"Nuclear power is a potential safety threat, *if* something goes wrong. Coal-fired power is *guaranteed* destruction, filling the atmosphere with planet-heating carbon when it operates the way it's supposed to". (Bill McKibben)
Same for fossil gas, by the way.
@kravietz Nuclear power is guaranteed destruction as well… Creating nuclear waste lasting for centuries and other than CO2, we don't even have a remote idea on how to get rid of it.
And no, hiding it in the ground is not a great answer as all temporary depots have shown.
I think we have to come up with better solutions there.
@pro @kravietz So, I just spend some time reading about full cycle nuclear power strategy and the first thing that sticks out is: Even for the "little" amount of nuclear waste that France produces, it has no final destination.
And another point I came across, due to the "statistics being an asshole the risk of an incident increases drastically with every new power plant, The incidents of Fukushima and Chernobyl were no exceptions, they were statically "expectable".
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00963402.2016.1145910
The situation in Germany however is not politics really, although it was *caused* by politics.
Politics told grid operators: you must provide stable power supply, and reduce CO2, and no more nuclear.
Grid operators replied: you can only choose two. This is how you ended up with stable power supply based on coal and gas, no nuclear and no CO2 reductions.
