Yes, and nationalize the industry

Nuclear power is already in use in some places around world providing a substantial amount of energy with little amount of pollution. The safety of a nuclear power plant is much greater than that of the fossil fuel factories we have today.

Nuclear energy protects air quality by producing massive amounts of carbon-free electricity. It already powers communities in 28 U.S. states and contributes to many non-electric applications, ranging from the medical field to space exploration. Switching to Thorium-based reactors will decrease waste and provide even more energy. Last technology has greatly increased the safety of these reactors, and they have been made so small and easy to operate by trained professionals that every city would be able to get a reactor of its own.

We should nationalize the industry through thorium and more efficient uranium reactors because nuclear reactor aren't like they were in the 1960's They are more efficient and safer than ever, and the nuclear waste problem has been solved years ago we can continue our expansion on nuclear power in america.

Wind and solar farms take up much more space than that of nuclear power plants. Plus, these two only function when forms of natural events, such as convection, and the cycle of the sun and moon occur, which varies on the time of the year. Nuclear does not produce any significant emissions over time, especially given the Wind and Solar farms are much more subject to the threats of the environment.

By nationalizing the industry it could lead to nuclear energy becoming cheaper and more well regulated.

In order to cut out the majority of carbon emissions, nuclear energy needs to become the new norm and replace coal power. This can only happen if nuclear power is available throughout the nation.

Nuclear energy is destroying the planet and needs to be illegalized as soon as possible, or else there will be irreversible effects on the planet.

We would need farless nuclear energy plants compared to the others which claim to be clean but destroy so much land and habitats that we are being counterproductive.

We need a lot of power and nuclear is a pretty good way to do it without completely leveling the entire American country to build implements for solar and wind technology that is likely to only run 40-60% of the time anyway, only 100 nuclear power plants supply 20% of the power consumption of the entire United States of America, imagine how much we could save with 200 or 500 or 1000.

It seems to be the safest and cleanest when ran correctly and safely. Would love to hear alternative views about it.

Nuclear energy is a clean source of energy, and as the industry goes on the dangerous byproduct will be taken care of. unfortunately there just isn't enough energy in wind and solar, and will cost too much money for it to be considered as a national energy.

Make nuclear energy an industry and a new power option for the energy field. Like how different companies own their own wind farms and whatnot.

I think that nuclear energy especially fusion is a good way to solve our nations problems with clean energy and the environment.

Many of the nuclear reactors involved in accidents like Chernobyl were older and more prone to nuclear meltdowns. 40 years of improvement and advances in technology have made them just as safe as renewables and certainly safer than fossil fuels that produce dangerous smog that goes into our air. Above all, it is crucial to understand that nuclear waste is completely safe with proper storage and can even be used again in some scenarios to produce more energy.

Nuclear is far more reliable (dispatchable) than renewables like wind and solar. Nuclear plants keep churning out energy even when the wind is not blowing, and the sun is not shining. https://changeoracle.com/2022/07/20/nuclear-power-versus-renewable-energy/#:~:text=Nuclear%20is%20far%20more%20reliable,the%20sun%20is%20not%20shining.

Private companies and corporations can’t be trusted to be in charge of nuclear energy, as they’ll make it about profits. Nuclear energy is a good and clean source when well maintained

Nuclear energy is currently the most efficient form of power generation we have. Coal produces 24MJ/Kg of energy, whereas uranium produces 3,900,000 MJ/Kg of energy. Uranium produces zero CO2 emissions - only water vapour - and actually releases less radiation than coal. Such a valuable energy source must be pursued. However, it should be under the control of the State, as the reasons for nuclear energy being so safe are to do with the regulations involved in its use.

Energy and energy production is important to national security because if we rely on other countries for energy, it is a liability and that country might not like us forever (if they liked us in the first place). Therefore, having nuclear energy nationalized will make energy cheaper, improve national security, and make the U.S. a more independent nation.

While the capital cost of thorium is the largest argument against its implementation, all forms of renewable energy will have a large capital cost. Furthermore, the United States has an abundant access to thorium, and can use this to reduce our carbon emissions.

Government takes oversight seriously, they make sure nothing possibly goes wrong because there are so many steps for everything and redundant policies put in place until they are necessary. If the government controls nuclear, nuclear just becomes a little safer than it already is.

We're going kill ourselves (ecocide) with carbon emissions if nothing changes. Ted Kaczynski was right.

Free energy and power! Some machines last for a decade without even working on them. It's really free energy with risk, but America was built on risk with the Declaration of Independence so why can't we all take that risk once more.

Although Nuclear power plants have high upfront cost we can reduce this by replacing other energy source with nuclear in hope to reduce the cost

We need electricity to live which means free market ideals are null with respect to the energy industry. Profit is determined by cost cutting, gouging, and exploitation rather than by effectiveness in this situation, and thus, the free market will drive private energy businesses towards unsafe and predatory practices.

Nuclear energy produces at least 8,000 times the amount of energy than average fossil fuels, Nuclear energy is easily reliable and a better solution compared to other alternatives. And Nuclear energy does not produce carbon dioxide emissions while the past 50 years, nuclear energy has brought down CO2 emissions down by 60 gigatons.

Yes it is as of right now the best choice for energy but it is a limited supply so we need to invest in clean energy while we rely fully on nuclear energy for power.

the argument against nationalizing the nuclear energy industry highlights potential issues related to bureaucracy, financial burden, innovation, political influence, international collaboration, safety, accountability, and economic viability. Proponents of this counterargument often emphasize the importance of careful consideration and a balanced approach to nuclear energy policy, which may involve a combination of government regulation and private-sector involvement to address the complex challenges and opportunities of the nuclear sector.