providing safe distribution of power —as in electricity— is not a significant problem. getting past obstruction is the significant problem. there are sources of energy that are not openly discussed and there is no logical reason why they are not being discussed.
there are sources of energy that have proven themselves time and again as inherently unsafe. that means that without active, unceasing preventive measures being jostled in place the energy system would break apart and cause widespread and relentless harm to people and the ecosystem.
that being said, there are also sources of harnessing energy that inherently are benign in the effects they pose to their surroundings, requiring no external effort to make them safe.
given those current day options why would anyone choose the prior? those who obstruct the safe and benign sources of power should be discredited and their input should be soundly rejected until irrefutable evidence is presented.
