This is opinion and by trying dismiss fears of nuclear power lightly, renders itself useless. Here is a quote from the article: "Passive safety means failures are not emergencies — if the cooling pumps fail, as happened at Fukushima, the atomic reaction simply stops". The first thing that happened at Fukushima is that the control rods turned off the chain reaction. Everything that is happening after that is because of inability to continue to cool the rods and take away the decay heat. If it were a matter of atomic reaction simply stopping, why do we make a big deal of cooling spent fuel in pools which is not even in a reactor? So, the author should get his facts clear first -- or explain why "passive safety" systems are not subject to decay heat and spent fuel considerations. And, everyone should stop these false debates between coal and nuclear. There are a vast number of choices and strategies beyond them.