Yes, it is.
Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat
This rate so far is 1 disaster every 20-25 years. Looks OK to me.
I think that everyone will agree that they are safe during operation, if things don't go wrong. The problem is that things do go wrong (on a regular basis), and there is also the issue of nuclear waste.
Because it can't be used to replace nuclear AND fossil fuel power. Pure and simple.
And renewable energy is better still, so why not use that?
So? Norway and Switzerland have hydroenergy, Iceland is geothermal.
There are 5 countries in Europe who produce close to 50% of their power using renewable energy, and another few that are above 25%.
This is the way.
This simply can't be scaled.
Newsflash: Denmark is still going to generate more than 25% of power using dirty fossil fuels in conceivable future. Better?
Several countries (like Denmark) have pledged to reach 50% in the near future.