I'm a big fan of harm reduction. Passkeys are *better* than passwords. Nuclear power is *better* than coal or LNG. Vaping is *better* (maybe?) than smoking. They're not perfect. They're often not even good enough. But they are better then the status quo, and that's important.

I'm not sure that nuclear is *better*. It's only better if there isn't an accident. If there *is* an accident, though, it's thousands of times more deadly and dangerous.

Including all nuclear accidents in history, coal and gas still kill thousands of times more people, in both absolute terms and on a per TwH basis. Always have.

Cool. Now do solar.

Can't admit when you got something wrong so you gotta move goal posts, doubling down on not understanding the point of the original post.

The main problem with nuclear as is any resource extraction is incompetence and negligence. In theory it’s better but standards would have improve drastically in order for it to be worth the risk: ratical.org/radiation/Fu...

I invite you to read with your brain and not just your eyes.

Again. IF THERE IS AN ACCIDENT nuclear is much more toxic for much longer.