renewable energy is the best solution for energy worldwide.

This topic of debate is crucially important. Especially today when we are reaching the point of when we need to permanently make this decision and it"s important that you have the facts. Before I begin my conclusion I"m going make rebuttals to cons arguments because there are important flaws that need to be addressed. Con tried to show that nuclear was a safe source of energy, but she gave information that proved that it is not. Con stated that it would require 100 mSv of radiation to have an observable increase in cancer then moments later said that the Fukushima disaster was 400 mSv. By her information the Fukushima disaster was four times more powerful than what was necessary to increase cancer, and as nuclear power plants continue to increase in size (and they will to power our growing population) they will be more dangerous. There is no way to eliminate all risk of a disaster, and if an event of up to 1000 mSv ever occurred then five out of every one hundred people would contract cancer. Let"s take the city of New York with a population of 8,405,837 people. [1] If a disaster of this size happened there then 420,291 people would contract today"s second deadliest disease. [2] The only solution con proposed was to make safer plants. It"s just frankly simplistic to say that we are just going to tell people to be careful. That does not solve the problem we have here. There is no way to eliminate the dangers that come with nuclear energy. Not today. There are plenty of unproven technologies that may make it safer, but not without a large amount of cost and time. These are the risk of nuclear energy and they are too great to use this as are primary energy source. The second part of my rebuttal is about cons statements on renewable. I need to point out that here main source of information is a site called union of concerned scientist. This is a site that hand over fist is in favor of renewable energy. These are scientist and they know the facts. Cons information is good but she is interpreting it to the reader improperly. Nowhere in the site does it say that "tens of millions of pounds of hazardous waste" was created by solar panels; however, if you examine the page from this site about the environmental effects of solar panels it will tell you that the waste is of chemicals used to treat the solar panels, and there chemicals that can be disposed of in an environmentally responsible way. I question how well con read this site because it also states that geothermal emits SO2. Not CO2 like con stated. Geothermal energy emits SO2 at a rate thirty times less than coal does. There is no world were renewable energy do more damage to the environment than conventional energy. Lastly I feel I need to explain that the four sources of renewable energy must be used together and not separately. Cons largest claim against renewable energy was that the batteries necessary for when the sources were not producing energy were insufficient. Hydro and geothermal produce energy twenty four hours a day. Solar and wind will be used were best and all the sources will be connected providing power to the world continuously. This eliminates the need for any energy storage. That"s the ideal and it"s what we are technologically capable of. Before my conclusion I must make clear that con argued against my resources of the MIT study that found that geothermal energy could theoretically power the world. The caption bellow is from the synopsis of the paper We have estimated the total EGS resource base to be more than 13 million exajoules (EJ). Using reasonable assumptions regarding how heat would be mined from stimulated EGS reservoirs, we also estimated the extractable portion to exceed 200,000 EJ or about 2,000 times the annual consumption of primary energy in the United States in 2005. With technology improvements, the economically extractable amount of useful energy could increase by a factor of 10 or more, thus making EGS sustainable for centuries. We live on a finite planet and renewable energy is the only way to a sustainable future. Managing our resources is imperative to continued advancement and improved public health. Renewable energy provides a safe and clean solution to the seven billion people that live on this planet. The trend of the last one hundred years is not working today and they will not work two hundred years from now when they have exhausted all of our resources. Today every life support system on the planet is in decline and the only way to reverse this is to use our scientific knowledge and find solutions that are sustainable and effective. [3] Renewable energy is one of the main ways that we can be able to continue to live on this planet and begin to prosper as a society. [1] http://www.cdc.gov... [2] http://blogs.wsj.com... [3] http://consensusforaction.stanford.edu...