It would be helpful if we get another note of readable text (maybe a booklet from school) - so we compare those characters to other characters he wrote.

194 WLD's NCBE SE- this must be solvable! :-)

In Germany, where 17 plants are in operation, 7 were switched off last week, and the other 10 could also be switched off any time without shortcomings in energy-supply. Germany is producing more energy than it needs.

With a bit more sparing and sensible energy-consumption we could save more energy than all those nuclear plants produce.

Burning oil, gas or coal produces carbon dioxide, yes. But those are not the only alternatives. Don't forget hydropower, wind and sun! My region (South Tyrol in Northern Italy) for example is producing twice the amount of energy with hydropower plants, than we need - we are exporting 50% of this "green" energy.

The only reason to sustain nuclear power is its low cost: greedy people earn a lot of money with it - at our risk and the risk of future generations. I wouldn't care, if my electricity bill would rise a 20% - others shouldn't too, so shut off those nuclear time-bombs ASAP!

Any other incident lasts only a few minutes: earthquakes, tsunamis, flooding, dam-breach, mine-breakins, ... The victims are countable and the rebuilding may start the day after the incident.

Wile with a nuclear incident, the surrounding area (and we talk about areas the size of an entire state!) becomes uninhabitable for thousands of years! :-(

Any nuclear risk, as small it might be, is too much risk. There exists only one single nuclear plant world-wide, which is 100% secure: it's in Austria - it was never turned on. :-)