to new modular nuclear reactors being developed but we should continue to use Coal and Natural Gas and it should all be publicly owned.

 @9G5MCLJanswered…8mos8MO

I support it, and it should be nationalised while we look into renewable alternatives, not for the climate, but for efficiency and economic gain.

 @9FXK3X3from Georgia answered…8mos8MO

Yes, so long as that independent committees of nuclear physicists are responsible for the operation of these plants, to avoid accidents like Chernobyl and Fukushima Daichi

 @9FRN3HYanswered…8mos8MO

Yes, nuclear is part of a tapestry of energy supply that is needed to ensure independence and stability

Latest News

Stay up-to-date on the most recent “Nuclear Energy” news articles, updated frequently.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1mo1MO

The Fantasy of Reviving Nuclear Energy

Representatives from more than 30 countries gathered in Brussels in March at a nuclear summit hosted by the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Belgian government. Thirty-four nations, including the United States and China, agreed “to work to fully unlock the potential of nuclear energy,” including extending the lifetime of existing reactors, building new nuclear power plants and deploying advanced reactors.“Nuclear technology can play an important role in the clean energy transition,” Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, told summit attendees. But she added that “the reality today, in most markets, is a reality of a slow but steady decline in market share” for nuclear powerThe numbers underscore that downturn. Solar and wind power together began outperforming nuclear power globally in 2021, and that trend continues as nuclear staggers along. Solar alone added more than 400 gigawatts of capacity worldwide last year, two-thirds more than the previous year. That’s more than the roughly 375 gigawatts of combined capacity of the world’s 415 nuclear reactors, which remained relatively unchanged last year. Pledging to triple nuclear capacity by 2050 is a little like promising to win the lottery.For the United States, it would mean adding an additional 200 gigawatts of nuclear operating capacity (almost double what the country has ever built) to the 100 gigawatts or so that now exists, generated by more than 90 commercial reactors that have been running an average of 42 years. Globally it would mean tripling the existing capacity built over the past 70 years in less than half that time in addition to replacing reactors that will shut down before 2050.The Energy Department estimates the total cost of such an effort in the United States at roughly $700 billion. For much less money and in less time, the world can reduce greenhouse gas emissions through the use of renewables like solar, wind, hydropower and geothermal power.

3 replies

Other Popular Questions

Explore other topics that are important to UK voters.