Yes, vastly better. You just learned about SL-1 or something?

Public ownership would be a great idea, but it would still incur costs in the immediate sense. Things have to be updated and maintained.

“The blasting had been planned for 5.30pm but was delayed after a 36-year-old pro-nuclear protester scaled an electricity pylon near the towers in protest at their demolition.”

Andreas Fichtner is now facing a legal battle for this protest. If you want to help out, please consider a donation.

Forbidden licorice.

Great overview, but I have two notes:

1. A mention is made of the proliferation risks due to purified plutonium. But no mention is made of the difference between weaponsgrade Pu-239 and useless Pu-240. Pu-240 has the annoying characteristic that it can ‘spontaneously’ fission, which of course for is highly undesirable in warheads. These are mixed up and hard to separate. This simple fact makes proliferation risks at best a theoretical scenario.
2. Vitrification of the fission products is explained well, but is still accompanied with the obligatory “hundreds of thousands of years” comment. This is incorrect. After 300 years, these fission products are no longer radiotoxic.

So, you’re then saying that nuclear is somehow more threatening to our future than fossil energy is? Wow. Thanks for being clear where you stand I guess.

Just for the record: fossil fuels not only change our planet’s climate, it also kills millions of people each year due to air pollution.