How far into the future? Last year, thermal energy production still represented more than 60% of total electricity production. If thermal power generation is disrupted in the next ten or twenty years, who will fill such a huge gap? Wind energy, solar energy, etc. currently present obvious and serious disadvantages. In comparison, thermal energy is indeed safe, economical and more environmentally friendly (pollution is not as bad as the media exaggerate). Thermal energy will therefore always be. dominant for decades, but it doesn't matter how high it is, I don't know.
Nuclear power is a clean energy source and does not emit large amounts of carbon dioxide, sulfur and nitrogen pollutants into the atmosphere like thermal power generation .
Uranium fuel used in nuclear power production has no other purposethan electricity production. The coal and oil needed to produce thermal energy are non-renewable energy sources, and the more they are used, the less they are used. .
The fuel used in nuclear power plants is small and easy to transport and store, while thermal power generation requires a huge transport volume.
Fuel costs represent a smaller proportion of the cost of nuclear power generation. The cost of nuclear power generation is less sensitive to the impact of the international economic situation, so the cost of electricity generation is more stable than that of nuclear power generation. other methods of energy production.
However, the consequences of a serious accident in nuclear power generation are unimaginable, and improving the safety of nuclear power generation is a top priority.