Well, one small accident 35 years ago and far away, that could have been much worse - is still the cause that large areas are contaminated here.

It is rational, to be sceptic of such a technology.

Most discussions about it are not, sure. Anti-nuclear is a strong dogma in green circles and not to be discussed about - but there are still real reasons, why it became a dogma in the first place.

Because nuclear energy is not as save and easy as it was promised. It is heavily subsidized, but socialised the risk - and the current storage solutions to the waste are sub-optimal. So expensive and dangerous.

I am open to have them run a bit longer, and rather close the coal plants, but they are not a magic bullet solution.