More Swedes favour nuclear phase out: poll

To be replaced with what...........

Millions of hamsters strapped to recylced bike light dynamos.

Replace old reactors with newer safer types of reactors...

Replacing nuclear power would be so retarded that I can barely believe the poll results.

Swedes are mostly very smart, but on some issues they are as dumb as a bag of spanners.

The question now is, should we ban cars too? After all we KNOW that 270 people died last year in traffic (and those where confirmed deaths in SWEDEN!). Until now much less people have died in Japan due to the nuclear power plant issues.

Guessing some people might mistake the high number of tsunami-related deaths in Japan with the nuclear power plant problems..?

Lets keep nuclear! We are much smarter in technology than the japs, russians and americans so disasters won't happen here.

amazing the amount of BS written about nuclear. Fukushima, no-one hurt, inside or outside the plant, radiation released was insignificantly small, the main danger was from unwarranted fear and panic.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/22/fukushima_tuesday_2/

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/14/fukushiima_analysis/

People were hurt inside the plant.

The headline should read 64% support nuclear power - left wing local.se bias

There are times when I agree with a demonstrator, but why is it that invariably these demonstrators look like they were professional demonstrators who do nothing else. They all have stringy hair, sloppy clothing, look dirty, and have the general appearance of the kind of people I don't want anything to do with. They all seem, like they vote on the far left, social dems, MPs or V, are useless, rely on public assistance, do not work for a living, nor do they want to, and generally appear as undesirable wrecks. Who are these people who have time in the middle of a day on a weekday to be out there carrying placards? How do they make a living?

Sweden needs to replace its most aging reactors with newer, more efficient reactors.

Also it would be a good idea for Sweden to increase the number of reactors it has.

Comparison of Nuclear power with Alternate Electricity Sources:

A document issued by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) in May 1996 provides a comparison. The NRDC analyzed data obtained primarily from two studies: one was a Harvard School of Public Health study reported by Dr. Douglas W. Dockery of Harvard University and seven others; the second was an American Cancer Society-Harvard Medical School study reported by Professor C. Arden Pope III of Brigham Young University and six others. Both studies dealt with the effect on our health from tiny particles of matter in the air we breathe. Burning fossil fuels is the largest single source of these small particles; this includes burning coal, natural gas, oil, diesel fuel, gasoline, and wood. Coal-fired power plants are the worst offenders by far. The NRDC analysis estimates that approximately 64,000 people may die prematurely each year due to these particles; the particles cause heart and lung disease. This number is for 239 metropolitan areas in the United States; the number for the entire country would likely be around 100,000 deaths per year. The lives are shortened by an average of one to two years in the most polluted areas. One-third of these deaths are estimated to result from discharges from electricity generating power plants.

Others have estimated the effects of air pollution in the United States. Bernard L. Cohen, Professor of Physics and Radiation Health at the University of Pittsburgh, estimated in 1990 that fossil-fuel burning in electric power plants may cause 30,000 deaths per year by air pollution. The late John Lenihan, past Professor of Clinical Physics at Glasgow University and Regents' Professor of Chemistry at the University of California, has estimated that air pollution may cause up to 40,000 cancer deaths per year. The EPA has made crude estimates of 70,000 deaths per year associated with particle pollution.

It is interesting to note that wood, a renewable energy resource, presents considerable health hazards. Residential wood burning releases more of some kinds of particles to the atmosphere than do coal-burning power plants. Aspen, Colorado and Klamath Falls, Oregon do not meet current EPA clean-air standards because of wood smoke.

There are other risks related to power production. For example,

• 15,000 people died when the Gujarati hydroelectric dam in India failed in 1979. The Vaiont dam in Italy failed in 1963, killing 2,000 people.

• Close to 90,000 miners have been killed in coal mine accidents in the United States in this century; the toll continues at 50 or more miners killed each year.

• 1,440 people were killed in 24 natural gas accidents (fire, explosion) between 1969 and 1986 according to a recent study.

• 2,070 people were killed in 57 oil accidents (refinery fires, transportation) in the same period according to the study.

Source: Max W. Carbon, Nuclear Power Villain or Victim Our Most Misunderstood Source of Electricity.

Are the supporters of nuclear power aware of this Stanford University study? Or is it too long to read it?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/50896700/Review-of-Solutions-to-Global-Warming-Air-Pollution-and-Energy-Security

Are you used to short ignorant media articles and too lazy to read the paper? Have a look at an abstract

http://pubs.rsc.org/en/Content/ArticleLanding/2009/EE/b809990c

REading so many stupid comments here hurt my eyes, but I guess it is just a representation of the people we have in this world...

Sweden is in a unique position, due to the water and wind we have.

50% of our energy comes from those sources and 50% from nuclear power, BUT we could have 100% energy from those other sources.

So pleeeeeeease, before making a stupid comment, try to study a bit and get to know something...

I say that those who are so in love with nuclear power AND CARS, go and live in the States. They also seem to be in love with brutal capitalism so, it all makes sense. Go and eat your "monsanto breed" vegetables and leave us alone.

Thank you.

Well, it's perfectly understandable, given the number of earthquakes and tsunamis Sweden experiences.

35 people have died from power generating wind mills. Zero have died from Nuclear power in the USA. Let's ban "Big Wind".

Yes let's all forget the atrocities of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island because the past apparently has no bearing on the conservative mind.

Just Observe: West along with Japan (the strategic partner) opposed the Combat Nuclear power to the world. So far so good !

But

A stage came where Nuclear power for peaceful purposes was also denied and hurdles were created for certain countries.

Result : Their own people have turned against it. Just Observe How and Why ?

Wow, the guy in the picture looks like a cool dude, I bet he didn't go to work today.