It's going way off the orginal topic, but:
> It would be great if you put your point of view against John Baez’s pro-nuclear challenge page
You mean the page [[Nuclear power]]? She already did that a long time ago. This actually raised a question to me, can we neutrally refer to articles we have actually posted ourselves?
> you may read this
well, I understand your blog is also about art, but it doesn't help to give a neutral impression to depict a skeleton at the top.
I have the feeling most opinions with respect to nuclear power are based on emotions: "It's black magic!" But maybe that's based on my own experience. I used to be extremely against nuclear power as a child (especially when passing nearby a power station) out of fear from the unknown but during my studies I've actually put moderator rods into a (tiny) research reactor etc, and this helps to remove some of the emotions involved. (Actually, I find it funny to compare a clean room with a safe room, once you've been in both) But I've heard there's some theory in psychology about this, e.g. awareness about accidents like dam breaks, depending on the distance people live from the dam. Once they're close enough, they worry less again. But I wouldn't go so far as to conclude that experts cannot be trusted because of this.
I'd like to do without nuclear (I don't like to get X-rays either) but if more coal and brown coal are the alternatives, well... Besides, it appears to me a more clean resource than shale gas. There are too many people using too many resources, and it will be hard to convince them to do otherwise, so in a democratic society energy solutions will have to be pragmatic.