I don't know how somebody who calls themselves a "realist" would advocate for a known, actual, irrevocable damage to the planet over an avoidable, hypothetical one. Global warming caused by emissions is real, and things will only get worse. Society doesn't seem to be on the way of even considering doing the huge path correction needed to avoid the gravest issues.

Nuclear power is still an open question, avoided for decades now due to the false dichotomy of "nuclear or wind/solar" perpetuated by the mainstream