Do you support the use of nuclear energy?

Yes, but with intense scrutiny of safety and commissioning, decommissioning and waste disposal costs, and any secondary costs to any impacts to nearby residents and wildlife.

Yes, but only if it is 100% publicly-owned, strictly regulated, constantly updated, & only set up in remote areas.

Yes, but as long as all safety requirements are met and not polluting the environment with byproducts

Yes. The reason being, is that nuclear energy is actually one of the cleanest energy sources on earth. It's just people are afraid to use it due to the Chernobyl incident, when in reality, that was an accident, and not something that would happen when nuclear energy is used.

Oil & Gas all the way!

Yes, but under proper protection with nationalize industry, while investing in cleaner alternatives.

I do support the use of nuclear energy, however I think that in the short, Canada should focus on taking advantage of our abundance of fossil fuels to help pull us out of this budget deficit, while working towards cleaner alternatives

im all for it, but we have to make sure we dont do what the soviets did and cheap out, and make sure we dont put them in areas prone to natural disasters. so in other words, YES

The nuclear power plants need to be managed at a more strict standard. The energy itself is safe and clean. The human practices are what leads to issues.

to a degree, I think current nuclear power plants should install more security and safety systems, and at least shut down the reactor if not enough employees show up for work.

Unlock the hidden tech that has been invented over the years. Zero piont energy, the that runs on water ex.

As long as this is constantly being protected and monitored to make sure no accidents occur to damage health. If we can be pretty much guaranteed that no accidents will occur such as the Chernobyl incident, then I'm all for it.

yes i do believe nuclear energy is important, but in the right hands and smartly. I do think we should abuse the fact that we have nuclear energy i think its good if used in the right hands.

As long as they try their best to ensure that the nuclear plants are well protected and unlikely to cause any accidents.

Yes, but we should more so be looking into nuclear fusion energy then fission. Also we need to find a better way to get rid of the waste I personally say that we should be using the property’s of the waste but only in ways that are safe.

Yes, as long as there is strict government policy and punitive measures for poor maintenance and disposal

Yes, but with public subsidy. but we should invest in cleaner alternatives such as wind, hydroelectric, thorium, and geothermal

Yes, but in Canada we have such a great resource in renewable hydroelectric energy that there may not be a need for nuclear?

Yes, but we should look into other clean energy alternatives as well like wind, solar, hydroelectric, thorium and geothermal

Nuclear energy is safe and reliable. It's a great energy source but we should consider cleaner alternatives.

Yes, only if it is abundantly safe to do so in the face of war, terrorist attacks, and long term for the environment.

YES! ABSOLUTELY! we need nuclear power more than ever, especially in BC, Canada where energy costs will continue to rise.

Yes, For nuclear fusion not fission. More funing in Nuclear Fusion as it is a good source of clean energy

The support for the use of nuclear energy varies. Some argue that it's a low-carbon energy source that can help address climate change, while others express concerns about safety, nuclear waste, and the potential for accidents. It's a complex issue that involves weighing the benefits and risks associated with nuclear energy.

No, but we need to investigate it, and learn more about nuclear energy, until we can use it as public usage. And keep only authorized people in the area. We don't want to repeat the mistakes of 1986 in Chernobyl

Yes, and nationalize the industry but Indigenous communities should have final say on where nuclear energy plants are built

There should be an extensive research into the pros and cons for humain’ health and the environment with nuclear energy

yes i support its use as long as it isint near a city or a place where thousands of people could get injured should a catastropic event occur at the nuclear power plant

Well, if we can find sustainable cleaner alternatives that can last for a long time and produce enough for the public, i say we ban the nuclear energy, but currently it is goind to be hard to do so for now yes until we find other solutions.

Yes. It's an essential form of non-GHG emitting energy, and can be an essential part of the low carbon economy for not just Canada but for other nations as well.

Yes but there needs to be more effort in how we can safely and cleanly deal with the nuclear waste without further harming Earth

Yes, as long as the people who work at nuclear power plants are extremely well educated, can pass a monthly exam to ensure they are fit to work at the plant, and they are white.

honestly it depends for what, if something gose wrong with it you can take out a whole city/all the people working with it and most of them are likly to die

No electric vehicles cause more damage to the earth when making the batteries than gasoline and diesel

No for nuclear fission, yes for nuclear fusion research while also investing in cleaner alternatives

Other than fossil fuels we do not have another way to make electricity efficient enough other than nuclear. Wind and solar depend on the weather, geothermal isn't developed enough, and hydro doesn't work everywhere and takes up lots of land. nuclear can fill the niche of fossil fuels whilst all the others fall short.

Yes! Absolutely! But with a combination of both Public and Private cooperation.

yes. start using thorium instead of uranium

I’ve not done enough research

yes and no because it can be useful but bad stuff could happen when being used ]

if it can be subbed then replace it

nuclear energy plants are not a good idea because something can go really wrong

i think if it is needed to be use for jobs its ok

Its one of our main power sources, but its very unsafe for the environment.

Only if a value added to the country, resources or if it's beneficial and if it's harmful then no.

no, unless its for xrays

As long as we don't use too much

No, because it's not renewable and we have to dump it somewhere

i dont support but i dont not support idk

Yes, are long as they keep the C02 emission low and are low on greenhouse effects.

in specific circumstances

Yes as long as its done its done without risking saftey

Yes literally nuclear energy the best source of energy

Find ways to make cleaner waste and make radiation more sustainable

Oppenheimer

Depends on the employees

100% yes. Nuclear energy, when handled correctly, is a much cleaner energy than people think. Most of the radioactive material is used up entirely when producing electricity. The only products made from it is a small gram of radioactive material and distilled water.

Nuclear energy has a lot of potential but untill we are able to mitigate and prevent any devestating problems and avoid another chernobyl, it’s just too big a risk

Yes, as long as it is safe and we can avoid potential nuclear disasters

as long as it is in safe locations

Nuclear energy is the most efficient and cleanest of energy, except for they should be using thorium as opposed to uranium, and the reactor plants are to be set up in nine earthquake zones and nowhere close to a coastline

I support nuclear energy, as long the waste is properly disposed of. But I think we as a species should invest in cleaner engery.

Yes, and invest in safe long-term storage options

No. We could power the entire world with renewable energy tomorrow if we wanted too. If we focused less on the money and more on the sustainability of life on earth.

Yes, as something such as the Chernobyl disaster was not caused due to the use of nuclear energy, but instead due to the negligence of the Soviet Union who decided it was better to cut corners and use cheaper components than follow worldwide safety procedures. When operated safely, nuclear factories provide no inherent risk to the public, and the fuel generated is much cleaner and efficient than propane, gasoline, and coal.

Yes but the locations need to be chosen very cafully to avoid areas of natural disaster, environmental impact and impact on humans

theoretically yes, but I have major public health and safety concerns, so not in practice. I think cleaner, renewable alternatives are what we should focus on right now.

Nuclear energy is good because it makes a lot of power with little fuel and doesn’t pollute the air, but it’s also dangerous because of accidents and radioactive waste, so it needs to be used carefully.

Yes, this is a massive power source but we need to research this more and understand it and figure out ways to use this in a safe way

It is true that nuclear energy would drastically decrease CO2 emssions, unfortunately, we live in a high volatility world. There are a lot of wars happening right now therefore, nuclear development is not a godd idea for human civilization right now

As long as funding is given to research how to implement it safely and properly dispose of nuclear waste.

I support nuclear energy use, but only if it doesn't become the main energy source and is temporary while we find better alternatives. Also when using nuclear energy if should majorly affect citizens

One of the best sources of energy if waste is dealt with properly. So spend the extra money to deal with it long term

yes for it can be very beneficial. its a waste not to use nuclear energy it can power and do so many things that can help us as humanity. but I think we should be weary of communist nations such as Russia and china to make sure they don't use it against us.

If there are plans for nuclear energy, it should be nationalized. However, we should invest in cleaner alternatives first (ex: hydro electric where possible, wind in the Prairies)

no, because nuclear energy,bombs,technologies not only can harm humans,animals etc. but also they can harm the environment, and it might be dangerous to the people that are close to those technologies cause this technologies might overheat/explode.

yes, as as long as the power plants are placed away from major populations and proper safety protocols to protect citizens are put in place.

I don’t support it because it could be fatal at any point and time, like what happened in Chernobyl. It’s dangerous because we are having more and more weather problems.

Yes. as long as the chances of failures happening are slim to none, and any damage the failures cause is minimal

yes, but with the Federal government oversight on the projects with specialized safety measures in place for the workers and general public

yes, as long as there is people that work in the nuclear plant field that are well-educated and able tol identify problems with an well-preventative approach in a quick manner to reduce accidents.

Yes, so long as there's a way to safely dispose of nuclear waste, (spent nuclear fuel, and waste water (D2O)), if so, and there isn't a threat of another Chernobyl, I'm behind the idea.

Yes and no, more cleaner alternatives should be more invested in and also the nuclear energy should be in a controlled environment and checked for any spills/harmful things happening to the facility where the energy is stored

It depends on whether a better, cleaner option is viable or not. If there isn't yes, but if there is, I would be critical of the provincial government not choosing to invest in said other options.

Yes, nuclear energy an efficient, clean, and safe source of fuel. Theoretical events of damage, collapse, epidemic, etc. only occur when nuclear energy is not appropriately handled by or in a safe and educated manner by qualified individuals/officals.

no because nuclear energy ahrms the enviroment and it also reproduce radioactive waves they are deadly if any human coems in contact of those rays because they can destroy a human body and otehr cells on a cellur level.

The use of nuclear energy can benefit us, if used in a controlled and mild way with highly trained professionals on site.

I do believe it should be banned but it's one of the best sources of energy we have so we cant ban It yet

Yes, without public subsidy but there should be no public subsidy into ANY industry. Let market forces drive research and innovation. There is much to be done with low yield, low half life reactors. It is possible to have a unit the size of a semi-trailer that powers an entire town. Safe operation should also address safe disposal of spent fuels until fusion energy becomes the preferred choice.

Yes if surrounding communities are well compensated, given the option to relocate, or Nuclear sites are built in desolate areas

Only as a last resort while we search for cleaner alternatives and conducted away from public spaces with increased safety regulations to avoid another Chernobyl.

Nuclear energy is dangerous, because it produces radioactive waves

Yes, but with extra measures and more safety.

Only if chill stuff happens

we don't want this to end up like fallout 4

yes nuclear energy is our future need we need to put more money into it and our nuclear weapons' program

Yes because if done right it is a form of clean energy that can have no effects

Yes, it is much safer than carbon

Yes, but we should use thorium over uranium