askchapo

I think catastrophic failure of nuclear plants will always be an issue, and by catastrophic failure, I don't mean something like a nuclear meltdown, but more like a belligerent country blowing up the plant with cruise missiles or sabotage from within. It's all well and good to say coal plants emit more radiation and are overall more polluting, but if blowing up a coal plant is less catastrophic than blowing up a nuclear plant, then that needs to be factored into the calculus as well. You can't assume your country will always be at peace or that your country has hundreds of S-500s on standby.

There are definitely worse scenarios (blowing up dams) and I'm not even sure if a completely destroyed coal plant would be less catastrophic than a completely destroyed nuclear plant, but blowing up a bunch of windmills or solar panels isn't exactly going to make the immediate area inhospitable for decades to come.