radioactive materials embedded in coal going out into the environment

They should put it beyond the environment.

We'd be better suited to reduce emissions, that's for sure.

Uranium isn't the only fuel source, for one. Fusion reactors, if we can figure out the underlying science, world likely use hydrogen. New generation reactors can use Thorium, and breeder tractors are able to generate usable fuel from nuclear waste.

Not to mention, uranium is finite but we have enough supply of it to develop other technologies while we still reduce emissions via nuclear.

And this is discounting new technologies which could allow us to create a large artificial uranium supply.

It's not renewable but we have something like 200 years worth. It's a cleaner stopgap than fossil fuels until we figure out fusion and build up renewable capacity.

https://www.destatis.de/EN/Press/2023/03/PE23_090_43312.html

And because they shut down their nuclear plants, they had to start burning coal again, which is about as bad an energy source you can get when it comes to emissions and pollution. Their coal use % went up from 2021 to 2022. They may have a higher renewable mix, but they've also increased their emissions. Not to mention, they also significantly reduced their energy imports from France -- the majority of which is generated by nuclear energy. They are replacing clean energy with coal.

France is actually a significant counterpoint as well. They've got 65%+ nuclear energy, and renewables just add to the percent of clean energy sources. Considering they're doing much better than Germany in terms of not using fossil fuels, I believe they are an example to follow over Germany -- which means nuclear is critical to meet our climate goals.

Geothermal - 0.4%

Geothermal is not quite to the point where we can represent it with a whole number percentage value, but it's getting there! If we're going to include sub-1% generators, burning wood has geothermal beat out at 0.8%. Geothermal is cool, though!