#Government has destroyed the ultimate, cleanest, and what should be an inexpensive industry compared to its partners in terms of initial costs: the #nuclear industry. From the very beginning, governments had #altered the course of the nuclear industry and its actual #potential to power the #US for an extremely low cost, while releasing an extremely small amount of #carbon-dioxide or any other types of harmful pollutants into the #air (which in turn fuels the extremely controversial #climateChange/global warming debate).
First, we must understand how governments had from the very #inception of nuclear energy, altered its course for government benefits. In the late 1930s, the power to harvest nuclear energy was discovered. However, its use would not initially be used for the greater good nuclear energy has the potential for. #Scientists all over the #SovietUnion, #NaziGermany, and the Western #Allies petitioned their governments to take up nuclear energy only so that they could produce #nuclearWeapons.
When large governments have the ability to wage #wars, and start what could be considered an #unproductive time period, many new #technologies and #innovations would be used for war, rather than for peaceful purposes. What if the #FederalReserve did not fuel the #stockmarket #crash of 1929, nor the #GreatDepression be prolonged, and what if the #WeimarRepublic, from its conception, did not suffer harsh economic burdens? Such large wars which had risen from government #interventions would most likely only result in much smaller wars between smaller nations rather than a full-on #WorldWar. The US would most likely not be the super power today, although it would be a strong #nation regardless (especially with its economy).
From this, what would the scientists who understood how nuclear energy works most likely do? If in #peace time, the most obvious answer was to try and find ways to fund their #research in order to produce #electricity. This would most probably go through large electric #companies, #universities, and other #private entities which would have the ability to get the right type of #funding, #equipment, and other essentials in order to harvest electricity via nuclear energy.
But what guarantees such projects would be carried out, especially that they would most probably cost a fortune to get up and running? #NikolaTesla did not receive a single government #grant when discovering how to use #AC to power homes; instead he …
If you could master nuclear fusion that fuses non-radioactive, non-poisonous elements into other non-radioactive, non-poisonous elements, that might be an ultimate (i.e., no need to switch to anything else in the future) energy source. (1) No waste problem. (2) Fuel probably, for practical purposes, unlimited. (3) Environmental harm from mining?
Nuclear fission necessarily uses radioactive heavy metals (poisonous) to produce lighter but also mostly radioactive elements. The radioactive elements created usually have short half lives and are, therefore, even more radioactive. The radioactive elements used for fission are rare. Mining them damages the people who mine and the environment. (1) Waste problem. (2) Limited fuel. (3) Environmental harm from mining.
There's nuclear, and there's nuclear. Notice how government doesn't enter into the analysis.
Fossil fuels: (1) Waste problem. (2) Limited fuel. (3) Environmental harm from mining. Definitely not ultimate.