The problem is that nuclear "oopses" effectively become forever problems due to the half-life of the materials involved. When the worst-case scenario makes a lo

The problem is that nuclear "oopses" effectively become forever problems due to the half-life of the materials involved. When the worst-case scenario makes a location a permanent hazard / permanent toxic pollution generator, it's reason enough to say no. Every other form of pollution can at least be cleaned up in a human timeframe. This kind can't even be approached by machines without them breaking down. The only way I'd ever support nuclear power is if the nuclear industry were to develop an actually safe reactor (and by safe I mean that it's literally IMPOSSIBLE to cause a nuclear hazard, not "we have safety protocols in place"). But so far that hasn't happened in any meaningful way, so I'm all for dismantling everything and forbidding any new reactors until they can actually prove their safety (this is where I applaud Merkel). But that's never going to happen, because big projects like this are full of graft, lies, payoffs, and plain fraud (just look at Boeing). So effectively, I don't expect I'll ever be anything but anti-nuclear. And that's a shame, because it has huge potential :/