They're not nearly on the same scale. There are estimates that the US has, in its entire history, produced about 56 thousand metric tonnes of high-level radioac

They're not nearly on the same scale. There are estimates that the US has, in its entire history, produced about 56 thousand metric tonnes of high-level radioactive waste as of 2008 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-level_radioactive_waste_management#cite_note-doe1-81 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-level_radioactive_waste_ma...). On the other hand, the EPA estimates that in 2012 alone, the United States produced 6.5 billion metric tonnes of carbon emitted due to transportation. Obviously, a tonne of carbon and a tonne of radioactive waste aren't really comparable. In fact, I'd argue that the radioactive waste produced by a fission power plant is better for the environment: it remains in the reactor facility, where it can be easily contained and buried in geologically stable rock formations, or reused/reprocessed to extract further energy from it. The carbon produced by burning fossil fuels is dumped into the atmosphere, where it can't be easily collected, disposed of, or reused.