If you are willing to resume a serious discussion and stop the name-calling (which you're obviously not), then let's point out (no more exaggerations here, every number below is well-sourced and easily checked):
- Nuclear energy currently accounts for approximately 1/6th of worldwide electricity production.
- Wind energy currently accounts for approximately 1/25th of worldwide energy production.
- No country currently produces a majority of its electricity output via wind. Denmark is the highest at 41%. Note that Denmark's population is 5.5 million. Germany (population 80 million) derives roughly 13% of its electricity production from wind. Spain (population 46 million) is at 18%. There's a couple of smaller countries (Portugal and Ireland) up there as well.
- Meanwhile France (population 66 million) derives roughly 75% of its electricity production from nuclear power plants.
No politics, no hidden agenda, just the cold hard facts, which you don't like. (By the way, I post under my real name with my real email and real homepage. It's absurd for you to accuse me of hiding anything.)
When it comes to nuclear power, it's clear that we can scale up far beyond present production. We can build more power plants just about anywhere. Functionality-wise, there are no technical restrictions like weather limiting nuclear power plant location. Safety-wise, there is a concern, but it is not an existential threat to humanity like global warming. We as a species can survive (indeed, have survived) one power plant meltdown every 25 years. Hell, we as a species could survive one deliberate nuclear attack every 25 years.
When it comes to wind power, it's not clear that we can scale up. Wind power requires favorable weather. How many of these locations are there? Are they all used up by now? Maybe present-day production is close to the upper limit of production. More to the point, if it could be done at a larger scale, why hasn't it been done already? I look at wind power and I see a huge litany of unsolved engineering challenges that need to be solved (storage, transmission) to make the idea practical. Nuclear power also involves engineering challenges, but those have been solved already.
I do think wind power can be done, and we should try. I'm just saying it hasn't been done yet. We can easily get wind up to where nuclear is now (~20% of worldwide electricity consumption). No evidence exists that we can expand beyond that level; certainly only one small country (Denmark) has managed it to date. On the other hand, if we actually tried with nuclear power, we can easily get nuclear power worldwide up to where it is now in France (~75% of consumption). I guess you haven't noticed, but France has a pretty good safety record with their nuclear plants. If proliferation is a concern, then fine, I'll happily take 75% of (USA, Russia, Great Britian, France, China, India).
