We never found a way to deal with the radioactive waste that coal plants emit into the air (look it up) or the millions of deaths that coal and petrol/diesel are responsible for, but we still use those.
Per Wiki:
> According to the World Health Organization in 2011, urban outdoor air pollution, from the burning of fossil fuels and biomass is estimated to cause 1.3 million deaths worldwide per year and indoor air pollution from biomass and fossil fuel burning is estimated to cause approximately 2 million premature deaths.[14] In 2013 a team of researchers estimated the number of premature deaths caused by particulate matter in outdoor air pollution as 2.1 million, occurring annually.[4][5]
> We never found a way to deal with the radioactive waste that coal plants emit into the air
Sure we did. We close them down where ever it's possible. Just like we should do and do with nuclear power plants.
> Nuclear is safer and better in every way even if you multiplied all the past disasters by ten. There really is no comparison.
What a brilliant argument you have there. Oh wait. No it's not. You actually did not bring anything up to counter the problem caused by nuclear plants: nuclear waste. Just some juicy whataboutism.
> its a political problem because humans have no sense of scale.
People have enough sense of scale to realize that the waste will be there forever and while some are safely away from it, others can watch your rusty barrels go to hell and pollute the environment. Funny because John Oliver had a piece about that just last week:
Per Wiki:
> According to the World Health Organization in 2011, urban outdoor air pollution, from the burning of fossil fuels and biomass is estimated to cause 1.3 million deaths worldwide per year and indoor air pollution from biomass and fossil fuel burning is estimated to cause approximately 2 million premature deaths.[14] In 2013 a team of researchers estimated the number of premature deaths caused by particulate matter in outdoor air pollution as 2.1 million, occurring annually.[4][5]
And see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_accidents#Fatalities
Nuclear is safer and better in every way even if you multiplied all the past disasters by ten. There really is no comparison.
Where to store some icky stuff isn't really a huge drawback, its a political problem because humans have no sense of scale.