I still cannot imagine how can anyone happily burden is own children (and it’s children, and it’s children, and it’s children, and all of our children too, up to many many generations) with is own harmful waste.

Also, there is the simple fact of neglecting the opportunity cost: given the amount of labor and money that any of those plants imply, would you invest it into more non renewable, fossil based, highly concentrated sources of energies, or cleaner, diversified, decentralized and renewable ones? In other words, we can ask ourselves this simple question: which of these options will make the world better for our children?

• The video has no sources, timestamps to explain specific science he wants to backup nor is that dude an actual expert. He stitched together what he thinks implies security ignoring the fact that in 100 years we blow up 2 nuclear power plants and had another incident back in 61, we had many - almost - incidents, last one in Ukraine when military almost cut the power from an power plant which is critical. He also swipes under the carpet that you can, with some effort build weaponized material out from it to build dirty bombs. Especially in countries with an unstable government this is highly controversial.
• You cannot store waste for million of years, this is madness and not security. No one can predict 100 or 100k or even 1 million years, absolute no one can. Politics change, govt change, funding and maintenance might change.
• Claiming you know how long a warm barrel holds shows hybris. You constantly need to maintain it over time, this is not security this is a bottomless pit in that you need to throw cash into. Besides this, we actual had incidents with the transport already.
• There is no serious scientists who backs up nuclear energy and there never will be one. Actual expert all say there is no end solution. Which is backup by actual science which is backup up by many reviewers. There is no end solution and there never will be one.
• The so-called safety in the video is often the transport, the transport is never a thing for almost anything it is about storing it for millions of years which is problematic since there are earthquakes, Vulcan’s and other things that are not predictable. Again there is no end solution, there is many stuff on this subject.
• Nuclear energy is not green and does not belong into this community.

We should not encourage or fool yourself claiming it is secure when people already suffered and died because of nuclear energy.

We have alternatives that, even when compromised are simply - off - which is a more security way how to deal with our energy problem. Fusion energy is upcoming and it looks much more green and secure than traditional power plants.

Nuclear energy is and never will be secure and the excuse people pull that we need it is wrong, we should invest and encourage green alternatives that are sustainable and not claim that nuclear energy is secure when history clearly showed it is not.

Please remember people who died in Chernobyl, Fukushima, Hiroshima and so. Humanity should get rid of potential threats and not endorse and embrace them. I do not want to give the burden the next generation when we just could use some combined alternatives and think in general how we use our home planet.

Removed by mod

🤢🤢🤢🤮