The claim was not "relatively safe compared to other forms of energy". The claim was bug free. Which -- if you want to use past history -- is false. > climbing

The claim was not "relatively safe compared to other forms of energy". The claim was bug free. Which -- if you want to use past history -- is false. > climbing on roofs and towers to install wind and solar is dangerous, yo Climbing on the roof of a two story house to install solar panels is considerably less dangerous than building a nuclear power plant. Yo. > without a single fatality to a member of the general public. No immediate fatality is the only accurate claim you can make. Over 150,000 people were evacuated from the Three-Mile Island disaster. Due to the stress, there were some increases in consumption of alcohol, cigarettes, and tranquilizers immediately following the accident. The eventual long term effects of those behaviors surely resulted in shorter life spans for at least some of the people. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0038012184900181?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/003801... > for over 70 years That's a short time. Unless you can show the US is somehow exceptional in its quality controls compared to Japan, then a huge disaster like Fukushima is inevitable, and life will be lost. No one complains about the dangers of the neighbors who use solar energy. No one wants a reactor in their backyard. And it has fair reasoning behind it. You'll never have to evacuate 150,000 people due to your neighbors' solar panels failing.