You're not the only one missing this. It seems very common to miss, but I can point out what you're missing.
Your link number 1 is supposed to support nuclear being safer than renewables, and it simply doesn't do that.
There's a few links that regularly get shared, intending to make that point and they all don't actually make it.
The list of things that nuclear is safer than, is notably missing grid scale wind and solar. What a mysterious ommision from something that is trying to argue they are not safe.
Having read your link 2 and 3, I see they also don't support the point you are making (the first describes how to recycle turbine blades into concrete and is looking for more applications, the second says solar panels are 90% recyclable and just wants some government policies to ensure this happens), which makes me wonder if you're arguing in good faith here?
Your link number 1 is supposed to support nuclear being safer than renewables, and it simply doesn't do that.
There's a few links that regularly get shared, intending to make that point and they all don't actually make it.
The list of things that nuclear is safer than, is notably missing grid scale wind and solar. What a mysterious ommision from something that is trying to argue they are not safe.
Having read your link 2 and 3, I see they also don't support the point you are making (the first describes how to recycle turbine blades into concrete and is looking for more applications, the second says solar panels are 90% recyclable and just wants some government policies to ensure this happens), which makes me wonder if you're arguing in good faith here?