# data[].attributes.body
I do believe that nuclear energy will be a major source of energy in the future because it is already the second most used low-carbon energy in the world, and it is virtually unlimited. Getting rid of nuclear power could double or triple the average cost of electricity. No one is going to want to pay more for electricity. Also, solar energy, wind energy, and batteries would have to make up for the loss of nuclear energy. They are building new nuclear plants which means that they are looking to expand and produce more.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that nuclear energy will be a major source of energy in the future. As stated in the article, many areas are trying their hardest to keep nuclear energy around. States like Illinois, New York, and New Jersey all took steps to preserve their nuclear plants. Countries like Taiwan and France also took steps in support of nuclear plants. I think that the countries/areas who are against nuclear energy may change their minds after seeing other countries/areas support nuclear energy.

I think that nuclear energy should be a source of energy in the future. As the article said, nuclear power is relatively affordable, and it does not produce a lot of carbon. The benefits are fantastic, and should be taken into account by everyone who dislikes nuclear energy.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that nuclear energy should and will be a major source of energy in the future. As the article states, it is already the second-largest source of low-carbon energy in the world, and extending the life of the existing nuclear reactors worldwide is the least costly approach to avoiding an increase of carbon emissions. It is also a nearly unlimited source of power. Other sources of power have different problems with them, such as being limited geographically or very expensive to produce. Electric energy would be a good replacement for nuclear energy if it weren't as expensive as it is currently. The article says that excluding nuclear energy as a source could double or even triple the current cost of electricity. Solar energy and hydropower could also be major competitors if they were not as limited as they are on the planet. Although nuclear plants are very expensive at the time, advances in nuclear industry are being found daily, so the cost should go down very easily in the future.

# data[].attributes.body
It is 1:40pm - last entry 4 hours ago - deadline was 8am!!!

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that Nuclear energy should be an energy used in the future. The primary reason for nuclear energy is that the nuclear plants be emit a lot less carbon into the atmosphere, being a very big contributor to decarbonizing the planet.
Secondly, by not using nuclear energy, costs for electricity could double and even triple. I agree that we should be using nuclear energy in the future because it is a lot cheaper than a surplus on solar and wind turbines, and it has one of the largest impacts on decarbonization.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that nuclear energy will be a major source of energy in the future because the world will have no other sensible option. The article mentions that the IPCC has issued a warning about the global warming of Earth, which the main reason that nuclear energy is being pushed for as much as it is. This general consensus is the reason that countries around the world are trying to decarbonize. However, there are many benefits to nuclear energy that extend beyond neutralizing global warming. Economically, it makes sense, as it would create many jobs, and establish a new market of energy that is more stable, and much less likely to crash or spike, due to the fact that nuclear energy is renewable. It will initially be extremely expensive to create all of the new nuclear plants, especially those new and advanced, but in the end, the money put in will end up favoring countries financially, and will also benefit the environment and outlook for the world. For these reasons, I think that nuclear energy should be worked into the world's energy sources as a major contributor.

# data[].attributes.body
Nuclear energy will be a strong, major source of energy in the future and for good reason. It will decrease the amount of carbons that impact the huge topic of climate change. By decreasing the amount of carbons, put into the air it will decrease the climate change. In addition to this it is more effective than the alternative natural energy resources. One of these, Hydropower, is a low cost solution, but would be unreasonable considering how much power would need to be generated. On top of this this is restricted to land because they would only benefit people who lived around locations with water. Other sources, like solar and wind are only useful and certain times of day. Nuclear power would be able to be ran all of the time and would create jobs around the nation. Whether be people working in the plants themselves or if they are working to build the plants. However, this highlights a downside of Nuclear energy is the cost of new power plants that would need to be created. This could be covered by states and countries preserving and using older power plants in conjunction with creating new ones. In short, nuclear energy should be used because it is the most cheap and effective form of natural energy and should be embraced by all forms of governments.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that nuclear energy will be a major source in the future. Decarbonization is important for the world as carbon emission can be harmful. Nuclear energy is able to avoid it. Although I do not know much about nuclear energy and decarbonization, from reading this article, I believe that nuclear energy should be a major energy source in the future. Many countries are obviously in disagreement on this significant topic as some are pushing for it while other are not. If all countries make an agreement, they can tackle the issue of carbon emissions in the world. Many options to avoid this problem are limited geographically, but nuclear energy can be used worldwide. Although the cost of nuclear energy has increased, it is able to be reduced because a large impact on the cost can come from several sources.  Excluding nuclear power can exponentially increase the cost for decarbonization of the world.  Nuclear energy seems to be the safest, most reasonable way to decarbonize the planet.  This could help the earth tremendously in the future if it used throughout all countries.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe in the future that nuclear power will be a major source of energy in the world. I believe that it should be because it reduces the amount of carbon put into the air that is causing climate change and changing the world completely. It is also a cheaper way to create energy with less carbon emissions than solar and wind energy. Nuclear power is basically unlimited and we have technology now to be able to use nuclear power as our main source of energy instead of energy that gives out large amounts of carbon emissions. Without nuclear power the cost of energy that do not produce much carbon emissions will double or triple. Nuclear power should be used more in the future so that our world is a much cleaner place and that climate change does not keep occurring.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that nuclear energy will be and should be a major source of energy in the future. One reason I believe it will be a major source in the future is because of its  worldwide availablity compared to other options. Nuclear energy is one low-carbon dispatchable option that is virtually unlimited and available now. Another reason is because of cost efficiency. Excluding nuclear power could double or triple the average cost of electricity for deep decarbonization scenarios because of the enormous overcapacity of solar energy, wind energy, and batteries that would be required to meet demand in the absence of a dispatchable low-carbon energy source. One of the only arguments against the use of Nuclear energy is the cost to build new Nuclear plants is expensive, but there are many ways to reduce the cost of building new plants. In conclusion, Nuclear energy should not be the sole source of energy, but I believe it should be a major source.

# data[].attributes.body
Going into this article, I believed nuclear energy was a problem. I had been scared by the images often associated with the thought of nuclear power: reactor meltdowns and weapons of mass destruction. However, after reading the article, my opinion has suitably changed. Nuclear power is good for decarbonizing the atmosphere, and it will considerably help the environment if we continue to use it. The article claims that a combination of nuclear and renewable energy, such as solar or hydropower, is the greatest path towards decarbonization. This topic is not very close to my heart, and I do not admittedly know much about it. If the experts say that using nuclear is the way to a cleaner future, who am I to disagree? I believe that nuclear will and should be used for energy in the future because of its abilities to produce massive amounts of clean energy.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that nuclear energy will be a major source of energy in the future. I believe that it will be very expensive to create all the nuclear plants that will have to be made in order to create a long term use out of them. But if we spend the money now to create the plants, it will lead to excess money later on because we will not need to replenish the energy source as much as we would with other ways of crrating energy. The article says, that nuclear energy is a source of energy that is "virtually unlimited," so this is so much more efficient than the other ways that energy is produced. So I believe that if we spend the money now to build all these nuclear plants, we will end up saving money in the long run due to the longevity of nuclear energy.