Maybe you do, but most people "vehemently opposing nuclear power plants" only pay some lip service to fossil fuels. I've yet to see an anti-nuclear activist declaring that Germany and Japan have nothing to be proud of, considering their carbon footprint. Granted I didn't search very hard, but every anti-nuclear opinion piece I've come across praises how "Germany and Japan showed" that it's possible to shut down nuclear power. The staggering environmental cost of fossil fuels is at best left in a footnote.

Nevertheless, Germany's per capita CO2 emission per year is 9.44 tons [1], Japan's is 9.70 tons [2] and the US's is 15.52 tons [3] in 2016. Sorry, I couldn't find a more recent source. All that despite, Germany is shutting down nuclear and it has already reduced its usage of brown coal (Braunkohle) and stone coal (Steinkohle) in the last 10 years [4]. So, please explain how the US with higher relience on nuclear is faring better?

The valid criticism from many including the green party in Germany is, the shutdown of coal plant could go faster. But it already started.

[1]: https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/germany-co2-emis... [2]: https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/japan-co2-emissi... [3]: https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/us-co2-emissions... [4]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_phase-out#/media...

This criticism of the Energiewende is a core point of the program of the german green party, combined with the plan to end coal power as soon as possible.