[palata]

> I know a lot about energy policy, through involvement in the policy development process.

Right. So not an expect in nuclear waste.

> The clear path to doing that is renewable energy, which now is cheaper in almost every case.

But which are built with fossil fuels, and which are cheaper in a world with abundant fossil fuels to make and transport them.

It's not clear at all that renewable energy can replace fossil fuels. Actually, it seems pretty clear that they can't. Even nuclear energy can't. It's just that we need to maintain some low-emission energy (as much as we can, which is not enough to avoid a degrowth).

> Nuclear - if pushed to the (il)logical conclusion will destroy the world such that normal human life becomes impossible in many places.

This is nonsense. How do you extrapolate from some nuclear wastes to "human life is impossible"?

[worik]

>> Nuclear - if pushed to the (il)logical conclusion will destroy the world such that normal human life becomes impossible in many places.

>This is nonsense. How do you extrapolate from some nuclear wastes to "human life is impossible"?

Move to Chernobyl exclusion zone and live there.

One silly accident, one bomb, and your whole neighbourhood is dealing with nuclear waste.