Even in case of multi century poisoning, the affected area is small. The more radioactive the isotope, the faster it decays, so the poisoning isn’t really multi

Even in case of multi century poisoning, the affected area is small. The more radioactive the isotope, the faster it decays, so the poisoning isn’t really multi century. Chernobyl, the worst accident to date, is negligible in terms of poisoned area, and environmental impact. Orders of magnitude less than poisoning from fossil fuels. Your point simply doesn’t stand scientifically. It’s an ideological position, fueled by fear and disinformation. If we had other options, maybe, but we are against the climate change wall, and Germany is the perfect example of what’s wrong with your reasoning. So, tell me, when do you think Germany energy policies are going to shine, with actual CO2 numbers? In 20 years? 50 years? I believe it’s never going to shine, because it doesn’t work if you do the math. Wind turbines and solar energy aren’t going to fulfill all energy needs alone, for many reasons. We’d need orders of magnitude more, not to mention energy storage. Germany has built lots of them, it’s been at least 20 years, and they are still very very far from being clean. As I said they are the worst after Poland. How can you even argue?