system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
ELI5: Why do countries that generate a lot of energy through nuclear power plants, such as Switzerland, want to remove nuclear power if they have seen no negative consequences from it?
gpt
Humans are intrinsically, extraordinarily bad at judging risk.

Things we do every day that are incredibly dangerous (ex: driving) do not provoke a fear response in us, due to habituation.  Meanwhile, extraordinarily rare but spectacular and scary events (ex: terrorist attack, plane crash, etc.) preoccupy our brain with fear because of how random, novel, and powerless we feel about them.

This causes our brain circuitry to mess up, and get legitimately scared about say, being in a crash while on a plane, even though we felt safe and comfortable on the car ride there, which was *literally* a million times more likely to kill us.

Nuclear suffers from this.  A lot.  When you look at nuclear's track record in terms of environmental damage, damage to human health, deaths, etc. it is orders of magnitude safer than coal, gas, or oil.  Thousands of times.  (Fun fact:  there is an environmentally significant oil pipeline rupture approximately every 14 days in the US.  But like driving, we're habituated to it and do not factor in that risk anymore.)

But nuclear, because it is rare, explosive, involves radiation, and tends to be pretty disruptive when something *does* go wrong (ex: Chernobyl, Fukushima), our brains place these incidents far higher in our minds in terms of perceived danger and risk.  We obsess on them more and want to take dramatic action to reduce the chances, even at extraordinary cost.  And even when it doesn't make any actual logical sense.  (Ex: you get significantly more daily radiation exposure living near a coal plant than a nuclear one.)