I'm surprised it takes 50 mines for uranium, that's far far more than I had expected.
Nuclear power is doing measurably less harm - in deaths, in habitat damage, in volume of waste produced and management thereof. Solar companies also aren't going to be held liable for the social costs of grid disruption which will inevitably cause outages or require additional countermeasures by other parties to secure their electricity supply.
Nobody is going to protest when solar company employees get skin cancer. Nobody is going to protest solar power when toxic sludge from carelessly-disposed heavy metals waste (or indeed solar panels themselves) contaminates drinking water in some rural town. Groups won't be organised to phase out solar installations in response to accidents in foreign countries.
And I think solar is perfectly fine, I just don't see why we impose all these silly restrictions on nuclear when it is a measurably superior form of energy.
> I'm surprised it takes 50 mines for uranium, that's far far more than I had expected.
Sounds like you might be in for a nasty shock when you find out how many coal mines the world has.
EDIT: Looked at Our World in Data, and all renewables and nuclear are actually comparable. They're orders of magnitude below fossil fuels and biomass.
They aren't comparable. There are something like 50 mines supplying the entire global uranium industry [0]. And I happen to know Australia quite well, 3rd biggest uranium supplier globally with 2 active mines and one reprocessing old waste heaps. More than half our production comes from a mine that isn't even a uranium deposit, it is really a copper mine [1]. That is a top 3 global uranium producer - a uranium mine, a copper mine and an old dump. Good luck supplying the production of a serious number of solar panels with that sort of mining setup.
There are no issues associated with uranium mining. The industry is too small.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_uranium_projects
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Dam_mine