which country gets the largest fraction of its energy from nuclear power plants?
411147
Definitely France. They get 76% of their electricity from nuclear generators.
70283
In depends on what.\n\nIran nuclear processing: European Union (All those countries including Germany, France and UK.  Semi-allies on this, China and Russia.\n\nIraq: UK, South Korea, Poland, Italy, Romania, Georgia, Japan, Denmark, Australia, El Salvador,  Azerbaijan, Mongolia, Albania, Latvia, Lithuania and Slovakia.  Each of these nations have at least 100 tropps/staff in Iraqi with the US forces.
584806
we have them now.  submarines run on nuke power with an onboard reactor.  there are plenty of solar powered devices.  calculators come to mind.
382108
Acknowledged: Britain, China, France, India, Pakistan, Russia, United States\nUnacknowledged: Israel\nSeeking: North Korea, Iran\nAbandoned: South Africa—Constructed but then voluntarily dismantled six uranium bombs. Belarus, Kazakhstan, Ukraine—When Soviet Union broke up, these former states possessed nuclear warheads that they have since given up
385600
I love nuclear power - Chernobyl was run by a bunch of resentful communists - with very little grasp of anything technological - now they have 2 heads and 12 fingers to show for it!
327509
Declared Nuclear powers\nUSA, United Kingdom, France, India, Pakistan, China, Russia\nScrutinized Nuclear powers\nIsrael\nDevoloping or really good bluffer nuclear powers\nIran, North Korea
662295
Nope. (Canada is the US' largest foreign supplier of energy, including oil, gas, uranium, and electric power.) \n\nThe UAE according to the CIA:\n\nExports - partners: Japan 24.9%, South Korea 9.9%, India 5.4%, Thailand 5% (2004)  \n\nImports - partners: China 9.9%, India 9.8%, Japan 6.8%, Germany 6.5%, UK 6.2%, France 6.1%, US 6% (2004)\n\nCanada: \n\nExports - partners: US 85.1%, Japan 2.1%, UK 1.6% (2004)  \nImports - partners: US 58.9%, China 6.8%, Mexico 3.8% (2004)
711297
A list and world map of the countries that can produce Polonium 210 can be found at the site listed below. Essentially, any country that has a nuclear reactor can produce Polonium 210; however, it requires someone with specific knowledge of the alpha particle to safeguard and administer a lethal dose that would kill a specific target, yet one that would not kill immediately thereby providing an escape prior to the target's death.\n\nhttp://www.insc.anl.gov/pwrmaps/
637810
Well there are three of them in the US so we already use nuclear power. But nuclear can only be cost effective in highly populated areas. And normally iot is still safer and cheaper to use a petrolium based power.. Although we do have another option hydropower... (Hoover dam)
248178
A nuclear power station in Iran is not bad. However the 'fuel' (enriched uranium or plutonium) can be used for composing an atomic bomb. The politicians are afraid for that. So do I.
125399
Technology is certainly going to help - for example, there are tests now of fusion power (this doesn't generate as much dangerous radioactive waste that current fission-based nuclear reactors do). But this won't be enough by itself - people need to learn to use less energy, because if we don't reduce the need, there will be a crisis. "Though accounting for only 5 percent of the world's population, Americans consume 26 percent of the world's energy. (American Almanac)"
426364
I don't think any country should have nuclear power unless they are using it for producing power, not weapons.
111272
this is because of they way americans obtain their electricity 110 volts is the kind of electricity which is produced by atomic nuclear energy the others use wather sun power and wind.
680137
To answer the first question, most power generation currently in use comes from burning things (coal, oil, gas, wood), that contain carbon in their molecular structure.  This carbon is combined with oxygen (typically from air), creating carbon dioxide, and releasing energy.  This carbon dioxide is released into the air.  Depending on the fuel source, other components and contaminants of the fuel may be burned or released as well, producing other types of pollution (such as mercury or acid rain).\n\nWith nuclear power (fission), the energy comes from a reaction contained entirely within a nuclear pile (generally made of uranium or plutonium).  Neither carbon nor oxygen needed for the process, and so CO2 is not produced.  In addition (at present), generally all of the waste products of the reaction are kept sealed and contained at special storage facilities.  While these waste products have the potential to be hazardous, because they are kept sealed, the environmental impact is greatly reduced.
422749
That's nuclear fission - used in nuclear power stations. The waste can be recycled to a certain extent and is done at Sellafield in the UK. Decommissioning nuclear power stations is a bigger problem.
601243
Nuclear, beyond any shadow of a doubt. \n\nThe US has appreciable Uranium reserves itself, and major Uranium producing nations such as Australia are already favored trading partners and stable western democracies.\n\nForget corn. It takes more oil to produce ethanol than the ethanol replaces. I. other words using corn for energy means we have to use MORE oil. We currently produce corn ethanol as an economic subsidy for corn growers. If we didn't make ethanol we would have to dump that corn in the ocean. But Corn ethanol is NOT a fuel source. See the first article below.\n\nHydrogen is iffy. We can only obtain hydrogen by splitting water using massive amounts of electricity. That electricity has to be obtained using normal power stations, usually coal. As a result hydrogen is like ethanol: it takes far more fossil fuel to produce than it actually replaces. That makes it a possible oil substitute but very unwise WRT greenhouse gas emissions unless coupled with lots of nuclear power stations.\n\nSolar and wind are never going to be major players. There simply isn't enough land available to make more than a minor contribution and because the supplies are erratic we would still need other power stations to make up the regular shortfalls. See the second article below.\n\nNucelar is the only real solution.
630222
They haven't yet.  They've only produced low grade enriched uranium which, right now, could only be used to generate electricity.\n\nBut they are real close....