The question was asked by the Department of Natural Resources staff at a public meeting earlier this month.
It was the second time in as many months that staff from the agency had presented the question to the public.
The public was given the chance to weigh in on the issue, and the staff found that natural gas was safer than nuclear power.
Natural gas power, they said, is the only way to keep us safe from a nuclear meltdown.
The power plant’s power plant has a safety margin of less than one percent.
It is not the only option.
Nuclear power is more expensive, more risky, more dangerous, more radioactive, more expensive and more costly to build, they concluded.
However, the agency is looking at options to address both natural gas and nuclear energy.
“We are going to be working closely with the Department to develop alternatives to natural gas power in the future,” said Dr. Chris Davenport, the department’s associate director for research.
We’re also looking at other options for alternative generation, such as solar, wind and hydroelectric, he added.
In addition to natural-gas, the staff presented a number of other energy options, including solar and hydro.
They also explored whether electric vehicles could replace natural gas as a primary energy source.
At the end of the meeting, the DEQ staff said the agency would take a second look at its nuclear power plans.
It has said it plans to restart the nation’s nuclear reactors after a shutdown due to the Fukushima Daiichi accident.
(The DEQ did not respond to a request for comment on this story.)
Natural Gas, Nuclear Power and the World As The Cold War Draws On The Next Cold War: Nuclear Power By Bryan CaplanThis article originally appeared on TechRadars on February 16, 2018.
Photo credit: Getty Images/iStockphoto.