> What I read in this article is that German government did a thorough analysis I am unsure how you came to that conclusion. A cost–benefit analysis need to in

> What I read in this article is that German government did a thorough analysis I am unsure how you came to that conclusion. A cost–benefit analysis need to include the benefit aspect, as otherwise it is by definition not a cost–benefit analysis. > Everyone thinks that it is as safe as it was in the past The article explicitly states that the security is just as safe as it was in the past. That is the issue that the German government analysis brings up. The German government has regulations that require plants to be more safe than it was in the past. It need to increase from one accident in 100,000 years, to less than one accident in 100,000 years. The German government analysis do not explain why this is more important than the benefits.