> Nuclear is bad because it produces waste despite that waste often being the size of a can of coke after a year of service? The history of the German anti-nuc

> Nuclear is bad because it produces waste despite that waste often being the size of a can of coke after a year of service? The history of the German anti-nuclear movement is quite long, Chernobyl has essentially put a stop on new investments and killed any ongoing research for good (see THTR-300). This is also due to the ecological impact it had on Germany. And now, because of this stop in new investments, Germany ended up with reactors stuck somewhere in between 1960 and 1980. Critical issues went unaddressed, the control rooms are cold war era time machines, incidents were swept under the rug for fear of it finally dropping the sword of damocles on the industry. Operators showed gross negligence all around (especially Vattenfall, who are now suing the German government over the phase out) and it's a small wonder we've not had a more serious incident (though significantly larger incidence of leukemia around Krümmel should probably be considered serious). Nuclear is not happening here. The best we can hope for is keeping our fossil fuels mostly off and buying nuclear power from France until renewables are viable on their own (if ever).