Try the political quiz

17.6k Replies

@ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...7yrs

No, we should invest in cleaner alternatives such as wind, hydroelectric, thorium, and geothermal

@ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...7yrs

Yes, temporarily while we increase investment into cleaner renewable alternatives

 @93LVSF5 from Washington answered…7mos

Yes, as well as investing in other clean energy alternatives such as wind, hydroelectric, thorium, and geothermal.

@924MYCK from GU answered…7mos

Yes, but with more oversight and rigorous adherence to safety procedures to prevent accidents and to ensure safety of citizens. However, renewable energy sources (i.e. wind, solar, geothermal, hydropower, etc.) should be prioritized first.

@9375CJZ from California answered…8mos

I don't support the use of nuclear energy but I support the research of nuclear energy

@9334YP3 answered…8mos

Yes, in principal, just as soon as we figure out safer ways of disposing of the nuclear waste that it produces. Until then, we should increase investment into fossil fuels.

@92YX7Z9 from California answered…9mos

Yes, but the govt. should invest and require safe and clean ways of disposal with minimal environmental damage.

@92XHX9V from New York answered…9mos

@8ZK5HYT from New York answered…9mos

@928JWTG from Wisconsin answered…10mos

Only if the plants do everything in their power to stablize it and keep enemies away from them(could be used for nuke)

@8ZSR5NL from GU answered…10mos

Yes, with more oversight and rigorous adherence to safety procedures (i.e. proper knowledge of how to dispose waste safely) to prevent accidents and to ensure safety of citizens. However, renewable energy sources (i.e. wind, solar, geothermal, hydropower, etc.) should be prioritized first.

@925JC5F from Wisconsin answered…10mos

@9229SCK from California answered…10mos

It is unhealthy for the environment and citizens and can cause long lasting negative affects.

 Deleted answered…11mos

Yes, but with more oversight and rigorous adherence to safety procedures and with proper knowledge of how to dispose waste safely to prevent accidents and to ensure safety of citizens, while we increase investment into cleaner, renewable energy sources.

 Deleted answered…11mos

Yes Yes, as long as there is no public subsidy Yes, temporarily while we increase investment into cleaner renewable alternatives

Yes, but with more oversight and rigorous adherence to safety procedures along with proper knowledge of how to dispose waste safely to prevent accidents and to ensure safety of citizens, while we invest more into renewable energy sources.

 Deleted answered…11mos

Yes Yes, as long as there is no public subsidy Yes, temporarily while we increase investment into cleaner renewable alternatives

Yes, but with more oversight and rigorous adherence to safety procedures along with proper knowledge of how to dispose waste safely to prevent accidents and to ensure safety of citizens, while we invest more into cleaner, renewable energy resources.

@8ZGPKM9 from Missouri answered…11mos

yes because it could come to extreme and we could get damaged and destroyed by other nuclear weaponized areas

@8ZGPKQP from Washington answered…11mos

If someone like another state is using nukes for bad reasons and another state helps by using nukes to them? then yes.

 @RickStewart from Iowa answered…11mos

I support the free market deciding what kind of energy is created and at what cost. If there is pollution involved, the government should tax it, in order that no one be exposed to it without just compensation.

 Deleted answered…12mos

Yes Yes, as long as there is no public subsidy Yes, temporarily while we increase investment into cleaner renewable alternatives

Yes, but with more oversight and rigorous adherence to safety procedures to prevent accidents and to ensure safety of citizens, and with proper knowledge of how to dispose waste safely, while we invest more into renewable energy resources.

@8YVYRGZ from Wisconsin answered…12mos

i do but i also think that it could be bad for us just in case it ever were to not work

 Deleted answered…1yr

Yes Yes, but with public subsidy Yes, temporarily while we increase investment into cleaner renewable alternatives

Yes, but more oversight and rigorous following of safety procedures is needed to avoid accidents and to ensure safety of citizens so long as it can be guaranteed as safe and the waste is safely disposed.

@8YKV6MS from Hawaii answered…1yr

Yes, as long as it contained within a safe environment so that it doesn't harm people, or the environment.

@6VWJ8PP from Wisconsin answered…1yr

@8XBRMPX from Missouri answered…1yr

Yes, but it should be away from people so they wont be effected by the nuclear reactions.

@8X92W7Q from Alabama answered…1yr

yes, I think it is OK but toward the future try to shift to a more environmentally sustainable option

@8X8VVZ2 from Alabama answered…1yr

@tasibuttel from Nevada answered…1yr

@8WVKG57 from Georgia answered…1yr

In circumstances where the plant isnt relying on things like water, solar, or wind energy

@8WRKRDY from Kentucky answered…1yr

@8WRL5Q9 answered…1yr

Yes, with litter tax payer money. And not in the hands of the government and lobbyists.

@8WPN6T6 from Ohio answered…1yr

Yes, it has almost no waste and we have secure ways to dispose of the waste

@89CDM9C from Kansas answered…1yr

@8W9KX2R from Idaho answered…1yr

No and we should support 80% of how we get out energy with a cleaner form if possible

@8VYLX9V answered…1yr

It depends if it is a crisis at hand that needs to be taken to these extreme measures of using nuclear weapons.

@8VMNWSQ from California answered…1yr

Only if the plants aren't near any civilization or a place that can cause any harm if they blow.

@8VCYWFL from Michigan answered…1yr

Engagement

The historical activity of users engaging with this question.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...