I don’t know why you’re downplaying the Fukushima disaster, that’s a bizarre thing to argue. I hope something like that never happens in your hometown. >> Here

I don’t know why you’re downplaying the Fukushima disaster, that’s a bizarre thing to argue. I hope something like that never happens in your hometown. >> Here's the thing: every source of energy contains risk. Solar and Wind are never going to be reliable enough to produce a baseload. Are nuclear power plants guaranteed sufficient uptime to provide baseload? Germany faced an energy crisis a couple years ago because too many of their nuclear plants were undergoing scheduled maintenance at once, and were unable to contribute to baseload when Russia cut off Germany’s oil supply. At least batteries can be stored in a variety of locations, as opposed to one central location that may be susceptible to natural disasters or a terrorist attack. Same with solar and wind farms. Europe was on tenterhooks during the bombing of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant a year back. I don’t think the wind and solar farms that were destroyed during the invasion even made the news. I agree, everything comes with risk. The point I’m trying to make is that nuclear power comes with unique risks that are inarguably far more horrible than the risk of a tree falling on someone or a solar panel electrocuting a maintenance worker or something.