I would take the high possibility of short blackouts over the possibility of nuclear meltdown any day tbqh,(reply>), This may be a cynical way of viewing it but here goes: Fossil fuels kill/worsen the quality of life of very large amounts of people ambiently, in the background. Whereas nuclear power kills people in very specific events. Even though there is no real way of quantifying the damage done by fossil fuels, it is arguably more than that of nuclear. The thing is that nuclear kills people in specific and spectacular ways so it sticks in peoples minds as being bad where in actual reality fossil fuels are far, far worse.,(reply>), In fairness there's as much chance of coal and gas plants blowing up as of nuclear meltdown. The two largest disasters in nuclear were caused by a soviet approach to safety mechanisms combined with poor training and a tsunami. Neither of those would occur in modern Britain so we wouldn't realistically have problems,(reply>), every single mistake that can happen in a power plant will happen at a power plant, regardless of the safety protocols involved, even if it was 100 times safer then plane travel, that's a disaster a century or so.<br><br>I would always be extremely careful of where those plants where built, if I was responsible for that sort of thing. The fact Japan even has them, being on the ring of fire, is lunacy.,(reply>), @Luke-Antra ok but my points still stand; if renewable is C and fossil is A then nuclear would be B; there's no need to jump on B when C is ready and available, especially when B <b>could</b> cause loss of life and impact the earths ability to sustain and nurture life (not to mention nuclear waste),(reply>), @Barry Cassidy Soo, i just checked the list of nuclear disasters aaaaaand.<br><br>Every single one was caused either by insufficent safety mechanisms, improper maintenance and mismanagement, or by a major natural dissaster.<br><br>Or a combination of the two.<br><br>And even during a major natural disaster, a modern nuclear power plant will have safety and containment mechanisms that will prevent any major damage.<br><br>Fukushima is probably the best example for this, the tsunami itself killed about 15 000 people.<br><br>The powerplant only contaminated the sorrounding area due to the powerplant beeing old, poorly maintained and safety guidelines outright ignored.<br><br>While i agree that using solar, tidal, wind and thermal power sources is a better idea than using nuclear power sources.<br><br>Nuclear power sources are still a hell of a lot better than Oil, gas and coal.