How do you feel about investing in nuclear energy as a source of electricity in the US?

Strongly agree (36%) – "The negative stigma surrounding nuclear energy has held American infrastructure back for far too long. Especially now that the cost of living for normal people has reached historic highs, it needs to be realized that nuclear power is the most efficient option, that the risks it poses are minimal, and that nuclear power produces dramatically less waste when compared to other forms of energy production."

• "Nuclear is so much safer than the mainstream source of energy, fossil fuels. The use of coal and its resultant air pollution causes so many more deaths by several hundredfold than nuclear energy. The incidents where a disaster occurs with these plants are isolated and rare. On the other hand, it’s true that it costs a lot of money to develop these plants, but paying that cost will provide substantial returns in the future, which makes it worth it. It’s a wonder America has taken so long to adapt to further develop this innovation and invest in nuclear power."

"Technology is getting better. Pollution from coal and gas fired power plants must be reduced or eliminated. While nuclear waste and safety is a huge deal, we've been mostly successful in dealing with it.

• "Having spent ten years working in the electric utility industry, I have seen firsthand the results of innovation as it relates to generation. Nuclear is a big part of the future."

Somewhat agree (25%) – "I'm a big fan of the potential upside of nuclear energy, but the crazy cost overruns and delays make me hesitate a bit when committing so much money. Hopefully technology continues to improve and bring down the costs and time for construction."

• "It can be clean and reliable. The problem is the potential devastation that can result usually from human error."

Neutral (12%) – "There are two huge issues that need to be resolved before I can be convinced that expanding nuclear power capacity is a valid way for energy generation in the US. First are the safety issues regarding potential emergencies, less along that of Chernobyl but more about Three Mile Island and Fukoshima. Secondly we need to address the issue of nuclear waste and the disposition of spent fuel.... and no, stashing spent fuel in a mountain in Nevada is not an answer.... it's kicking the can down the road to future generations."

Somewhat disagree (14%) – "I understand the need to get away from a fossil-fueled grid, but I also understand we haven't had the best safety track record. If we are going to open new nuclear facilities then it needs to be done safely, not fast. Efficiency is fine, but safety should always be first!"

Strongly disagree (13%) – "1. Chernobyl, 2. Three-Mile Island, 3. Fukushima. There have been more than 100 serious nuclear accidents and incidents from the use of nuclear power. Fifty-seven accidents or severe incidents have occurred since the Chernobyl disaster, and about 60% of all nuclear-related accidents/severe incidents have occurred in the United States Would you like to live next door to one? I don't think so."