The lowest point wants to tell us how great nuclear is and how bad renewables are.

[stopdiggin]

4. I'm of the camp that says the ecological costs of nuclear

are infinitesimal (near negligible) in comparison to the alternatives (which basically means fossil at this point in time) - and that cumulative and total footprint over the past 60 years by comparison - is enough to want to make a person break down and cry.

No beef with renewables here - other than the long standing issues of practicality and competitive output. But if people are willing to put the effort and capital into those directions - go for it!