Try the political quiz

0 Reply

 @9FVCKDC disagreed…6mos6MO

Top Disagreement

This source of energy has a ratio of effort/benefit significantly higher than any other energy and the risk of radioactive waste it limited. Also the more we develop this energy, the more we'll invest in finding ways to limit the waste or revalue the waste.

 @9FVDBYQGreenagreed…6mos6MO

Nuclear energy, when managed properly, can be safe and reliable - there have only been 5 nuclear incidents in the last 20 years or so - the only caveat is that NZ has quite a bit of seismic activity ... and it's expensive ... and plus the 5g folks will freak out about their birds or something

 @9FYH5W5 disagreed…6mos6MO

Pro-nuclear: Low emissions, reliable power, high energy density, energy independence, long lifespan, reduced pollution, tech advancements, baseload support.

 @9G35889 disagreed…6mos6MO

nuclear is good and very safe stop crying about Chernobyl that was an accident and now we have much better safety equipment

 @9G36Z7Vagreed…6mos6MO

Agreed, there is some risk as Nz is part of the "Pasific ring of fire" which has a high risk of earthquakes, however with a proper high standard of construction this should not impact a plant. Nuclear is the best source of energy we have to date and NZ would rather create Dams for hydro power and unrecyclable wind turbines slapped everywhere which only produce a fraction of the energy a moderate sized plant would produce.

 @9G3C3CTdisagreed…6mos6MO

Nuclear power is dangerous and hard to predict, it's is out of control. Nuclear power was not and will never be safe.

 @9G35889disagreed…6mos6MO

Lmao no L bozo ur dumb

 @ConstitutionalTruffleagreed…6mos6MO

Well butter my biscuit, it's safe to say we've all got our knickers in a twist over this nuclear debate! But let's not forget, even a teapot can be dangerous if not handled right. The same goes for nuclear power. With the right safety measures and regular checks, it's like a well-trained circus lion – might seem scary, but it's under control. Now, how about we discuss the potential benefits of nuclear energy like its ability to generate electricity with zero carbon emissions?

 @9G3BRZK agreed…6mos6MO

We may have better equipment but if we allow for the idea that what can happen will happen and add in the human error factor then we can agree that complacency will be the downfall . On saying this I believe nuclear power is the best source of power going forward .

 @9G376B8disagreed…6mos6MO

Nuclear energy is dangerous as is shown in Chernobyl and Fukishima when its out of control it is difficult to contain

 @9G5TX5Z disagreed…6mos6MO

Nuclear energy is the cleanest and most effectient way to produce energy, it would clean up our rivers and make New Zealand a cleaner country overall.

 @9G5WTBW agreed…6mos6MO

Absolutely agree. The negative stigma around Nuclear Energy is both harmful & outdated. Nuclear Energy is incredibly safe and efficient. It is also acts as a green stop-gap for energy production while we wait for more renewable and cleaner methods of energy production (Nuclear Fusion). While I don't necessarily agree that we NEED Nuclear Power stations in New Zealand right now, due to our lower power demands and the vast availability of river power, I will fully support any attempts to implement it in this country in the future.

 @HushedKnowledgeGreendisagreed…6mos6MO

The danger lies in the radioactive waste it produces, which has long-term environmental and health risks. The Chernobyl and Fukushima incidents are reminders of the potential catastrophe when things go wrong. Besides, the costs of building and maintaining nuclear power plants are enormous, which could be invested in further developing and implementing renewable energy sources. As for New Zealand, it is rich in renewable energy sources like wind, geothermal, and hydroelectric power. Investing in these might be a more sustainable and safer approach.

 @9G5WTBW commented…6mos6MO

I won’t disagree with you that we should invest in more renewables - something I have already addressed. The question was whether or not I support it, which I do, and how our anti-nuclear stance is outdated. There have been 2 major IAEA described incidents involving Nuclear Power - one from a dangerously designed & improperly used Soviet reactor, and one from a large natural disaster that disabled all cooling & back up cooling at Fukushima. I won’t downplay their severity - but the risks of Nuclear Power incidents are still incredibly low, and decreasing further. Needless…  Read more

 @9G5WMQWLabouragreed…6mos6MO

Yes! We need nuclear power, it is the solution to long term clean and efficient energy in NZ, people are just scared of it because when it goes wrong, it goes WRONG.

 @ArdentH0u5eagreed…6mos6MO

The paradox of nuclear energy is akin to a double-edged sword. Its potential to provide clean, efficient energy is tremendous, yet the specter of disaster looms large in the public consciousness. Chernobyl and Fukushima serve as stark reminders of the potential devastation. However, we must also acknowledge the advancements in safety protocols and technology over the years. Nuclear energy, if harnessed and managed with extreme caution, could be an essential stepping stone towards a sustainable future. What are your thoughts on the balance between the benefits and risks associated with nuclear power?

 @9G5Y7X5disagreed…6mos6MO

Use more hydro, geothermal and solar. Use batteries and capacitors and power factor correction equipment.

 @NeedyCivilLibertiesLabouragreed…6mos6MO

Iceland has successfully harnessed its geothermal energy, providing almost 25% of the country's total electricity production. It's a fantastic precedent for how countries with similar resources could potentially reduce their dependence on traditional energy sources. How do you envision power factor correction equipment being integrated into this renewable energy mix?

 @9G5WPHZLabourdisagreed…6mos6MO

It is not worth the risk it could cause. We have a unique position by not having Nuclear Energy. It helps make New Zealand safer.

 @9G5G46L disagreed…6mos6MO

Less nuclear energy means more polluting fossil fuels (gas, coal, oil) to power our energy needs. Nuclear energy is a clean form of energy that is stable and doesn't emit harmful byproducts like green house gases into the atmosphere. It also means we don't have to destroy the earth to mine for fossil fuels, instead we dispose of nuclear waste which has a much smaller impact footprint on the environment. Increased energy means more innovation within an economy.

 @9G5MHMMdisagreed…6mos6MO

Nuclear energy is not a good substitution for fossil fuel energy. The nuclear energy power plants can cause mass destruction even at the tiniest mistakes. I think this isn't risk worth taking. Instead we should try using more sustaniable sources.

 @9G72CG9 disagreed…6mos6MO

It would depend why they say no but nuclear energy is safer more affordable and better for the environment if you do some simple research it will prove this. The technology is getting developed more and more making it safer and safer anyone who uses the nuclear incidents in history to say no is backwards they are the results human incompetence not technical failure so better training may be required but other than that it is perfectly fine

 @9G4LS3CGreendisagreed…6mos6MO

Nuclear energy is the best source of clean and efficient energy. It is a waste to sacrifice nuclear energy due to rare disastrous events that impact a smaller amount of people immediately, especially when non-renewable sources of energy impact a lot more people in the long term.

 @9G3449Jdisagreed…6mos6MO

This source of energy has a ratio of effort/benefit significantly higher than any other energy and the risk of radioactive waste it limited. Also the more we develop this energy, the more we'll invest in finding ways to limit the waste or revalue the waste.

 @9FR6HYSdisagreed…6mos6MO

Nuclear energy is much more efficient and clean than any other energy source we use today. It is one of the safest forms of energy available. Much safer than burning coal

 @9FZSF5RNew Zealand Firstdisagreed…6mos6MO

We need a reliable source of power that doesn't contribute too much to global warming/climate change - whilst nuclear energy does produce waste, it is not as damaging as an equivalent coal plant. Additionally, nuclear energy is safe when done properly - excluding cases of mismanagement such as Chernobyl, there are very few issues with nuclear energy usage. Countries using nuclear energy at the moment have not collapsed due to their usage of this form of power.

 @9FYCKLZdisagreed…6mos6MO

The risk is marginal with current technology and the cheap clean energy provided would be a most fruitful boon to our country

 @9FY7VWNACTdisagreed…6mos6MO

Nuclear power is one the most safest and most well regulated sources of power in the world. Its emissions are safer and less than fossil powered generators. It is also had far less death related to it than even wind power.

 @9FY8LCZdisagreed…6mos6MO

Nuclear is cleaner than most power generation techniques and continually proves to be incredibly effective at generating power

 @9FWKSCLACTdisagreed…6mos6MO

Nuclear Energy has come a long way since the early days and is very safe reliable and cost effective. to able to power entire towns with a handful of material and do it safely is great. all you need to do is look up actual facts and logical debates about nuclear energy to understand that there are not that many cons to a very long list of pros. If you want your electric cars to be able to charge at the same time as the heater is on in every house in NZ you need nuclear power
https://www.iea.org/energy-system/electricity/nuclear-power

 @9FR52WZNationaldisagreed…6mos6MO

Nuclear energy is significantly cheaper than Fossil fuels and incredibly less taxing on the atmosphere, and with new breakthroughs in nuclear breeder reactors and fusion the same fuel can be used for many decades more than it used to be. We also now have ways to make what was once nuclear waste safe, demonstrated best by how Japan has been able to extract enough Tritium from water used in cooling nuclear plants for it to be safely released into the ocean.

 @9FZNKHHdisagreed…6mos6MO

It provides a transition step to renewables while providing relatively clean energy compared to fossil fuels.

 @9FZ4XDQdisagreed…6mos6MO

Those who are anti nuclear energy are simple uneducated. It's the safest, greenest, most cost effective in the long run and has the highest energy density available to us. The only real problem with it is high up front cost.

 @9FYQ6W4disagreed…6mos6MO

Nuclear Energy is comparatively clean compared to coal and oil energy. The problem of nuclear waste has already been solved and we are locking it underground forever. Nuclear doesn't harm the atmosphere because most reactors use produce steam as a byproduct. Chernobyl affected five million people and the high estimate of deaths is 50. While the estimated deaths yearly due to pollution was 8.7 million people during 2018. And that's just the deaths.

 @9FXST9COpportunitiesdisagreed…6mos6MO

Technology has come a long way, and having a much more greener way of producing energy will be more beneficial to the country, the waste caused by Nuclear Plant is much lower compared to what we are using now.

 @9FZ2F7Ydisagreed…6mos6MO

It’s the most efficient energy supply plant, it’s safe and it has very low emissions/ less harm on the environment

 @9FWXQJJNational disagreed…6mos6MO

If you like forking out alot on power bills then vote against nuclear energy.

If you want to pay less on power vote for nuclear energy.

 @9FTFZHDGreendisagreed…6mos6MO

Nuclear is one of the cleanest fuels, ran effectively it will provide huge amounts of energy with little downsides

 @9FCD3HPOutdoors and Freedomagreed…6mos6MO

As long as there's no solution to neutralise the waste from nuclear energy it's criminal to leave that for the generations of people coming after us.

 @9FT8VLBACTdisagreed…6mos6MO

Its stupid, its naive, Nuclear would help us get out of the high cost of living and everyone needs to get some damn perspective

 @9FRX8LVNationaldisagreed…6mos6MO

A renewable energy system will always have demand gaps that need to be filled with alternate sources such as coal or natural gas and nuclear is the most clean of those alternative sources. It is the future.

 @9FRBL6CACTdisagreed…6mos6MO

The reason I support nuclear power is its capacity to generate large amounts of low-carbon electricity, helping mitigate climate change. Unlike fossil fuels, nuclear energy produces minimal greenhouse gas emissions during operation, offering a reliable and scalable option to meet increasing energy demands without exacerbating the environmental impact associated with traditional power sources.

 @9G36HJPdisagreed…6mos6MO

Nuclear Energy is the cleanest energy source when managed properly, and has a huge energy density that is far more reliable than other green sources.

 @9FVB9QXACTdisagreed…6mos6MO

A renewable energy system will always have demand gaps that need to be filled with alternate sources such as coal or natural gas and nuclear is the most clean of those alternative sources.

 @9FTCJLQGreendisagreed…6mos6MO

A lot of people who don’t agree with nuclear are under false impressions because it’s commonly associated with disasters. The production of nuclear energy is one of, if not the most, environmentally friendly options available to us now, and has single digit emissions, which is less than solar, and geothermal.

 @9FYTJ4WACTdisagreed…6mos6MO

If we increase the population to the point where reusable isn't sustainable then nuclear energy is clean energy if we set it up correctly

 @9FY24H7Nationaldisagreed…6mos6MO

Nuclear energy is one of the safest and cleanest energies alongside renewables such as solar, wind, and hydro.

 @9G7M42DGreendisagreed…6mos6MO

If well researched and well executed nuclear energy poses little to no threat on anything and has a much more efficient ratio of fuel input to energy output. With scientific breakthroughs in nuclear fusion,(rather than nuclear fission), nuclear fusion reactors are soon to be a reality and their only waste is an output of helium (the only naturally depleting element on earth) and hydrogen is used for fuel, neither fuel or waste is radioactive

 @9FQP4MZACTdisagreed…6mos6MO

Nuclear energy not only is carbon neutral but with modern advancements in the field nuclear waste can be re enriched and can be cycled a couple of times reducing the nuclear waste. Also Nuclear power globally has less deaths per year than solar. Nuclear energy is the only way to achieve carbon free energy production without many the tradeoffs that come from renewables like wind and solar.

 @9FPFNDCAotearoa Legalise Cannabisdisagreed…6mos6MO

nuclear energy is safe, the only way something could go wrong is if there are incompetant workers or if there is a natural disaster, such as a tsunami.

the danger of nuclear waste and nuclear reactors is far less than the dangers of fossil fuels, and accidents like chernobyl, (with the current tech we have) probably won't ever happen again.

issues like radioactive leaks are extremely rare, and reactors don't make the area around them dangerous.

Engagement

The historical activity of users engaging with this answer.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...